andrew wakefield

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-41104629

From Craig's video, it sounds to me like the chiropractors are getting jumpy.

I'd assume that most of their "patients" (if that's the best word for people who pay them for health care) vaccinate their children, and might be quite concerned by publicity suggesting that they may come into contact with unvaccinated kids at the office.

One was Craig Egan, a miscreant with suspect funding

This bit I always find really strange. Anti-vaxxers (and indeed other anti-science idiots) seem to believe that the only way people could not fully agree with them is for those people to be paid off by some nefarious organisation. Craig Egan has made it abundantly clear where he is getting money for this exercise from, but Nancy Hokkanen thinks otherwise. It makes me worry how much projection is going on.

And on the bright side, down-under has denied entry to three of the anti-vax morons. Now if only we could evict them from here as well.

More topically, we need far more people like Mr Egan. If we had more people publicly ridiculing and calling anti-vaxers on greater benefit then pointing out logically how wrong they are. their BS, it may be of a

I HATE THIS TRACKPAD. Apologies for the incoherent post.

FTFM: If we had more people publicly ridiculing and calling anti-vaxers on how wrong their BS is, it may be of a greater benefit then pointing it out logically.

And on the bright side, down-under has denied entry to three of the anti-vax morons.

Sadly, we have plenty of home-grown and important ones. We have a Meryl Dorey in excess of our needs.

It's funny how AVers can't take it when someone lawfully protests them. Egan has done nothing to intimidate people wishing to visit the pro-disease Vaxxed group, nor has Egan broken any laws regarding protest or assembly. He's called a bully simply for opposing their pseudoscientific arguments.

Australian pro-vaccine groups have their AVers essentially on the ropes and almost out for the count through constant calling-out and open opposition by politicians, groups and physicians. I hope Craig is the start of a more vocal, open, direct opposition of anti-vaccine groups in the US, because it's sorely needed to head off vaccine-preventable disease outbreaks.

Yeah, the whole "you can dish it out, but you can't take it" aspect of the antivax reaction to Craig is rather amusing. Antivaxers think nothing of doxing, harassing people at work, harassing CDC employees as they show up for work, and calling us pro-vaccine pro-science advocates every ugly name in the book. Yet, when they're at the receiving end of a little peaceful protest, with someone like Craig and occasionally a handful of his fellows showing up at a few of their events, the VAXXED crew runs away and hide with their tails between their legs and demonize the protester. I mean, seriously. Antivaxers made fun of Paul Offit for months because he became so alarmed and upset at a VAXXED cameraman getting in his face while he was eating breakfast before a vaccine conference at NYU that he made the mistake of cussing him out on camera (something he acknowledges to have been not a good idea), but they run like cowardly little wimps from a jovial middle-aged dude showing up with pro-vaccine signs at their events. It is to laugh.

It's a tricky thing, how to interact with someone who is convinced their child was harmed by vaccines? I have a family member who is convinced her son's eczema was caused by vaccines. Last I heard she stopped vaccinating. The crazy thing is, when she was pregnant she was insisting that family get a Tdap booster. Talk about a 180.

How many of these supposed vaccine injuries have been compensated by the vaccine court? How many have even filed? I'd be curious to know.

How many of these supposed vaccine injuries have been compensated by the vaccine court? How many have even filed? I’d be curious to know.

Angela, you will find some numbers here

Roughly one third of cases are compensated. That number is inflated by Table injuries. These are known vaccine side effects and compensation occurs even if the vaccine did not cause the injury.

Table injuries are somewhat fluid & conditions there were compensated for decades ago, wouldn't be today (as the science has advanced & we understand that certain conditions aren't related to vaccines).

It is my understanding that many of the original awards given to claimants due to the DTP vaccine would not be awarded today.

Just to add two points of context to what Chris and Lawrence said: the Table of injuries was updated recently, mostly by adding conditioning, none were removed. Though they did narrow the definition of encephalopathy.

B. A third compensated is, best as I can tell, equivalent or higher rate than non-asbestos product liability cases in the courts. Especially design defect cases, as most of these are, are hard.

Two points on Craig: when he made an error in judgment that upset a mother who lost a child and was in the Vaxxed bus telling it, he apologized publicly (he blew an air horn outside, which he admits in hindsight was a bad idea).

B. Craig is one of the few people I know that was actually successful, online, in converting extreme anti vaccine people, all mothers that I know of. Some of them were impressed by his persistence and the facts he shared.

And yes, he got a lot back. Apparently Dr. Tenpenny called the FBI on him. And more.

Yep. You'll never see an antivaxer apologize for being too tasteless or too hurtful. The reason is, of course, how "they" view "us." They view us as the enemy, to be crushed at all costs. To them, almost any tactic is justifiable to achieve that end. In contrast, we do not view most antivax parents as the enemy. The leaders of the antivax movement, maybe in a few cases (e.g., Mike Adams), but the vast majority of vaccine-hesitant and even antivax parents are not our enemies.

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/02/12/who-they-view-us/
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/02/13/how-they-view-us-briefly-r…
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/05/05/how-they-view-us-2014-edit…
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/07/25/how-they-view-us-mike-adam…

You'd be amazed by how many parents have come to me with information about Wakefield.

Case in point: For more than a week now, there's been a death threat against Dr, Pan on Del Bigtree's Facebook page. An angry anti-vax lunatic has threatened to shoot him at some public baseball game event. Bigtree has refused to condemn that threat even after repeated requests.

My mistake: it was a charity soccer game. and itwas last week, so I presume no one attempted to murder Dr. Pan.

I hope I did this Twitter link correctly:

https://twitter.com/thereal_truther/status/902913782535536640

All one needs to do, to see how much of a precious snowflake anti-vaxers are, is take a look at the responses that our friend "the Gnat" gives when his views are challenged.

Indeed.

One was Craig Egan, a miscreant with suspect funding

About that suspect funding. I would have loved to join him on Craig's ProVax World Tour but obligations prevented me, so I sent many of my little dollar bill friends in my stead. As of this morning, 294 people thought the same as I did -- as did the GoFundMe team, which kicked in (IIRC) $1,000.00

Craig is really good at convincing the vaccine-hesitant that vaccines are good for kids. It's not too late to send him the price of a fancy coffee.

Sadly, Lansing is too far away for me to make it.

Antivaxers who react to criticism by claiming that it represents bullying of parents with injured children, have never been good at looking in the mirror.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4763062/Parents-harassed-anti-v…

Antivax leaders have been remarkably quiet about such behavior by their adherents, which has no parallel among immunization supporters.

I'd hesitate to applaud Australian authorities for denying visas to prominent antivaxers. Much better to debunk and mock stupid speech (even when it has potential health consequences) than to ban it altogether.

Angela: "How many of these supposed vaccine injuries have been compensated by the vaccine court? How many have even filed? I’d be curious to know"

The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program has a page with the statistics, there is a link here:
https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/data/index.html

There is information on the US Vaccine Court, including a link to the opinions/orders here:
http://www.uscfc.uscourts.gov/vaccine-programoffice-special-masters

You can see how the US government keeps it all hidden in plain sight. end sarcasm

Also of interest are the recent rulings on a "researcher" often discussed here:

Hooker Vaccine Court lawyer fee ruling, with special words for Shoemaker: https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2002vv0472-132-0

Final ruling: https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2002vv0472-118-0

They are entertaining reading.

In related news, Kent Heckinlively has been denied entry to Australia for his December Anti-vaxx tour if this source is legit:
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2017/08/31/anti-vaccination-advocate…

Hmmm... I had a comment disappear. Weird.

A pair of rulings that were published at the US Vaccine Court list is about the case of a "researcher" who has been discussed often on this blog:
Hooker Vaccine Court lawyer fee ruling, with special words for Shoemaker: https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2002vv0472-132-0

Final ruling: https://ecf.cofc.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2002vv0472-118-0

Oh, come on! I just had two comments disappear into the ether! I did not even get a note about it being under moderation.

It included the the lawyer fee ruling and final opinion on Brian Hooker's Vaccine Court case. The one on the lawyer fees as very interesting comments about his lawyer, Clifford Shoemaker. A lawyer who we have encountered before.

test

Another test

Ms. Ginger Taylor actually called for people to start filing complaints about commercial fraud every time a medical provider says something they disagree with, like "vaccines don't cause autism."

Her timing was reasonably good, though the idea is a pretty ugly one, since I was just teaching malicious prosecution and abuse of process in torts and she provided a good hypothetical problem for the students to grapple with.

From the angle in the photo of the Vaxxed bus, it looks like it says "Vaxxed.con" on the side.

Now that's VaxTruth we can live with.

Mr. Egan has really been doing an amazing job. Way back years ago he trolled a (now defunct) facebook page entitled "Proud Parents of Unvaccinated Children." It eventually imploded when a dispute broke out within its ranks about whether or not the page should allow a "medical astrologer" to post advice on the page. It really was entertaining to watch Mr. Egan stir the pot and watch it boil over. He exposed how out of touch with reality many of the hard-core antivaxxers were.

On a side note, I was hoping to get a bit of advise about an anti-vax ethical dilemma I'm struggling with:

I occasionally snoop around secret anti-vax facebook pages. Not really to troll them like Mr. Egan, but rather to just get an idea of what their arguments are. A while ago I stumbled on a post about anti-vaxxers lying about their (and their children's) vaccination status. One post particularly bugged me. It was by a mother who said she had to lie or she would lose her job. It turns out that this woman is a nurse and works at a medical clinic.

Should I inform her employer? One the one hand, I really don't like doxing people to their employer. On the other hand, she could be putting her patients at risk....

Some of you are in the medical field and I would be interested in your perspective on this.

A classic example of how the anti vaxxers can dish it but can't take it: In one of her videos, Polly Toomey describes the T shirt that Craig is wearing as a "threat". The T shirt has the message "I heart Australia"
A few days later, she recorded a video with the Lindemans, a couple she describes as her close friends. Mr. Lindeman says that paediatricians are evil child murderers, and that anyone who attempted to vaccinate him or a member of his family would "end up underground" . He pulls out the handgun he is carrying and waves it about in front of the camera to show that he is serious.
Polly is not at all upset by this. In fact, she encourages it. its OK if your T shirt says "Vaxxed"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbIwsuzsX5U

Craig is great on video!

Here's what bothers me and I hope that he can find ways around this:

anti-vaxxers seek sympathy from the general public by comparing their situation ( having autistic family members) to that of victims of war, bigotry and oppression:

- today, @ AoA, Dachel's post, Dara Berger says her son resembles
" survivors of the fire bombing of Munich"
- Kim Rossi has recently compared the bus to the Viet Nam Memorial Wall;
she's also shown images of bloody hands whilst referring to doctors ( April 2017) and invoked images of martyrs of racism and bigotry ( Gandhi, King)
- Hokkanen calls the bus a "travelling monument"
- many have compared ASDs to the Holocaust ( Orac covers this)

In reality - if any of them ever visits it-

no one has died- despite their claims-
no one has been blown up by a land mine or lost a family member to an attack by terrorists
( My cousin's father died when his vehicle hit a land mine and my friend lost a family member to a bombing in a public place and had to identify what was left of the body)

Having a child with autism is not the same thing-

they're alive and looking at you. They have feelings. They're not buried somewhere.

You don't have an "anniversary' to dread each year like my friend does and you can't go to a monument to trace the name of the victim as my cousin does.

We should continuously point this out-
They're playing martyrs and victims inappropriately.
Wars and terrorism have PERPETRATORS who aim at killing people to implement their goals.

Well, I'd qualify that a bit. Some of the parents have lost children, for example, some of the stories are SIDS stories. The vaccine connection is either not there or very problematic, but some of these parents are grieving parents.

The equation of ASD to death, though, which is a constant theme, is horrible. So is language like Kennedy's use, referring to autism as "their brain is gone."

Sadly, Lansing is too far away for me to make it.

I really have to visit the Boil Festival one of these days.

I really have to visit the Boil Festival one of these days.

Please, tell us that the festival involves food and not carbuncles. Please.

CORRECTION:

the Munich quote is from Dachel herself not Berger.

The AV movement has posted Craig's home address on social media today.

Doxing and harassment of vaccine advocates - it's not a bug of the AV movement, it's a feature.

Because of course they did. It's how they operate. As you say, it's a feature, not a bug.

I have looked into a few hundred of the vaxxed bus stories and, so far, have found only one that has been compensated by VICP. A few have filed but were denied. If you watch the videos, even just a few, it is pretty clear that nearly all of these stories are not really things caused by vaccines. A lot of SIDS babies, a lot of autism kids, a lot of allergies.

I have watched a few hundred of these Vaxxed videos and they are often about things we know vaccines do not cause, such as SIDS, autism, allergies. I've seen one that was a case that actually got VICP compensation. A few filed, but claims were denied.

Is Dachel perhaps confusing Munich with Dresden? Both were firebombed, but Dresden was wiped out.

(Not that I expect antivaxxers to get their facts straight).

Indeed. Pretty much all major German cities were bombed, but Munich got off much easier than Dresden.

Dangerous Bacon at #21, I understand your position that censorship is a slippery slope, however there are a few Australia-specific issues at play here. The first is that Australia only has implied free speech, meaning that while in practice it's ok to say what you want, if push comes to shove defending irresponsible/dangerous speech is problematic. Secondly, our visa requirements are pretty strict - if Heckenlively was intending to travel on a tourist visa but on a speaking tour he would be breaching his agreement with the government. That's a reason there to reject the visa. If he was travelling on a non-tourist visa (so many visa classes I wouldn't know which one he may have tried to get) it would be pretty clear what he was intending to do. This gets to the nub of the issue.

The Australian Immigration minister (Peter Dutton - the brussel sprout head who is also in charge of our offshore detention *cough concentration cough* camps - I'm not a fan of him except for his pro-vaccination actions) had recently banned Tommey and Humphries after their Vaxxed caravan of carnage. So whoever alerted him to the fact Heckenlively was intending to come and deliver his 'wisdom' would have been able to use the recent banning as precedent, allowing Dutton to get on the front foot.

To circle back to the issue of free speech, while Heckenlively is not allowed to come to the country, there's nothing censorious about our minister's actions - Heckenlively's facebook page is still active on Australian facebook (more's the pity), and if any Australian really wants to read his words or watch him on video there's nothing stopping them doing so. His speech isn't stopped, just his ability to make a buck out of it. And with the way the value of the Australian dollar tends to increase when there's tensions in the US, that's probably the bigger issue for poor Mr H.

Apologies for the long comment, essay writer playing at commenting :-D

Just want to add to my colleague Retro Pastiche's comments. Banning Tommey, Heckenlively et al from Australia is not a "free speech" issue. Every country in the world retains the right to control the entry of non-citizens. That why we have visas and passports. Just a few months ago, a member of one of our State parliaments was banned from entering the US. He was travelling with a group on official government business: had applied for and received the correct visa and was still turned back at the border. The reason? he had a Syrian stamp in his passport. He had visited Syria ( also as part of an official government delegation) in the years prior to the outbreak of war.
Governments do this kind of thing all the time, and sometimes their reasons are arbitrary, but they are completely within their rights. All levels of government and all major political parties in Australia are strongly pro-vax. As the government pays for our health care its very much in their financial interest to see that vaccination rates remain high.
We just don't need to import anti-vaxxers. We have plenty of our own. We also have many dedicated volunteers who do what we can to counter their message, and hold them to account. Thats where the "free speech " comes in.

Anti vaxxers turn nasty at the drop of a hat.
Here, they started ringing and harassing parents who had just lost their child:
https://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/her-daughter-died-now-anti-v…

Absolute scum.

The decision to ban Tommey, Heckenlively et al from Australia is NOT a Free Speech issue. Every country in the world retains the right to restrict the entry of non-citizens for any reason they choose. Just a few months back a politician form one of our State Governments was denied entry to the US . He was travelling with an official government delegation, and had applied for and received the correct visa. He was turned back at the border because he had an Arabic name and a stamp from Syria in his passport. He had visited Syria ( also as part of an official delegation) years ago, before the hostilities occurred. These kinds of arbitrary decisions about who is admitted to what country occur every day and are perfectly valid in a legal sense.
All the major political parties in Australia have a strong pro vaccination stance. Given that the government pays for our health care, they have a strong financial interest in supporting vaccines.
We have no need to import foreign anti- vaxxers. We have plenty of our own. We also have a band of dedicated volunteers who work tirelessly to counter their lies and hold them to account. That's where the Free Speech comes in.

Angela: It’s a tricky thing, how to interact with someone who is convinced their child was harmed by vaccines?

Just schedule enough social interaction to keep the lines open in case her son needs help, but don't indulge her and subtly edge her out of your life.
(I kind of have a similar problem with an uncle who's been lying about most of his life. But most anti-vaxxers are jerks, anyway, so small loss?)

I wish I'd known about Egan, since I saw the Vaxxed bus on one of it's tours while out running errands.

Would that The Wife's favorite cousin could go around with Craig. It wouldn't be easy, since she would need a couple of caregivers; at her age and in her condition, it's doubtful she could cope with the evil—doxing, financial assault—that the anti-vaxxers treat their opponents to.

The cousin, you see, was disabled by measles encephalitis in the 1950's, and hasn't been able to use most of the right part of her body since.

-----The first try at posting this comment didn't seem to take, so forgive me if this shows up twice.

It is all going to be OK. Kent Heckenlively has been telling his woes to a Donald Trump doll over at Pattimmy's place. Apparently Kent wants Donald to organize to drop DVD's of VaXXed on the Australian people in some bombing run.

Heckenlively is obviously trying to make a point, but what point is beyond me.

It is all going to be OK. Kent Heckenlively over at Pattimmy's place has been telling his woes to a Donald Trump doll. Kent wants Donald to organize dropping DVDs of VaXXed over the populace of Australia in some sort of bombing run.

I kid you not.

The first try at posting this comment didn’t seem to take, so forgive me if this shows up twice.

That happened to me too.

I kid you not.

The first try at posting this comment didn’t seem to take, so forgive me if this shows up twice.

That happened to me too.

Third time lucky perhaps?

This is a test because:

The first try at posting this comment didn’t seem to take, so forgive me if this shows up twice.

That happened to me too.

"...Australia only has implied free speech, meaning that while in practice it’s ok to say what you want, if push comes to shove defending irresponsible/dangerous speech is problematic."

Many of us support an explicit free speech model, while recognizing that there are greater hazards in allowing government to decide on and ban "dangerous" speech than in permitting public appearances by those with reprehensible messages.

Too bad Australia apparently doesn't have anything on a par with the ACLU.

Se Habla Espol: One of mine got lost too.

Angela: "It’s a tricky thing, how to interact with someone who is convinced their child was harmed by vaccines?"

I suggest gently edging her out of your life, but making sure that the lines are open in case the son needs someone to protect him from his mother.

Funny thing, I saw the Vaxxed bus while running errands. They didn't seem to have much of an audience.

Dangerous Bacon: Australia does not have a Bill of Rights, and our Constitution does not explicitly protect free Speech, although the High Court has found in past decisions that we have an implied right to Free Speech. However, this is not a Free Speech issue. Our government is not preventing Heckenlively's views from being heard here: they are freely available to anyone with an internet connection a a streak of masochism.
We are preventing Heckenlivley from coming to Australia - which is an entirely different matter. All governments all over the world retain the right to control the entry of non-citizens. No one has a "right" to travel wherever they please.

I'm closer to Dangerous Bacon's views than yours on this, I'm afraid. Yes, Australia, like all countries, has the right to decide who can and cannot visit based on whatever criteria its government decides upon. You keep harping on that, but no one is claiming otherwise or arguing that Australia doesn't have the right to control its borders. However (and I realize this is an unpopular viewpoint here), when the criteria used are so clearly designed to prevent someone from speaking in a country, I always get a bit uncomfortable.

You're not going to like this, but I said exactly the same thing about David Irving 11-12 years ago. I've been nothing if not consistent about this. I don't expect all nations to hold a First Amendment-like view on this; so I'm probably less militant about it than DB (although 10-12 years ago I was), but I do tend to be more with him on this than with you. I'm no longer one to condemn decisions like this one as loudly as I used to, but I do sit back and watch all the gloating about it with a degree of discomfort, knowing how easily, depending on who's in power at any given time, that could be turned to other unpopular views that might not be as harmful as antivax views.

The best way to change the minds of AVers is to find the real cause of autism. I have been working on that for 8 years. Here are my thoughts:
What causes autism?
Autism researchers have developed many clues but haven’t been able to find the answer. They all agree on one thing: autism has both a hereditary component and an environmental component.
One clue, a hereditary trait, stands out: autistic people have a much faster visual response time than the average. [1] This rapid visual processing means that they also have a higher flicker fusion frequency number. This is the frequency at which a flashing light appears to be a constant light, and it varies widely from individual to individual.
If a fast visual response time is the hereditary component, it would explain the puzzling fact that 80-85 % of autism cases are male. Humans have been farming for 10,000 years, prior to that we were hunter gatherers; males hunted and females gathered. Evolution produced a difference in their visual systems: females have slightly wider-set eyes for better depth perception and males have a rapid visual response time to quickly detect motion and react while hunting; more males than females have the hereditary trait associated with autism.
If fast visual response time is the hereditary component, then the environmental component has to be a visual input. It’s not due to an exposure to mercury, aluminum, or any other element or compound, or a lack of any vitamin, nutrient or element, prenatal or postnatal.
It isn’t hard to find a source that produces the problematic visual component: fluorescent light. Research using EEG brain wave monitoring confirms that fluorescent light alters brain waves. [2]. Brain waves of individuals with the shortest visual response time have the greatest change. Fluorescent light is actually a strobe light, turning on and off based on electrical frequency, producing an unnatural visual environment. It’s well known that strobe light can cause migraines, disorientation, and seizures. Brain waves represent the electrical activity in the brain. The five senses are the keyboard to the brain. The electrical input from these senses determines how our brains develop, who we are, and who we will become. If one of the main inputs is providing corrupted electrical signals, it’s understandable why infants with a high flicker fusion frequency number fail to develop a normal social skills foundation, resulting in autism.
Below are other clues that reconcile with and support the hereditary and environmental combination discussed above that causes autism.
In the Pacific Northwest, more rain equals more autism [3]. The inordinate number of rainy and overcast days requires additional hours of artificial lighting including fluorescent light, resulting in additional cases of autism.
There is a higher rate for children conceived from December to March [4]. They are born just prior to the shortest, darkest days of the year, again requiring additional hours of artificial light.
The rate of developing autism is high among premature birth babies [5]. One in four infants weighing between 1 and 3.3 pounds showed signs of autism as toddlers, i.e., 18-24 months. The male/female ratio was 6:1, reinforcing the rapid visual-response-time component. The lower the birth weight the longer the time in NICU and the higher the risk. These children spend extended time in neonatal care, continually exposed to fluorescent light.
Children using daycare have a high rate [6]. Research using Google Earth’s street level function found that over 90% of day cares are in strip malls or stand-alone commercial buildings, certainly all with fluorescent lighting.
The four countries with the highest rates, and 7 of the top 10, use 50-cycle electricity [7]. Lowering the frequency from 60 cycles per second to 50 means those with a somewhat lower flicker fusion frequency number are affected.
Ten clusters with high rates of autism have been identified in southern California. These clusters are neighborhoods with expensive, upscale housing where both parents are highly educated [8]. Due to their education level, each may want their own career or both may have to work to support their lifestyle, resulting in daycare for the child and exposure to fluorescent lighting.
The first cases were diagnosed in the early 1940’s. Fluorescent lighting became commercially available in 1938.
Why has the rate of autism increased over the past three to four decades so dramatically? The major factor was the advent of the compact fluorescent light. From 2000 to 2007 CFL sales went from 21 million to 397 million, an annual increase of 52% [9]. By 2009 70% of homes in the United States had CFLs and averaged 4.4 CFLs each [8]. By 1996 80% of homes in Japan, the country with the highest autism rate, used CFLs [8]. Other factors are the increase in single-parent homes and the declining economy forcing both parents to work, each increasing the use of daycare.
The Amish have little or no autism. The Amish use no electricity in their homes, so no fluorescent lights. Dr. Frank Noonan, practicing for 30 years and treating thousands of Amish children in the Ohio area, has seen no autism [10] and Dr. Kevin Strauss practicing in the Pennsylvania Amish area has seen no idiopathic autism, classic autism [11].
I know many will think this hypothesis is unlikely, but if the answer were obvious it would have been found long ago. I believe further scientific investigation is warranted. It’s my hope that this information becomes widely spread, as it will do no harm, unlike the vaccination controversy. Even parents who think it’s unlikely would avoid fluorescent lighting just to be safe. If that resulted in a noticeable drop in the rate, this case would be very strong. Please share my hypothesis with others in the fields of autism support and research, with parents of autistic children, and with parents of newborn children.
I am willing to discuss all of my research—all of which supports my hypothesis and much of which is not included in this general paper—as well as ideas for further research projects.
Oren Evans
ogevans2525@gmail.com

Mr. Evans: "The best way to change the minds of AVers is to find the real cause of autism. I have been working on that for 8 years."

Um, really? Did you know that over half the genetic sequences that cause autism have been discovered? Some of them have names you may recognize like Rett Syndrome, and Fragile-X Syndrome.

Families should join the effort to find the rest of the genetic sequences by signing up here: https://sparkforautism.org/

This video has more information:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOQ9s0GcG5s&index=41&list=PLjvfRtcMhn4P…

Mr. Evans: "Why has the rate of autism increased over the past three to four decades so dramatically?"

Here is a little story:

In 1991 I was told by a child neurologist that my non-verbal three year old was definitely not autistic because he smiled and laughed. Granted, sometimes it was often not at appropriate times.

So I had a child who went through the special ed. system with various and differing diagnoses that were often related to speech and language disorders. After ten plus years of speech/language therapy he could speak, though it is sometimes difficult to understand. One has to be patient to understand him.

The very first time someone mentioned "autism" was during his senior year. It was the school psychologist, who also mentioned that even if he was put into their autism program he would have lost services. Because she recognized they created a label without realizing the vastness of the autism spectrum.

It is not one neurological issue, it is dozens. The saying is "If you met one autistic person, you have met just one."

My son finally got a full diagnosis of autism a bit over two years ago. While he seems to have Aspergers, he would never had gotten that diagnosis because he was non-verbal after he turned three years old. Apparently, speech disorders was an automatic disqualification for Aspergers.

Mr. Evans, can you think of what actually changed between 1991 and 2015?

Aargh! Why did the stupid video change to just the playlist. Try again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOQ9s0GcG5s&list=PLjvfRtcMhn4PB0NTW0Rlv…

Oh, crud it did i again! Okay, third time, this time getting if from their blog (which Mr. Evans should probably check out):
http://www.seattlechildrens.org/classes-community/current-class-offerin…

Here it is again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOQ9s0GcG5s&feature=youtu.be

Sad to see you glorifying the mentally ill

If you want to check the references for the idea that fluorescent lights cause Autism -

https://www.facebook.com/oren.evans.3/posts/1460741517353896

[1] Children with Autism Detect Targetsat very Rapid Presentation Rates with similar Results as Adults Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders January 2016 DOI:10.1007/s10803-016-2705-9
[2] Kuller R, Thorbjorn L [1998]. The impact of flicker from fluorescent lighting on well-being, performance and physiological arousal. Ergonomics 41(4):433-47.
[3] Waldman M, Nicholson S, Adilov N, Williams J [2008]. Autism prevalence and precipitation rates in California, Oregon, and Washington counties. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 162(11):1026-34.
[4] Ousseny Z, Iosif AM, Delwiche L, Walker C, Hertz I [2011]. Month of conception and the risk of autism. Epidemilology 22(4):469-75.
[5] Study Suggests Preemie, Autism Link WebMD www.webmd.com/…/20080402/study-suggests-preemie-autism-link…
[6] Boyles S. [2008]. Study Suggests Preemie, Autism Link. www.webmd.com/…/20080402/study-suggests-preemie-autism-link…].
[7] McDowell MJ [2004]. Is autism statistically linked to early non-maternal child care? [http://cogprints.org/3747/1/Autism-Statistical.html].
[8] World Atlas. [www.worldatlas.com/…/countries-with-the-highest-rates-of-au…]. Accessed: April 2017.
[9] VanMeter KC, Christiansen LE, Delwiche LD, Azari R, Carpenter T, Hertz I [2010]. Geographical distribution of autism in California: a retrospective birth cohort analysis. Autism Res 3(1):19-29.S
[10] Worldwatch Institute. [www.worldwatch.org/node/5920]. Accessed June 2017.
[11] United Press International [2006]. The age of autism: Amish bill introduced. [www.upi.com/The-Age-of-Autism-Amish-bill-in…/35321154110819/]. Accessed: April 2017.
[12] Combatting Autism from Within [2008]. Guess What? The Amish Vaccinate! [http://combatingautismfromwithin.blogspot.com/…/guess-what-…].

Well, Mr Owens, first you'll need to change your theory because 1) the Amish *do* have autism and 2) many of us with family members who are/were autistic can trace these members back a few generations, well before the fluorescent lights. Since you gave reference numbers but no articles, we can't tell if your research is as good as the other stuff spouted off about autism increasing without taking diagnostic substitution into account.

I've a post in moderation giving the references, but you can find them at
https://www.facebook.com/oren.evans.3/posts/1460741517353896

Guess where the idea that the Amish don't have Autism comes from?

Oren Evans @59: But homes don't have fluorescent lighting. So unless *only* children in daycare develop autism, then it can't be the lights.
A few other confounders you didn't account for: Day cares and pre schools are staffed by early childhood experts (by schooling or experience or both) who are more likely to notice developmental delays compared to parents who don't have as many kids to compare against. Therefore children are more likely to get diagnosed sooner.

The PNW has a large tech sector and many older fathers, both of which are also correlated with higher autism diagnosis rates.

Finally, if this were true, then all of Canada, Scandinavia and Russia would be autistic.

The vast majority of compact fluorescent lamps with built-in drivers capacitively filter the full-wave rectified AC mains voltage to DC with relatively low ripple content, then drive the tube with a switch-mode converter running well into the kilohertz range, vastly above the flicker fusion threshold of any human. The same applies to modern electronic ballasts for linear fluorescent tubes. Many commercial buildings have switched to T5 (5/8" diameter) fluorescent tubes and the only available drivers are electronic. With older magnetic ballast circuits designed to drive an even number of tubes (2 or 4 per ballast), phase shifting between the individual tubes doubles the effective flicker frequency.

I don't buy the hypothesis, and it certainly isn't supported by the behavior of any reasonably modern fluorescent lighting apparatus, with the possible exception of phase-angle controlled dimmable types, which are not at all common.

Guess where the idea that the Amish don’t have Autism comes from?

From Dan Olmsted.

My original comment with the references was too large so I couldn't send it. I tend to believe the Doctors who treat the Amish and not those that have an ax to grind.. Here are the references:
References
[1] Children with Autism Detect Targetsat very Rapid Presentation Rates with similar Results as Adults Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders January 2016 DOI:10.1007/s10803-016-2705-9
[2] Kuller R, Thorbjorn L [1998]. The impact of flicker from fluorescent lighting on well-being, performance and physiological arousal. Ergonomics 41(4):433-47.
[3] Waldman M, Nicholson S, Adilov N, Williams J [2008]. Autism prevalence and precipitation rates in California, Oregon, and Washington counties. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 162(11):1026-34.
[4] Ousseny Z, Iosif AM, Delwiche L, Walker C, Hertz I [2011]. Month of conception and the risk of autism. Epidemilology 22(4):469-75.
[5] Study Suggests Preemie, Autism Link WebMD www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20080402/study-suggests-preemie-autism-…
[6] Boyles S. [2008]. Study Suggests Preemie, Autism Link. www.webmd.com/brain/autism/news/20080402/study-suggests-preemie-autism-…].
[7] McDowell MJ [2004]. Is autism statistically linked to early non-maternal child care? [http://cogprints.org/3747/1/Autism-Statistical.html].
[8] World Atlas. [www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-with-the-highest-rates-of-autism…]. Accessed: April 2017.
[9] VanMeter KC, Christiansen LE, Delwiche LD, Azari R, Carpenter T, Hertz I [2010]. Geographical distribution of autism in California: a retrospective birth cohort analysis. Autism Res 3(1):19-29.S
[10] Worldwatch Institute. [www.worldwatch.org/node/5920]. Accessed June 2017.
[11] United Press International [2006]. The age of autism: Amish bill introduced. [www.upi.com/The-Age-of-Autism-Amish-bill-introduced/35321154110819/]. Accessed: April 2017.

I am currently trying to get data from Japan, India and UC Davis. Japan is one culture but two electrical frequencies, the northern half of the main island uses 50 cycle and the southern half 60 cycle. I predict that the northern half will have the highest rate of autism. Remote areas of India has villages without any electricity, I predict little of no autism. A UC Davis study linked a higher risk of autism with some freeway sections but not major roads. The increased risk was for dwellings that were less than 334 yards from the center of the freeway. Considering the width of California freeways that would put the dwellings close to the freeway. I have made many requests but have gotten no response. I believe that Google Earth street level function will show the back (bedroom side) of the dwellings facing the freeway and street lights on those sections. LED, mercury vapor and sodium vapor all have a more pronounced flicker than fluorescent light.

Looking at your predictions:

If a slower flicker rate increases autism than incandescent bulbs would be the main cause of autism (no flicker).

Lower rates of autism in remote areas of India and I am assuming other remote poor areas of world will have lower autism rates. A simple answer if your prediction is correct is that these areas have poor access to medical attention thus autism is not diagnosed (also infant mortality is much higher).

I don't think your arguments hold much water.

But kudos for at least having citations.

Its a shame the pro-vaccine put so much effort into denying the science.

Vaccines cause brain injuries and autoimmune diseases. Craig Egan is promoting the ongoing epidemic of vaccine injury.

We already know what causes autism, but the medical industry chooses to not understand the science. Autism is caused by inflammation in the brain during prenatal and postnatal development, and the cytokines IL-6 and IL-17a specifically. Aluminum adjuvant in vaccines travels to the brain and causes long term chronic inflammation and stimulation of these cytokines. Thats why vaccines cause autism, and its also why the science done to date (on MMR and thimerosal) has (mostly) come up empty.

This well known quote by U Sinclair captures perfectly why the medical industry has such a hard time understanding the science of autism causation.

"its difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it." --Upton Sinclair

Hmmmm - Oren left reference 12 (from his FriendFace post) from his list in post #70. I wonder why.

He says in post #59 "...and Dr. Kevin Strauss practicing in the Pennsylvania Amish area has seen no idiopathic autism, classic autism", and cites reference 11, which is, as friend Julian notes, is from Dan Olmsted.

But Reference 12 ( http://combatingautismfromwithin.blogspot.com/2008/01/guess-what-amish-… ) has this to say -

Strauss says he doesn’t see “idiopathic autism” at the clinic, which he defines as children with average or above average IQs who display autistic behavior. “My personal experience is we don’t see a lot of Amish children with idiopathic autism. It doesn’t mean they don’t exist, only that we aren’t seeing them at the clinic.”

He says a child in the general population is more likely to have autism detected early and to receive a diagnosis than an Amish child. “Amish child may not be referred to an MD or psychologist because the child is managed in the community, where they have special teachers,” he says. “We know autism when we see it, but we don’t go actively into the Amish community and screen for ASD.”

Strauss adds that the Amish have a high prevalence of genetic risk factors and are protected from others. The low rate of idiopathic autism “might have more to do what genetic structure of population than lifestyle, environment or diet.”

What do you do for a living when cherry picking is out of season, Oren?

Vaccine Papers: "Autism is caused by inflammation in the brain during prenatal and postnatal development, and the cytokines IL-6 and IL-17a specifically."

So why are there more cytokines from a vaccine than from something like a full pertussis or Hib infection?

"So why are there more cytokines from a vaccine than from something like a full pertussis or Hib infection?"

Because its only the cytokines in the brain that matter. Aluminum adjuvant induces cytokines and inflammation in the brain specifically.

Also, the DURATION of the inflammation is also important. An infectious illness induces a brief inflammation (which typically does not significantly impact the brain). By comparison, aluminum adjuvant particles remain in the brain for months or years, causing long term chronic inflammation.

Normal infectious illnesses reactions do not cause significant brain inflammation, and do not cause long term chronic inflammation in the brain.

VP: You didn't answer the question. Chris asked you why there are more cytokines from a vaccine, which is antigens, a killed virus, or weakend virus, than from the actual disease.

Saying that only the cytokines in the brain matter does not answer his question. So I'll ask again: Why would a vaccine produce more cytokines than the actual disease?

And you're wrong about infectious diseases not causing significant brain inflammation. Hib and measles are two in particular that are known to do that.

The first cases were diagnosed in the early 1940’s. Fluorescent lighting became commercially available in 1938.

Silly bunny. Kanner gave the condition that name in 1943. Are you going to tell us that there were no diagnoses of Down's Syndrome before someone gave that name to Trisomy-21?

Dr Down diagnosed autistic patients in 1887.
https://www.wisconsinmedicalsociety.org/professional/savant-syndrome/re…

VP: "Because its only the cytokines in the brain that matter"

So the lack of oxygen getting the brain because the pertussis, Hib (epiglottitis), diphtheria is just a minor concern compared to those terrible vaccine induced cytokines.

Of course the encephalitis and meningitis from Hib is not your concern. Obviously you don't care if a kid becomes permanently disabled by the actual disease.

Chris, first let me thank you for responding to my post. After supper I watched the you tube video you recommended and was amazed that they were attaching significance to gene changes that were found in only 1 or 2 % of autistic people. It seemed like they were standing in a wind storm grasping at straws.
My theory is based on a genetic trait that 100 % of autistic people have.
You asked what had changed in the last 30 years, if you read my theory you would see that it was the introduction of the screw in fluorescent bulb. I'm glad that you mentioned families getting involved.
I have just started trying to get families to volunteer to be part of my research. There is no money involved, no interviews, no Dr.s visits. This would be for newborns and expectant parents. All I want to know is the birth date, the birth weight and gender. After 2 years I will contact the to see if the child is on the spectrum. Of course I will ask that the child avoid fluorescent lighting as much as possible. If you would like to volunteer contact me at ogevans2525@gmail.com..

herr doktor bimler, Dr. Kammer said it was a new and never before seen condition but you didn't mention that. So yes I don't think it existed prior to fluorescent lighting.

The first cases were diagnosed in the early 1940’s. Fluorescent lighting became commercially available in 1938.

And Kanner's case notes for his patients trace their condition back to the mid-1930s. "Donald", for instance, was already behaving oddly in 1935. Your evidence destroys your theory.
http://simonsfoundation.s3.amazonaws.com/share/071207-leo-kanner-autist…

VP, if I may, because you ignored me in that other thread -

In the RFKjr comments you said "This is thoroughly explained and demonstrated in the study. its because the higher dosages have lower transport into the brain. And thats a result of higher LOCAL inflammation.

High local inflammation at the injected site prevents the aluminum adjuvant from traveling to the brain."

Where does the Al go when the local inflammation goes down? Everything has to be somewhere. Does it travel to the brain at that time? If not, why not? If so, why didn't Crepeaux et al find a positive dose/response?

Because its only the cytokines in the brain that matter. Aluminum adjuvant induces cytokines and inflammation in the brain specifically.

Also, the DURATION of the inflammation is also important. An infectious illness induces a brief inflammation (which typically does not significantly impact the brain). By comparison, aluminum adjuvant particles remain in the brain for months or years, causing long term chronic inflammation.

Normal infectious illnesses reactions do not cause significant brain inflammation, and do not cause long term chronic inflammation in the brain.

Oh my, that's a whole lot of ignorance of disease pathobiology.

Dr. Kammer said it was a new and never before seen condition but you didn’t mention that.

Leo Kanner never had the opportunity to read Down's description, so his mistake is understandable. You do have that opportunity, so you do not need to repeat the mistake.

Treffert, Uta Frith, and many others have written about the "pre-Kanner" history of autism. You do not have to agree with their case analyses, but you do have to recognise they exist if you want to argue with autism researchers.

Oren: It's Kanner, not Kammer, and he wasn't telling the truth at all. How do you explain Asperger's work, which was done at the same time but independently of Kanner? Pretty sure Germany didn't have florescent lights. (I also think there was one other doctor, started with a B, who was active at the same time in the same field but didn't work with either of the two I mentioned.)

Actually, looking at old movies, florescent lighting seemed limited to department stores and maybe hospitals, though hardly common outside of big cities.

Also, how do you explain the pervasive myths of changelings found throughout Europe?

It’s Kanner, not Kammer
Not important. I am sure Oren Evans knows the correct spelling, but he had just spelled out my own name in the same comment, and it is known to cause spontaneous outbreaks of "m"s through a process of alphabetic contagion.

Oren your "research" reminds me of the time my mother found me in the kitchen mixing the kitchen spices together in a cut of water.

When she asked me what I was doing, my response was "an experiment."

I was eight. I got my first lesson in the scientific method that day when she explained to me what a hypothesis and an experiment actually were. She then made me clean up the mess, and found me an appropriate age level book of science experiments the next time the bookmobile came around.

What you're doing isn't research. It's not even a poll, since you rely on parents to change their behaviors. It's about the equivalent of an eight year old mixing kitchen spices together in water and expecting something to happen. Go to the library and find yourself a decent primer on science before you make a real fool of yourself.

Mr. Evans: "After supper I watched the you tube video you recommended and was amazed that they were attaching significance to gene changes that were found in only 1 or 2 % of autistic people. It seemed like they were standing in a wind storm grasping at straws."

Seriously? Do you know how to read a pie chart?

"You asked what had changed in the last 30 years, if you read my theory you would see that it was the introduction of the screw in fluorescent bulb."

Total fail. The big hint was the disappearance of Asperger's from one criteria to another. It is like they realized that intelligence was not determined by the physical ability to speak, so go figure.

The change was in the "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders" over the past thirty years. My son did not qualify under DSM III, but did under both DSM IV and DSM V.

Seriously, dude, you claim to be an "expert", but you totally missed the hint I gave with the reasoning behind an "Asperger" diagnosis. The spectrum expanded between DSM III and DSM IV to include kids who actually laughed and smiled, especially when it was inappropriate.

DSM V focused on the actual detrimental characteristics and required supports. Asperger's was removed because it was realized that kids with severe language impairments (like my son) were intelligent, even though they need several reports. For the record my son was diagnosed with Autism Level 2.

The "screw in fluorescent bulb" explanation is inane. First, it would not explain his neonatal seizures when he was two days old. Plus I never liked them and used them sparingly. Who wants to walk into a room, turn on the lights and wait ten minutes for them to turn on so you can see stuff?

Are you now going to predict a downturn of autism diagnosis due to the introduction of affordable LED lighting?

Oh, crud, I saw it... did not believe it, so I forgot to ask about it.

Mr. Evans: "My theory is based on a genetic trait that 100 % of autistic people have."

What, pray tell us, is that?

Because as far as we know "autism" is a description of dozens of neurological variances that make us sitting comfortably in the standard deviation a bit of confusion.

Mr. Evans: "I have just started trying to get families to volunteer to be part of my research. There is no money involved, no interviews, no Dr.s visits"

That also applies to the genetic research program I mentioned. Also tell them to sign up at:
https://sparkforautism.org/

Oren Evans, my point with my previous comment is this: Unless you know precisely what type of ballast or driver is used for a fluorescent lamp you know precisely nothing. The same applies to sodium vapor, mercury vapor and LED lamps. Even knowing how the lamp is driven isn't really sufficient because there may be other lamps acting to reduce the magnitude or add to the frequency of any luminance ripple. Measuring the luminance ripple in situ is the only fully reliable method - and that assumes that extensive data regarding flicker fusion for various levels of luminance ripple is available.

Science hint: do not use the word "theory" the way you have at #80 unless you are willing to be laughed at by scientists.

Myself: "even though they need several reports."

While this is very true (scan everything, save it on many media!), it was not what I was trying to say. The phrase was supposed to be...

"... even though they need several supports."

Because my son who is near average intelligence still has speech issues, one of those supports is to be patient while he talks. Do not interrupt him, and he is okay if you ask him to clarify.

Oddly enough, this is the same advice you give to someone with a stutter. My son is different... but the accommodation is similar.

Pretty sure Germany didn’t have florescent lights.
I am obliged in the interests of humourless pedantry to remind everyone that Asperger was Austrian, and Austria =/= Germany, as was determined rather conclusively in the middle of last century.
The prevalence of fluorescent lighting in Vienna in the 1930s is not my field of expertise, but any suggestion that Mitteleuropa was technologically backward then, it will not be well-received.

<i.The vast majority of compact fluorescent lamps with built-in drivers capacitively filter the full-wave rectified AC mains voltage to DC with relatively low ripple content, then drive the tube with a switch-mode converter running well into the kilohertz range, vastly above the flicker fusion threshold of any human.

To my immense relief, for my flicker-fusion frequency is quite high, and old-school fluorescent strip-lights used to drive me to distraction, with the visible flicker and the perpetual sense of motion in my peripheral vision.
To the best of my knowledge this did not turn me autistic, and my humourless pedantry, literal understanding of words, unawareness of other people's perspectives, and aversion to social contact are purely part of my culture.

I have just started trying to get families to volunteer to be part of my research.

I do hope you have approval from an IRB.

Luddite VP wrongly states:

Normal infectious illnesses reactions do not cause significant brain inflammation, and do not cause long term chronic inflammation in the brain.

Hmm....ever cared for a patient with meningitis? Of course you haven't, and with your level of smug ignorance I hope you never care for a sick person in your life.

Taking a whack at Vaccine Paper's comment #73:

Vaccines cause brain injuries and autoimmune diseases.

What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

We already know what causes autism...

Hundreds of years ago, people "knew" that witches existed. Today, many people "know" that before Columbus, people believed the Earth was flat. Until I was an adult I "knew" that in France, people were guilty until proven innocent.
"Everyone knows" is a bad argument.

VP: "Normal infectious illnesses reactions do not cause significant brain inflammation, and do not cause long term chronic inflammation in the brain."

Well alrighty then, the common occurrence of significant brain inflammation due to infection can be explained away as being "abnormal" and thus can be ignored.

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/encephalitis/symptoms-cau…

The folks at Mayo (a bunch of Science Deniers, doncha know) remind us: "Common childhood infections — such as measles (rubeola), mumps and German measles (rubella) — used to be fairly common causes of secondary encephalitis. These causes are now rare in the United States due to the availability of vaccinations for these diseases."

Ooo, better ignore that too, VP, very inconvenient. Also don't bring up SSPE, as that does not involve your theories about aluminum.

Here's an idea... Be skeptical of anyone who says that they've been doing "research" with "data," but are not affiliated with a team of researchers or a research institution. This is especially true if they have not been trained in the dark arts (biostatistics) or the darker arts (epidemiology). That whole thing about fluorescent lights, for example... WTF?

HDB: I know, I just wanted to give the troll a good poke. I'd still love to hear how he explains Dr. Asperger, Dr, Bettelheim and Dr. Downs's work.

Another example of projection - information sharing even in the early twentieth century was spotty at best. It wasn't as though doctors had email and the Internet to instantly share new and interesting information.

derr doktor bimler, Thank you for the link. I had not seen it before. You are quite right. GE sales started April 21 1938 and the children in the study were born several years prior.

Oren,

Unfortunately, your proposed hypothesis fails on its face. When the first commercial fluorescent lighting came out around the time of Dr. Kanner's work, they used magnetic ballasts. Such ballasts produce a flicker rate of twice the mains, so 100Hz-120Hz in most of the world. However, at about the time the autism "epidemic" started, the electronic ballast was introduced. The flicker rate of an electronic ballast ranges from 40,000Hz all the way up to 120,000Hz, far too high for your hypothesis to account for. Furthermore, all compact fluorescent lighting, which you specifically targeted as the cause of the increase. If your hypothesis were true, we should have seen a decrease in autism cases in the last 30 years, as magnetic ballasts were phased out.

Sincerely,

W. Kevin VIcklund, P.E.
FEMP Certified Lighting Engineer

Mr. Evans, what changed between 1991 and 2015 in autism?

I believe that Google Earth street level function will show the back (bedroom side) of the dwellings facing the freeway and street lights on those sections. LED, mercury vapor and sodium vapor all have a more pronounced flicker than fluorescent light.

That hasn't been my experience with HPS, although street lamps use LPS. The main problem I see here is distance and the fact that those bulbs have diffusers on the housings.

PGP: "Dr, Bettelheim"

For one thing, he was not actually a "doctor" of anything? Just another fraud in a long list of frauds when it came to autism.

W. Kevin Vicklund and herr doktor bimler,
You are right about the electronic ballasts and some research shows that the rate is leveling off. The very first CFLs did use magnetic ballasts. Getting back to Dr, Kanners research, while fluorescent light could not be the problem mercury vapor could be. It was used in industrial applications in the early 1900's and by 1910 was used in water treatment for the ultra violet output. By the 1930's improved lamps developed by Osram-GEC, GE and others led to wide spread use for general use. Since mercury vapor lights have a more pronounced flicker than fluorescent lights I will not discard my theory yet.

wide spread use for general lighting.

Mr. Evans, what very important thing changed twice between 1991 and 2015?

This is basic information for anyone who works with autism.

Oren, you are so very wrong.

Electrical signals do play a roll in causing Autism, but it's higher frequencies. You are at the wrong end of the spectrum. See -
https://darkmattersalot.com/2016/11/01/one-last-ghz-microwave-look-at-t…

Hypothesis, Oren. Hypothesis.

When you are investigating a question in science you create a hypothesis. It is always an open ended question. For example, "What happens when sugar is exposed to high heat?" not a yes or no type of question . . .or a statement that on its face looks like a foregone conclusion: because we don't want to introduce bias into our experiment.

A theory is science is a principle or a conclusion that has been shown consistently through repeated experimentation or observation to be correct. I know through repeated observation that if I drop a cup, it will fall to the floor. It will not float up to the ceiling. It happens that way every time I drop a cup. If I drop two cups at the exact same moment, they will fall at the same rate and hit the floor at the same time; one should not fall faster than the other. If one does, then there is a variance that needs to be explained, which sets up the next hypothesis.

If you're going to investigate something, the hypothesis you form has to make sense in context with other knowledge we have about how the natural world works. This is why homeopathy fails; the notion that you can be cured by something that makes you sick doesn't make the least bit of sense, and the idea is not testable; there is no dilution you can achieve that will produce anything greater than the placebo effect.

For you to prove that fluorescent lights cause autism, you have to first explain why that would be so, and you have to explain why EVERYONE doesn't have autism. You can't even get to coincidence (much less correlation) from the historical information you've supplied, therefore asking parents to keep their kids away from fluorescent lighting in a modern society is not a truly testable idea, and that's before we even deal with issues of how you would collect such data and ensure it is reliable.

Seriously: you're a kid mixing kitchen spices and waiting to see what happens. What you are doing isn't science, and you don't even understand the bare bones principles behind it if you keep misusing the word theory.

PGP: “Dr, Bettelheim”
For one thing, he was not actually a “doctor” of anything? Just another fraud in a long list of frauds when it came to autism.

Arguably Bettelheim was the *first* in that long list -- the first person to see autism as an income stream, and the true predecessor of Bradstreet and the DAN charlatans.

Anyway, Bettelheim claimed to be an expert on "emotionally-disturbed children" when he took control of the Orthogenic School. He didn't specifically claim to be treating and curing autism (with his regimen of parental deprival, neglect and corporal punishment) until the 1950s / 60s. So not relevant to the pre-Kanner history of autism.

By the 1930’s improved lamps developed by Osram-GEC, GE and others led to wide spread use for general [lighting]. Since mercury vapor lights have a more pronounced flicker than fluorescent lights I will not discard my theory yet.

Define "wide spread" and "general," and note again that coated bulbs are going to smear out flicker. Streetlamps are not going to cut it.

# 112 Panacea,

Just to help me here. Would it be better to say that a hypothesis always CAN BE framed as an open-ended question? I'm just thinking that, maybe as shorthand, hypotheses are quite often framed as statements of putative fact to be tested.

Maybe I'm old fashioned. I grew up on Conjectures and Refutations. And, of course, later Wakefield.

hdb: I am sure there were others before Bettelhiem who promised cures for "defective" children. They probably had limited publicity.

I am amazed at what kind of quackery has surfaced through the years, and the ways one can find it. Like a local history comedy podcast about a quack who starved folks:
http://theseattlefiles.com/2016/01/05/episode-10-starvation-heights/

She moved to New Zealand:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Hazzard

HDB: I went back and read your comment about Dr. Asperger. I knew he was Austrian, but for some reason I'd thought he'd done work in Germany as well.
I was not trying to imply Europe was backward, but given the tensions in 1938, it's reasonable to assume that imports would have been impacted, so I don't know for sure whether florescent bulbs made it over there pre-war.

Panacea,
You are right I am using Theory where I should be using hypothesis, sue me. If you read my paper you would know why not EVERYONE is affected. It’s due to the differences in visual processing speed. It varies from individual to individual and more generally between males and females. You might look at a light and see it as a steady light but I could see it as flickering and very bothersome. We know that autism is a brain related problem . So when I see EEG research that proves that the faster the visual processing speed is the more the brain waves are altered and other research that shows that autistic people have a much faster visual processing speed than the general population and another that shows males have a faster visual processing speed than females and that the male/female autism ratio is 6/1, That gets my attention. My hypothesis is that there is a subset of infants that have a high enough visual processing speed to suffer alterations in their social foundation and the lower the frequency the larger the subset.
It’s easy to sit back and be critical but when you have a better solution I’ll be very happy to listen.

If autism starts in the womb, what light would cause then to become autistic?

Mr. Evans, what very important document changed twice between 1991 and 2015? I even told you the answer, but you seem to be evading recognizing its relevance to your claims.

"So when I see EEG research..."

What is your education and qualifications to evaluate EEG data?

"If autism starts in the womb, what light would cause then to become autistic?"

I just saw a Star Trek rerun in which a specific light frequency was beamed onto a planet suffering an alien infestation (the beam was able to penetrate into enclosed spaces, so presumably had an intrauterine effect as well). Or maybe some expectant Moms swallow those little book lights so their fetuses can get a head start on reading assignments.

Use your imagination, connect the dots.

I see that Chris and Lawrence have asked a few of my own questions/ remarks to Mr Evans so at this point rather than exhausting myself explaining data we have about ASDs I'll just say-
Oy vey!

It is fascinating that this self proclaimed "expert" on autism seems to be ignoring well known facts.

I'm still sticking with my hypothesis that broccoli consumption leads to autism.

Oren Evans (#59) writes,

The best way to change the minds of AVers is to find the real cause of autism.

MJD says,

Not surprisingly, climate-change indicators (e.g., atmospheric carbon dioxide) has not been considered an environmental component in the etiology of ASD.

http://www.cambridgescholars.com/patents-and-climate-change

If Orac turned his back on a few of my comments I'd present a "suspected" cause of regressive autism.

Q. What's another name for auto-moderation, for some commenter's, here at the ScienceBlogs Respectful-Insolence.

A. Solitary confinement.

Evans: Have you also looked at the differences in how boys and girls are taught to socialize? Or how often doctors entirely miss autism in girls? It's easy to have a skewed gender ratio if the diagnostician isn't looking at one gender at all.

"Chris asked you why there are more cytokines from a vaccine, which is antigens, a killed virus, or weakend virus, than from the actual disease."

You left out the most dangerous ingredient: the adjuvant.

I did answer the question.

Aluminum adjuvant travels into the brain and causes long term chronic inflammation IN THR BRAIN. Natural infectious illnesses do not cause long term chronic inflammation in the brain, except in severe cases (e.g. if the infection is in the brain).

"Where does the Al go when the local inflammation goes down? Everything has to be somewhere. Does it travel to the brain at that time? If not, why not? If so, why didn’t Crepeaux et al find a positive dose/response?"

Thats a good question and should be the subject of future research. After the granuloma dissipates (granulomas can last months or years), there may be new mechanisms that retain the Al adjuvant (e.g. such as scar tissue, which can form in a granuloma). Alternatively, as the granuloma resolves, the Al adjuvant may become mobile.

Transport of Al adjuvant into the brain is immune-mediated, and specifically it is caused by movement of Al-loaded macrophages. Transport to the brain will be minimal unless the macrophages are stimulated to travel into the brain. Macrophage movement occurs in response to some types of inflammation, and specifically when the chemokine MCP-1 is produced in the brain.

The Al adjuvant appears to mostly stay at the injection site. In Crepeaux, about 1.3% of the injected Al dose wound up in the brain. Transport is likely dependent on immune system genetics (e.g. tendency of microglia to produce MCP-1) and environmental exposures that cause inflammation.

Transport to the brain can take a while-weeks or months. Delayed transport explains why vaccine safety studies with short follow-up periods (few days or weeks) cannot detect the adverse effects on the brain. In the animal experiments the Al adjuvant appears in the brain about 4-8 weeks after injection. May take longer in humans.

"Ooo, better ignore that too, VP, very inconvenient. Also don’t bring up SSPE, as that does not involve your theories about aluminum."

Infectious diseases can definitely damage the brain, including measles and rubella for example. I would never argue that these diseases do not have the potential to damage the brain.

Question is: does vaccinating or not vaccinating have greater risk with regard to brain injury?

If not vaccinating had greater risk, then we should have observed a DECLINE in autism and neurodevelopmental disorders in children as vaccine usage increased in the 1980s and 1990s. Thats not what happened. Incidence of these disorders increased in parallel with increasing exposure to Al adjuvants. That is consistent with vaccines having a greater risk of brain injury.

I find it most interesting that you use the word "may" (or its synonyms) so often. This shows me that your Aluminum adjuvant claims are conjectures and other excuses, not to be taken as having any merit whatsoever.

Brian: You could frame a hypthesis as a closed ended question but then you have to be more careful of bias. For example, if I ask "How does X medication affect blood pressure," there is the assumption it actually does, and that might not be proven. If I ask "Does X medication improve blood pressure," if the answer I want is Yes, it's easier to come to the conclusion I'm looking for or want.

Oren needs to answer an essential question before he goes about trying to convince parents to avoid fluorescent light: is there a correlation between this type of light an autism, then he needs to ask does correlation equal causation. He hasn't proven correlation, and yet he's trying to jump to causation.

He's asking the wrong questions.

And Oren: terminology does matter. That you don't respect the terminology is why you're skipping steps, and it's why your "research" is useless, and can only come to the conclusion you've predetermined.

I’m still sticking with my hypothesis that broccoli consumption leads to autism.

No. Broccoli has existed for hundreds of years. RADAR was invented in the mid-1930s and spread very fast.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_radar

Oren is right about it being an 'electrical' problem, but he's at the wrong end of the spectrum. RADAR frequencies can penetrate the brain. Broccoli just penetrates the bladder.

"Where does the Al go"

It goes where the goblins go
Below, below, below*
Yo-ho, let's open up and sing
And ring the bells out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LRZmFxdWBo

*obvious reference to excretion.

Aluminum adjuvant travels into the brain and causes long term chronic inflammation IN THR BRAIN. Natural infectious illnesses do not cause long term chronic inflammation in the brain, except in severe cases (e.g. if the infection is in the brain)

Dan, please answer the question I keep asking you and you keep dodging. What is the order of tissue deposition for aluminium?

VP, you wrote lots of stuff, but left out the actual answer to the question and actual supporting documentation. Just you blabbering on about adjuvants.

Again, why would the vaccine cause more cytokines than the actual factual disease. Seriously epiglottis is a cytokine reaction that literally chokes kids to death.

Newsflash: cytokine inflammation from infection does not just happen in the brain.

Come on, show us with actual factual scientific evidence that the vaccines are more dangerous than the diseases.

Oren needs to answer an essential question ...

And as W. Kevin and I have tried to hammer into him, he is basing his hypothesis on a notion that is clearly false with regard to most compact fluorescent lamps and many others. Based on what he has posted, he was unaware of this. Even if he could demonstrate correlation between use of fluorescent lamps and autism, he would still not have demonstrated correlation between flicker and autism unless he had data quantifying flicker for each individual case. His underlying assumption is one that begs the question.

... but when you have a better solution ...

Were we talking about evolution or origins, this would be a "god of the gaps" argument. A poor and unsupported hypothesis does not deserve serious consideration simply because there are gaps in knowledge.

I would be much more receptive to an hypothesis that luminance ripple ("flicker") may be more likely to be annoying to people with ASD than others in the general population. It is by no means a trivial task to gather good data.

D'oh! I read broccoli, but was thinking asparagus. I hate when that happens.

I wish I could install a wind turbine near VP post #128. All that hand waving kicks up a pretty good breeze.

Johnny: " All that hand waving kicks up a pretty good breeze."

;-)

Science Mom: "Dan, please answer the question I keep asking you and you keep dodging. What is the order of tissue deposition for aluminium?"

I have only slightly more biology education than VP, essentially a beginning college lever course. But I do at least know the vaccine is given in the arm.

I have actually witnessed a pair of children's hospital doctors using a tiny camera to check for epiglottis in my kid during one of his many visits to the emergency department for croup. They had a great deal of trouble getting that little camera in a crying toddler's throat.

I don't know about Vaccine Paper, but I pretty much know the neck and throat are between a human arm and brain.

By the way one comment from this pair of obviously stressed doctors (probably medical residents) was that they had seen lots less epiglottis since the Hib vaccine was being used. At that time the age limit did not include kids younger than preschool.

By the way, my kid was hospitalized multiple times for croup. While it was not pertussis, diphtheria or Hib... it is still frightening. I am dismayed that Vaccine Papers does not understand that a child not being able to breathe is is not as serious as his "cytokine from adjuvant" fantasy.

"Again, why would the vaccine cause more cytokines than the actual factual disease."

Its not merely the magnitude of cytokine expression. The chronicity is important. Animal experiments show the brain inflammation ongoing 6 months after injection.

Aluminum adjuvants travel into the brain.

Regular infections do not do this, except in very rare circumstances. And common childhood infections do not cause long term chronic inflammation in the brain.

I have already answered your question multiple times.

Scientific citations and context are provided at the VP website. Here is a recent example showing that Al adjuvant (at vaccine dosages) travels into the brain, causes behavioral abnormalities and causes microglial activation up to at least 6 months after injection.

http://vaccinepapers.org/al-adjuvant-causes-brain-inflammation-behavior…

Where is your evidence for the neurological safety of aluminum adjuvants? When I look at the literature cited here and elsewhere, I find NOTHING demonstrating that aluminum adjuvants are safe for the nervous system. The studies only look at short term acute/local reactions. You cannot use such evidence to support NEUROLOGICAL safety. But thats what the pro-vaccine are doing. It makes no sense.

"What is the order of tissue deposition for aluminium?"

I dont understand this question.

Are you asking for data on how the Al adjuvant distributes in the body?

Flarend is the only study I know of to address this, but the Flarend data did the measurements at 28 days, which is too short. Flarend measured Al in kidney, spleen, liver, heart, lymph nodes and brain. The brain had the lowest levels of these tissues. Unfortunately, the Flarend study did not use unexposed controls.

Can you please explain the relevance of your question?

I don’t know about Vaccine Paper, but I pretty much know the neck and throat are between a human arm and brain.

Evidently the macrophages function like little UPS delivery vans. The moment aluminium colloids are detected in the arm, their role is to phagocytose the particles and then to make their way all the way to the brain -- using their little cellular GPS units for guidance -- to deliver these packages to the proper destination. I guess they evolved for that purpose. This is Shoenfeld's Just-so story and who am I to argue?

Dan said in response to Chris:

Chris: “What is the order of tissue deposition for aluminium?”

Dan: I dont understand this question.

And that, Dan, is why you haven't a f***ing clue as to what you are talking about. He's not asking about absorption into the blood stream. He's not even asking about crossing the blood brain barrier (notoriously difficult to do). He's asking about the cellular level.

If you can't explain how the process works, you don't understand what you are talking about. See you have to first show that it is even plausible for aluminum to enter brain tissue and cause inflammation. You have to show what that inflammation would be different than any other kind of inflammation. You have to show what that specific inflammation (if it exists) would be the cause of autism when unvaccinated children also are diagnosed with autism.

There are so many barriers to proving your claim, and if even one falls apart, they all fall apart. You can cherry pick from studies all you like, it will never get you where you want to go because you don't understand what you are talking about.

You haven't even proven that aluminum adjuvants travel into brain tissue yet. You keep making the claim, but you haven't and can't prove it.

BTW I looked at Flarend. Please explain to me why a rabbit study proves anything in humans.

Then explain why aluminum deposits are greater in the kidney in the brain, and you would be getting closer to answering Chris's question.

I still haven't figured out why brain would want something else's used macrophages when it can whomp up its own shiny new ones.

Aluminum hydroxide is a questionable vaccine component.

Most important, aluminum-hydroxides affinity and binding characteristics with endogenous proteins, compared to vaccine antigens, has not been adequately studied.

In other applications, aluminum hydroxide has been patented as a means to remove allergens from commercial materials. https://patents.google.com/patent/US8324312B2/en

Therefore, the "absolute" safety and efficacy of aluminum-hydroxide continues to be questioned when used as an immunologic adjuvant.

Panacea: "Chris: “What is the order of tissue deposition for aluminium?”"

That was a question from Science Mom.

Vaccine Papers, I did not see any PubMed indexed in your verbiage. I have told you multiple times I will not click on any link that takes me to your personal website.

So, again, for the third time: how are the cytokines from a vaccine more dangerous than those from an actual disease? Just post the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers in this comment stream...

...not a link to your website.

Mr. Vaccine Papers continues to claim: "Aluminum adjuvants travel into the brain...Regular infections do not do this, except in very rare circumstances."

Well, let's see. Looking at just one vaccine-preventable disease (measles), we find the incidence of associated encephalitis is one in one thousand cases. Given that 3-4 million annual measles cases were the norm in pre-vaccine years, that's 3-4 thousand cases of measles encephalitis annually. Too "rare" to matter?

And what of the current 8 million cases of invasive Hib disease around the world, and 400,000 annual deaths from Hib meningitis and pneumonia in places where Hib vaccine is largely unavailable? Are those casualties to be waved off as insignificant too?

This evidence is documented and readily available from the WHO, CDC etc. (unlike unsupported claims of chronic brain inflammation from aluminum adjuvant).

Seriously, Mr. Papers, you need to find a line of jabber that doesn't come off as both ignorant and callous.

Whups! My apologies.

"Evidently the macrophages function like little UPS delivery vans. The moment aluminium colloids are detected in the arm, their role is to phagocytose the particles and then to make their way all the way to the brain — using their little cellular GPS units for guidance — to deliver these packages to the proper destination. I guess they evolved for that purpose. This is Shoenfeld’s Just-so story and who am I to argue?"

Thats basically correct. Microglia in the brain produce macrophage chemotactic protein (MCP-1) in response to inflammation. And MCP-1 attracts macrophages into the brain.

"we find the incidence of associated encephalitis is one in one thousand cases. "

This does not cause long term chronic inflammation. The inflammation resolves. Inflammation from aluminum adjuvant persists, and thats what causes the brain damage and autism.

"how are the cytokines from a vaccine more dangerous than those from an actual disease?"

For the third time: because they are PERSISTENT. Cytokines and inflammation stimulated by aluminum adjuvant does not go away. It persists for months or years. Cytokines from an infection resolve quickly.

Here is a review of the evidence showing that aluminum adjuvant travels into the brain:

http://vaccinepapers.org/vaccine-aluminum-travels-to-the-brain/

"Are those casualties to be waved off as insignificant too?"

Yes. The brain damage from vaccines and aluminum adjuvant is much greater.

it would be ideal to have truly safe vaccines.

"BTW I looked at Flarend. Please explain to me why a rabbit study proves anything in humans."

Flarend provides the best data we have on aluminum adjuvant kinetics. Even the FDAs 2011 study by Mitkus uses it in their modeling.

Sounds like you don't understand the concept of using animal models in biomedical research.

"You haven’t even proven that aluminum adjuvants travel into brain tissue yet. You keep making the claim, but you haven’t and can’t prove it."

Aluminum adjuvant transport into the brain is proven beyond any doubt.

http://vaccinepapers.org/vaccine-aluminum-travels-to-the-brain/

"I still haven’t figured out why brain would want something else’s used macrophages when it can whomp up its own shiny new ones."

Reasons why can be debated and are speculative. Macrophage recruitment into the brain may better protect the brain from invasive infections, thereby providing a survival advantage.

It definitely happens though. Examples:

http://www.jneurosci.org/content/29/7/2089.long

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5095060/

"Transport to the brain can take a while-weeks or months. Delayed transport explains why vaccine safety studies with short follow-up periods (few days or weeks) cannot detect the adverse effects on the brain. In the animal experiments the Al adjuvant appears in the brain about 4-8 weeks after injection. May take longer in humans. "

Hey Age of Autism! Vaccine Papers just called all the parents whose child had changed on the day of the shot, or those who heard the terrifying Encephalitic scream; filthy liars.

Go git im ;)

Thats basically correct. Microglia in the brain produce macrophage chemotactic protein (MCP-1) in response to inflammation. And MCP-1 attracts macrophages into the brain.

SO your theory is that microglia produce MCP-1 in response to local inflammation, attracting aluminium-laden macrophages from as far away as the arm, when then cause the brain inflammation that attracted them.
I am guessing that the Endochronic Properties of Resublimated Thiotimoline are involved in this circular causality.

Stop f@cking linking to your own f@cking site!

Wake me up when one of you comes up with a hypothesis that potentially explains the male/female ratio, the rates in the NW US, in day cares, in the California clusters, the seasonal variation and the low Amish rate. Not a bunch of scattered unrelated causes like mold, lack of vitamin D, lack of face time with the mother, the fathers type of work, air pollution, mercury and aluminium. Come on people tie them all together.

Don't bother taking your nap until you demonstrate that the "phenomena" you claim are actual connected phenomena, rather than just a collection of random claims. You can conjecture all you want, but your conjecture is meaningless until (a) evidence is shown and (b) contrary evidence is fully explained.

So you are not going to answer any my questions, Mr. Evans.

In other anti-vax news....

( I saw this on the Vaccine Machine facebook)

On the 29th ( a week later in LA), a new film about AJW, The Pathological Optimist, will premier at NYC's Angelika Theatre. There's a trailer and an eponymous facebook page.

Mr. Evans, why are most color blind people male? What sex are those with Fragile X? The answer to your question has to do with XX versus XY, plus some variations of the same.

For someone who claims to be researching autism you seem to lack a basic high school understanding of biology and genetics.

Vaccine Papers, just post the PubMed indexed papers by reputable qualified researchers that the cytokines from the vaccines are more dangerous than the cytokines from the diseases like Hib, pertussis, tetanus, diphtheria, etc.

Again, do not link to your stupid website. Make sure there is an actual comparison.

Also, Vaccine Papers, I see why you avoid posting the PubMed papers here The authors of some of the papers on your page (yes I looked) are included in the one source to several UNqualified and DIS reputable researchers here:
http://www.vaccinesafetyconference.com/speakers.html

Animal experiments show the brain inflammation ongoing 6 months after injection.

No they don't.

I dont understand this question.

Can you please explain the relevance of your question?

Then you have no business commenting on a subject you know nothing about.

Unfortunately, the Flarend study did not use unexposed controls.

Flarend et al. used tagged aluminium FFS. The same was found in a rat study (the authors elude me at the moment). If you are going to try and argue the radioactive isotope alone has that tissue deposition, good luck with that.

Vaccine Papers, it seems you do not understand the science or know about "relative risk." I have asked you several times to show vaccine cytokines are more dangerous than those from the diseases... with PubMed cites. And you continue to fail.

I have met a woman whose first child died from Hib meningitis, and yet you whine about the most common metal element on this planet's crust.

Why am I being redirected to a video ad at the top of this page on funerals? Who is the idiot who skipped the "kill ad x"?

Microglia in the brain produce macrophage chemotactic protein (MCP-1) in response to inflammation. And MCP-1 attracts macrophages into the brain.

Microglia are macrophages, genius.

Vaccine Papers: "Question is: does vaccinating or not vaccinating have greater risk with regard to brain injury?"

Which you have failed to answer.

"If not vaccinating had greater risk, then we should have observed a DECLINE in autism and neurodevelopmental disorders in children as vaccine usage increased in the 1980s and 1990s."

So what very important document changed twice between 1991 and 2015? It was the reason the neurologist told that my smiling non-verbal three year old was definitely not autistic. But in 2015 he was diagnosed with autism level 2.

The kid never grew out of the tics like the neurologist told would happen during a 1996 appointment. Because, even though the document had been changed it had not made into the full medical world.

Seriously, what is more dangerous: a full Hib infection or the most common metal element on this planet's crust?

Okay, for lurkers, another push for families to actually help autism research:
https://sparkforautism.org/

It requires an online registration. I tried, but my son is over age eighteen so he has to do it... that is not going to happen.

Hey, Danny Boy... I assume your attempt to do "science" with aluminum is because you have a child with autism. Dump that stupid website and sign your family up for that genetic research program. They just want you to fill out a questionnaire and contribute some spit from father, mother and child.

@Oren Evans #157:

Wake me up when one of you comes up with a hypothesis that potentially explains the male/female ratio, the rates in the NW US, in day cares, in the California clusters, the seasonal variation and the low Amish rate.

Just because we haven't come up with an alternative hypothesis it doesn't automatically follow that your hypothesis is correct.

"Wake me up when one of you comes up with a hypothesis that potentially explains the male/female ratio, the rates in the NW US, in day cares, in the California clusters, the seasonal variation and the low Amish rate. Not a bunch of scattered unrelated causes like mold, lack of vitamin D, lack of face time with the mother, the fathers type of work, air pollution, mercury and aluminium. Come on people tie them all together."

Immune activation and cytokines explain all this stuff. For example, vitamin D strongly reduces IL-17 expression Shown to cause autism).

Pollutants, nutrient deficiencies and toxic metals like aluminum adjuvant cause inflammation and cytokine expression in the brain.

The causal biochemical mechanisms of autism are now known. Autism is very clearly caused by inflammation and cytokine in the brain during development. Specifically, autism is caused by elevated IL-6 and IL-17a.

Looks like nobody has challenged the macrophage transport evidence. Do you folks concede this point?

"I have asked you several times to show vaccine cytokines are more dangerous than those from the diseases"

I have explained several times that it is the PERSISTENCE of the neuro-inflammation induced by aluminum adjuvant that makes it dangerous. Im not talking about the inflammation at the injection site. Im talking about persistent inflammation in the brain.

Do you agree that persistent neuroinflammation is harmful? Neuroinflammation during brain development? This is also basic, but I can provide citations if you require.

There is no single paper comparing the time evolution of brain cytokines from Al adjuvant and infections. Do you need me to post studies showing that cytokine expression in the brain after infectious illness is transient and not persistent? Seems trivial.

There are several studies now showing that the neuroinflammation induced by aluminum adjuvant is persistent (e.g. present 6 months after injection).

"Seriously, what is more dangerous: a full Hib infection or the most common metal element on this planet’s crust?"

"you whine about the most common metal element on this planet’s crust."

Aluminum is extremely neurotoxic. The proportion of Al in the surface layer of the Earth does not logically imply neurological safety and is not relevant to its neurotoxicity.

Humans are not adapted to tolerate injections of aluminum compound nanoparticles.

if you have evidence supporting the neurological safety of aluminum adjuvants, please provide link.

"Hey Age of Autism! Vaccine Papers just called all the parents whose child had changed on the day of the shot, or those who heard the terrifying Encephalitic scream"

Reactions can occur immediately as well, though this is probably less common.

Aluminum also induces MCP-1, so it may stimulate its own transport into the brain. So, once a bit of aluminum adjuvant enters the brain, MCP-1 is stimulated, attracting additional macrophages. Clearly, this can cause a positive feedback effect of increasing brain inflammation and Al transport into the brain.

In human autistic brains, MCP-1 is particularly and consistently elevated.

The vargas 2005 study (which analyzed cytokine levels in autistic brain samples) states:

“The presence of MCP-1 is of particular interest, because it facilitates the infiltration and accumulation of monocytes and macrophages in inflammatory central nervous system disease.”
AND
“MCP-1, a chemokine involved in innate immune reactions and important mediator for monocyte and T-cell activation and trafficking into areas of tissue injury, appeared to be one of the most relevant proteins found in cytokine protein array studies because it was significantly elevated in both brain tissues and cerebrospinal fluid.”
AND
“The increased expression of MCP-1 has relevance to the pathogenesis of autism because we believe its elevation in the brain is linked to microglial activation and perhaps to the recruitment of monocytes/macrophages to areas of neurodegeneration…”

Vargas 2005 link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15546155

Very nice, VP. About time you posted *something * from Pubmed. That was printed in 2005. It's now 2017. There should be tons of studies supporting that hypothesis if it held up under scrutiny. How about more studies? Oh, and by the way...the study - or at least the abstract, doesn't mention aluminium.

There should be tons of studies supporting that hypothesis if it held up under scrutiny. How about more studies? Oh, and by the way…the study – or at least the abstract, doesn’t mention aluminium.

It's a valid paper although no, hasn't been replicated widely. Due to the difficulty obtaining tissue samples I'd presume. Of course it doesn't have anything to do with aluminium; that's Dan's schtick, to cobble together different unrelated studies and declare his "theory" is correct and validated. Vargas was horrified to learn his study was used by the curebie crowd to justify the use of off-label anti-inflammatories and anti-virals. He has stipulated that his observations have no known aetiology and could be autism preceded the inflammation.

Thanks, Science Mom. I have rather restricted internet access at work, so could only view the abstract. But I figured it didn't say what VP claimed it said.

And none of them mention an actual disease. Danny Boy still does not understand the difference of effect between the actual factual toxins created by the four bacterial diseases I have mentioned and the most common metal element on this planet's crust.

Oddly enough, neither these guys wit their pet "theories" seem to understand what real researchers are discovering about the dozens of genetic conditions all lumped under the "autism" name. Oh, in case they forgot, just go to:
https://sparkforautism.org/portal/page/autism-research/

There are at least two more recent studies that have found that people with autism have brain abnormalities that would have already been present in utero-which makes VP's claims about aluminium in vaccines causing autism even more obviously ridiculous.

Courchesne, Eric, et al. "Neuron number and size in prefrontal cortex of children with autism." Jama 306.18 (2011): 2001-2010.
Stoner, Rich, et al. "Patches of disorganization in the neocortex of children with autism." New England Journal of Medicine 370.13 (2014): 1209-1219.
APA

Se Habla Espol #158
If we could keep 10,000 infants away from fluorescent light and had no cases of autism I think that would count as evidence. So let's get qualified researchers to evaluate the 300,000 Amish to determine their autism rate.

let’s get qualified researchers to evaluate the 300,000 Amish to determine their autism rate.

It's been done. The research found no significant difference in autism rates between the Amish and "Them English". With your self-proclaimed expertise on the subject, I'm sure you are aware of this non-AoA work. Right?

Vaccine Papers #169
Which of the causes that you mentioned explain the male/female ratio, the day care correlation or the NW US ratio.

Looks like nobody has challenged the macrophage transport evidence.

*koff*

This isn't the first time you've trotted out the macrophage routine here, Dan. It has not improved with age.

Do you folks concede this point?

It's not even wrong, that I'll concede.

To VP,

Lets see if you can solve a simple math problem: Find a good toxicology reference and look up the daily body load for Al per kilogram of body weight, using a 5 kg child (kinda small) multiply daily body load by 5. You now have the daily body load for a 5 kg child. Now take amount of the Al adjuvant in vaccine and find the percentage of the Al adjuvant to the daily body load. It will be a very small number.

Remember dose makes the poison.

Chris #161
The fragile X male/female ratio 57/43, not anywhere close to the 85/15 ratio for autism.

Mr. Evans: "So let’s get qualified researchers to evaluate the 300,000 Amish to determine their autism rate."

This has already being done:
https://clinicforspecialchildren.org/what-we-do/research/

How come you did not know about this? What is your education and training exactly?

Mr. Evans, what is the ratio for color blindness?

Mr. Evans there is a stark difference between Fragile X in males versus females. From:
https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/fxs/data.html

Which has these comparisons:

"About 44% of women with FXS achieved a high or very high level of independence in adult life."

"About 9% of men with FXS achieved a high or very high level of independence in adult life."

Notice a difference? So what was the last class you took in biology,?

(Will someone please kill that stupid video ad for funeral services that keeps making my cursor jump to the top of the page!)

Hey, Danny Boy… I assume your attempt to do “science” with aluminum is because you have a child with autism.

I'm thinking he's more of a Gerg type.

"There are at least two more recent studies that have found that people with autism have brain abnormalities that would have already been present in utero"

2 reasons why this is wrong:

1-Correlation is not causation, and
2-Changes not proven to be present prenatally. The prenatal origin is ASSUMED, based on the belief that such changes (e.g. disruption of cortical layers) cannot occur postnatally. This assumption is wrong.

"Lets see if you can solve a simple math problem: Find a good toxicology reference and look up the daily body load for Al per kilogram of body weight, using a 5 kg child (kinda small) multiply daily body load by 5. You now have the daily body load for a 5 kg child. Now take amount of the Al adjuvant in vaccine and find the percentage of the Al adjuvant to the daily body load. It will be a very small number."

Thats not what you get.

And, its not an apples-to-apples comparison because the forms are different. Al from vaccines is particulate. Al from ingestion is Al3+.

"Which of the causes that you mentioned explain the male/female ratio, the day care correlation or the NW US ratio."

Immune activation/cytokine exposure produces sexually dimorphic effects. Brain injury from Al adjuvant is greater in male animals.

Chris@176,

I went to the spark for autism website and tried to create an account but unfortunately, by virtue of asking for a zip code and not accepting anything else (postal codes here include letters), it seem this is US of A only.

Alain

Oren: "If we could keep 10,000 infants away from fluorescent light and had no cases of autism I think that would count as evidence."

How about a retrospective study looking at autism rates among children who were exposed to phototherapy with fluorescent lights as infants for bilirubinemia? Or a study comparing LED and fluorescent lights for bilirubinemia and also looking at autism incidence within the two groups? Or even a study to see if handling the light sources with and without latex gloves makes a difference?

Inquiring minds just gotta know.

Sorry about that. It is probably have to do with federal laws on human research subjects. Though that should not be an issue with both Dan and Oren, since they are located in the USA.

They have no excuse for promoting their own silly theories when they can be supporting real scientific research.

Chris: Except the real scientific research would tell them that their genes, like everyone else's aren't perfect, and these are guys who are convinced (and want to stay that way) that their toilets smell like roses. Bet they voted for Trump too.

Mr Oren Evans,

The fragile X male/female ratio 57/43, not anywhere close to the 85/15 ratio for autism.

Have you investigated the diagnostic criteria to figure out if there was a cultural bias which prevent having a ratio closer to 50/50 for autism in both boys and girls?

Next task for anyone interested would be to figure out a diagnostic procedure to diagnose autistic adults (same ratio targeted 50/50) as the current tests are targeting children only.

Alain

"kill that stupid video ad"

Get an ad blocker and kill it yourself. No one else will.

Chris #183
I used the link that you provided and checked all 104 papers, all of the current research and all of the past research and didn't find autism mentioned anywhere. Just tell me what the ratio is-- if you know.

Maybe it wasn't mentioned because they don't have any.

2 reasons why this is wrong:

1-Correlation is not causation

Neither is pulling things out of your ass, Dan.

Oren, there are other severe genetic neurological disorders listed. Also, if you are researching autism how come you don't know how to use PubMed? Here you go:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23065719

RS: I think Chris is complaining that the ad is sneaking through their adblocker.

" look up the daily body load for Al per kilogram of body weight, using a 5 kg child (kinda small) multiply daily body load by 5. You now have the daily body load for a 5 kg child. Now take amount of the Al adjuvant in vaccine and find the percentage of the Al adjuvant to the daily body load. It will be a very small number.”

No its not. Aluminum from vaccines greatly exceeds exposure in the first 1 or 2 years of life, from milk and natural sources. It is necessary to multiply the ingested amount of Al by about 0.3% because this is the absorption rate. 99.7% of ingested Al is eliminated in the feces and never enters the body.

Why don't you show YOUR calculation? I have already calculated this stuff, and its on the VP website.

Vaccine promoters use the FDAs 2011 study (Mitkus et al) to justify claims of aluminum adjuvant safety. But it has several fatal errors, explained here:

http://vaccinepapers.org/debunking-aluminum-adjuvant-part-2/

This weekend, I was out of town. Bought a domain name (won't disclose it for now). This morning, I lookup my inbox; have received 10 spams regarding SEO (search engine optimization), website building (no thanks, I'm building the Linux distribution who will host the website among other). Send all those spam to google's version of /dev/null; 3 minutes, some of these sc*mbag start to call me on my landline (hidden number, los angeles number, 16 digits number, etc...).

I know I haven't paid for the privacy option but, cold call...(yes, my phone is unplugged...thanks for asking even if you didn't)

Okay,

For Oren and VP, here's yer tutorials on doing searches on pubmed:

First, hop over to ht_tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh and punch in your favorite term for the moment: autism. you type that into the search bar. MeSH will propose you a page with your search result like this one:

ht_tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/?term=autism

Let's select the first one: ht_tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68001321 (Autistic disorder) [1]

[1] == mental comment withheld.

Go down the page to see a hierarchy which include "Child Development Disorders, Pervasive". Click on the link and now, you are at that page:

ht_tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68002659

On the right side, there is a set of buttons with one of them named "Add to search builder". Click on it and while you're at it, open a tab or windows in your web browser and type pubmed.gov.

you will land on this page:

ht_tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

in which, at the middle of the page, will include a link to "Clinical Queries": ht_tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/clinical

Get back to the previous tab (the one for mesh) and in the box, you should have your text '"Child Development Disorders, Pervasive"[Mesh]'. Copy that text and paste it over in the next tab which you used to bring up clinical queries.

You will get a set of results in which, in my opinion, the most important ones should be in the Clinical studies categories:

1-: Etiology
2-: Diagnosis
3-: Therapy
4-: Prognosis
5-: Clinical Prediction guides

with the least amount of publications being the prognosis at 3575 publications (with the filter set to broad in all case, you can use narrow but then, you'll miss out) and the biggest number of publication is the diagnosis category followed closely by the etiology with 11551 and 10746 publications respectively.

That's a good start. It's too many? hop over to systematic reviews of which there are 770 publications. But, you'll miss out.

In the overkill department, you can always check one list of result and for each publication (like this one: ht_tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28814540), check in the right pane for Similar Articles and click the link named "See all". For this one article, there is 106 similar articles so if you take a category which include 10000 publications (etiology and diagnosis for example), you could be facing a huge number of publications (potentially, 10000 * 90 on average) but a good number of these will be repeat so you can get the lists of related, punch that in a bibliography software and the duplicate will hopefully get removed.

Enjoy :)

Immune activation/cytokine exposure produces sexually dimorphic effects. Brain injury from Al adjuvant is greater in male animals.

And your reference for this is?

“I still haven’t figured out why brain would want something else’s used macrophages when it can whomp up its own shiny new ones.”

Reasons why can be debated and are speculative. Macrophage recruitment into the brain may better protect the brain from invasive infections, thereby providing a survival advantage.

It definitely happens though. Examples:

h[]tp://www.jneurosci.org/content/29/7/2089.long

Mice who have had bile-duct resection? Really, this is what you're trotting out? You apparently can't even understand what it says:

"In our current study, we confirmed our previous finding of a significant ∼8-fold increased recruitment of monocytes into the brains of mice with hepatic inflammation (Fig. 1)."

What part of "microglia are macrophages" did you not understand?

h[]tps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5095060/

Oh, yay, Oncotarget. Did you find this word salad* by just randomly searching for "macrophages" and "nanoparticles"? There's something about preloading macrophages and shooting them into murine tail veins only to see what happens in 12–24 hours that doesn't quite jibe with your inverse dose–response song and dance.

* "National Basin Research Program of China" is a nice touch.

(Will someone please kill that stupid video ad for funeral services that keeps making my cursor jump to the top of the page!)

Only happens to me in Chrome; IE is fine.

My problem is Firefox Moxilla. I found a work around, and it is only of couple of ads. I don't use an ad-blocker because it restricts my access to certain sites (looking at you Forbes).

Also I am amused at the targeted ads I get from my Googles... or using my Android phone. We got a new furnace, and I figured with the forest fires mucking up our local air that the filter will need to be replaced. So I took a phone picture of the present filter so we could order a new one and sent it to dear spouse.

Now I am seeing furnace filter ads on the web. The googles infiltrate all! I now have a work-a-around, which is okay since it is limited to just one particular ad. Though why I am being targeted for funeral services is disturbing. I much prefer furnace filter ads.

Especially since it has been an ashful day. Hubby's car was covered in ash this morning... the sky has been a hazy yellow all day. The sunlight has dimmed to what occurred halfway to the recent solar eclipse (and we only got a bit over 90%). This was good year to get air conditioning in our normally maritime climate.

"There’s something about preloading macrophages and shooting them into murine tail veins only to see what happens in 12–24 hours that doesn’t quite jibe with your inverse dose–response song and dance."

Not so. The inverted dose response of Crepeaux 2017 is a result of local granuloma at the IM injection site. Granuloma prevents dispersal of the Al adjuvant particles.

'Mice who have had bile-duct resection? Really, this is what you’re trotting out?"

The study determined the cytokines responsible for recruiting macrophages into the brain. When microglia release MCP-1, macrophages in the periphery travel into the brain. Other studies show the same thing. Immunology textbooks also mention the function of MCP-1 in recruiting macrophages. MCP stands for MACROPHAGE CHEMOATTRACTANT PROTEIN, which clearly describes its function. Its a protein that attracts macrophages.

The D'Mello paper states:

"...in the setting of peripheral organ-centered inflammation there is a directed recruitment of activated monocytes into the CNS, which occurs as a result of an initial activation of cerebral microglia to produce MCP-1/ CCL2."
"Our findings have significant implications for communication pathways between the periphery and the CNS, not only in liver disease, but also in other inflammatory diseases occurring outside of the CNS."

Recall that human autistics have particularly elevated MCP-1 in the brain, and activated microglia.

@Oren Evans

If we could keep 10,000 infants away from fluorescent light and had no cases of autism I think that would count as evidence. So let’s get qualified researchers to evaluate the 300,000 Amish to determine their autism rate.

Then maybe you should do that by contacting the relevant authorities. I don't think you'll go very far by posting your ideas in a commentaries thread on a blog.

Recall that human autistics have particularly elevated MCP-1 in the brain, and activated microglia.

Oh really? Sloppy work Dan.

MCP stands for MACROPHAGE CHEMOATTRACTANT PROTEIN

No, Dan, it doesn't, shouting notwithstanding.

Macrophage, Monocyte. They mean the same thing in VP's world. For biologists and medical people, maybe not.

Macrophage, Monocyte. They mean the same thing in VP’s world. For biologists and medical people, maybe not.

I guess the monocytes, upon recruitment, are presumed to be given orders for basic training in Fort Granuloma before being deployed. Or something.

"Macrophage, Monocyte. They mean the same thing in VP’s world. For biologists and medical people, maybe not."

I've seen others use the terms interchangeably, which is at best sloppy. Monocytes are blood cells which under some conditions can be recruited across the blood-brain barrier to enter brain tissue (where they differentiate into macrophages). One would have to connect a lot more dots than Mr. Papers has so far attempted, in order to conclude that aluminum adjuvant particles take this route after vaccination and set up shop in the brain causing inflammation and then autism and various other maladies.

It is wondrous indeed that Mr. Papers is happy to ignore and/or dismiss hundreds of thousands of cases annually of documented brain inflammation and death from vaccine-preventable diseases, because of his unproven theory that vaccines cause non-fatal brain inflammation resulting in autism.

This just in--results of a study of the benefits of vaccination published by the WHO--maybe Craig can shout this out at the Vaxxed people.

The short version is that the nonprofit organization Gavi has been working to increase access to vaccines in lower-income countries. Study estimates that by 2020, they will have saved 20 million lives and $350 billion in healthcare costs.

Full version here:
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/95/9/16-178475/en/

@VP
"Reactions can occur immediately as well, though this is probably less common"

Rubbish, I knew you wouldn't be able to resist making something up and here we have it, four weeks to a month your macrophages take to move any where near the brain, according to you, that's why the effects can't be picked up in studies, according to you.
Now conveniently its immediately as well. These are some hyperspeed macrophages lol.

See people, pure evidence that he's just making bits up as he goes along.

"Aluminum also induces MCP-1, so it may stimulate its own transport into the brain. "

Wut lol, which comes first lol? Why doesn't it just stop where it is, being attracted to itself lol. What about the macrophages without aluminium, why don't they fix the problem lol?

Why should we be worried about aluminium encapsulated in a Macrophage in the first place, it's where its supposed to be lol? Especially the tiny amount in each individual marcophage lol. How does this tiny amount inside an agent that deals with inflammation, cause inflammation? You are too funny. This is your total fantasy.

Like it's been said, Autism starts in the womb, if your version of reality was true, people be dropping like flies from burning nuggets of Aluminium and any other substances like it.

I suppose that Vaccine Papers might also trumpet the news that two NIH researchers received the Lasker Prize this week for work that facilitated the development of (aluminum-adjuvanted) HPV vaccines, only nine years after Harald zur Hausen was awarded the Nobel Prize for discoveries that pointed the way to that life-saving work.

Jake has a post up about Craig Egan. It's mostly content free (suprise), and it's mostly Jake saying that people should 'troll the troll' (where have I heard that?).

The most interesting thing is in the comments (which, as is standard for that site, are completely off topic from the post). It's from Jake himself (which is also fairly standard at that site, I'd guess he makes 35% to 40% of the comments) - "I’m really against denying being “anti-vaccine,” because being pro-vaccine should no longer be seen as a positive."

http://www.autisminvestigated.com/give-vaxxed-troll-craig-egan/#comment…

Also I am amused at the targeted ads I get from my Googles

I seem to get a lot for saris, senior dating sites, and timeshares in the Middle East. I can only speculate what it is about my online history that leads Google to assume I'm a Indian lady d'un certain age looking for a hot weekend in Abu Dhabi.

Shay, that is so amusing.

But, seriously, it is better than funeral services!

"Mr. Papers is happy to ignore and/or dismiss hundreds of thousands of cases annually of documented brain inflammation and death from vaccine-preventable diseases,"

Infectious diseases are dangerous and can cause brain injury. But like I said before, if the diseases were truly more dangerous than the vaccines, we would have seen a decline in neurodevelopmental disorders as vaccine use increased. But the opposite has happened. More vaccines is associated increased neuro disorders.

You are happy to ignore and dismiss the accumulating evidence that vaccination causes brain injury. You could have cited some science showing that vaccines do not do this. Instead, you resort to an "appeal to consequences" type argument. thats a logical fallacy and not persuasive.

"I suppose that Vaccine Papers might also trumpet the news that two NIH researchers received the Lasker Prize this week for work that facilitated the development of (aluminum-adjuvanted) HPV vaccines, only nine years after Harald zur Hausen was awarded the Nobel Prize for discoveries that pointed the way to that life-saving work."

I expect HPV vaccine will eventually be recognized as a public health disaster, causing more harm than it prevents. There is risk it may INCREASE cervical cancer and HPV cancers.

The adjuvant in the HPV vaccine appears to be particularly high risk for causing autoimmune and neurological disorders. Damage from these adverse effects will likely exceed the benefit provided by the vaccine (if any).

A significant problem with the HPV vaccine is that there are over 100 strains of HPV, and the vaccine targets only a few (latest targets 9). Hence, there is a risk of original antigenic sin (or deficits in heterosubtypic immunity, as seen with the flu vaccine) leading to increased susceptibility to non-target strains. In other words, vaccinated people may suffer more severe HPV infection from strains not included in the vaccine. Hence, the vaccine may INCREASE risk of cancers from HPV. The dangers of the non-target strains are not well understood. Widespread vaccine use will cause strain substitution. Will the new circulating strains be any less dangerous?

Efficacy studies to date look only at resistance to the target strains, not cancer outcomes or broader measures of HPV infection (i.e. infections with non-target strains).

Danny Boy" "There is risk it may INCREASE cervical cancer and HPV cancers."

Sure thing... another blatant assertion.

"A significant problem with the HPV vaccine is that there are over 100 strains of HPV, and the vaccine targets only a few (latest targets 9)."

Classic Nirvana Fallacy.

@ Chris

Indeed. I think he get's off by lying in public...

"The adjuvant in the HPV vaccine appears to be particularly high risk for causing autoimmune and neurological disorders."

Har no:

Results of a LONG TERM Safety study of a HPV vaccine:
"Neurological events
The rate ratios were not significantly increased for any of the five analysed neurological outcomes. For two of these outcomes, epilepsy and paralysis, the rate ratios were significantly decreased."

Efficacy studies to date look only at resistance to the target strains, not cancer outcomes or broader measures of HPV infection (i.e. infections with non-target strains).

Well, no.

http://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/7/8/e015867.long

http://www.gynecologiconcology-online.net/article/S0090-8258(17)30774-6…

A significant problem with the HPV vaccine is that there are over 100 strains of HPV, and the vaccine targets only a few (latest targets 9).

The main oncogenic ones and some others? Bummer.

@Vaccine Papers:

You are happy to ignore and dismiss the accumulating evidence that vaccination causes brain injury.

What you've posted in support of this claim is not evidence, although it is certainly "accumulating".

A significant problem with the HPV vaccine is that there are over 100 strains of HPV, and the vaccine targets only a few (latest targets 9).

Those 9 strains are responsible for over 90% of HPV caused cervical cancers. You really are clueless, aren't you?

Julian. Frost: "Those 9 strains are responsible for over 90% of HPV caused cervical cancers. You really are clueless, aren’t you?"

Which is why it is a classic Nirvana Fallacy. If it does work 100% of the time, it is not worthwhile. All the more reason to ignores the whining of Danny Boy.

Stupid typo, leaving out a certain word:

Which is why it is a classic Nirvana Fallacy. If it does not work 100% of the time, it is not worthwhile. All the more reason to ignores the whining of Danny Boy.

Sorry about that.

Those 9 strains are responsible for over 90% of HPV caused cervical cancers. You really are clueless, aren’t you?

I think you misspelled "have been backed into a corner." The "only x strains" routine is pathetically volk material for someone who estimates himself so highly as Mr. Vaper Papers.

Jake has a post up about Craig Egan. It’s mostly content free (suprise), and it’s mostly Jake saying that people should ‘troll the troll’ (where have I heard that?).

I am sooo tempted to troll, but discretion wins out.

A significant problem with the HPV vaccine is that there are over 100 strains of HPV, and the vaccine targets only a few (latest targets 9).

I am really hoping Dan doesn't take that attitude with everything else he does. There could be carnage out there.

For some diversion:
from Alex Jones, quoted at Salon:

“What they’re already doing for about 20 years is, they have an anti-stress vaccine they give the troops that’s really a nanotech virus that goes in and eats certain parts of the brain.”

All we want to do is eat your brains
We're not unreasonable, I mean, no one's gonna eat your eyes

All good things come to an end.

https://youtu.be/KoDxeS3mOFA

A significant problem with the HPV vaccine Kevlar vestis that there are over 100 strains of HPV targets on the human body, and the vaccine targets vest protects only a few

Let's strip every cop and combat soldier of their vests, shall we? Clearly they don't work.

Hence, the vaccine may INCREASE risk of cancers from HPV.

Sure thing, Dan. How's that LENR patent working out?

Despite the massive measles outbreak in the Minnesota Somali community, antivaxers double down

oracknows — Wed, 23 Aug 2017 05:00:08 +0000

Despite the massive measles outbreak in the Minnesota Somali community, antivaxers double down

I've written several posts about a tragic phenomenon in Minnesota. Specifically, there's been a major measles outbreak among the Somali immigrant community in the Minneapolis area, the largest group of Somali immigrants in the country. Actually, this outbreak is not the first outbreak among this community. There was another, smaller one in 2012. Both involved primarily children in the Somali immigrant community who were not vaccinated. The last recorded case of measles in Minnesota was on July 13 in a white child who was also unvaccinated, but officials need to wait at least 42 days (two full incubation periods of measles) before they will be able to declare this year's outbreak over. The toll thus far has been 79 measles cases, with more than 8,200 people exposed in day-care clinics, schools, and hospitals and 22 people hospitalized, many with high fever, breathing difficulties and dehydration.

Why have there been two major outbreaks among this specific community in five years, the latest of which produced more cases of measles in one concentrated area than there had been the year before in the entire US? The answer is simple. As I've described in pretty much all of my posts on the topic, the percentage of children of Somali immigrants vaccinated against measles with the MMR vaccine has fallen from around 90% in 2007, which was comparable to the rate among non-Somali children, to a dismal 42% now, far below the level needed for herd immunity. But why has this particular community become so hesitant to vaccinate their children with MMR?

Unfortunately, the answer to that one is both simple and complex. It's simple in that, beginning nearly ten years ago, the antivaccine pseudoscience of Andrew Wakefield took hold in the Somali immigrant community. Why and how that happened, however, is not as simple. In brief, back in 2008, there were news stories about a "cluster" of autism cases in the Somali community. Ultimately, scientific studies found that Somali immigrants suffer autism at no higher a prevalence than American natives, but that was years later. In the meantime, while there was uncertainty, there was an opening for antivaxers and their misinformation.

American antivaxers (like those at Age of Autism) immediately concluded what they always conclude whenever they see an epidemiological anomaly like this involving autism, namely that it had to be the evil vaccines. Antivaccine groups, both local and national, descended upon Minneapolis to promote their misinformation. Even Andrew Wakefield himself traveled there at least twice.to speak to the Somali community. As a result of privileged antivaxers swooping in like the Great White Saviors that they envision themselves as, the the view that the MMR vaccine causes autism took root there. At first, it was only distrust of the MMR vaccine, but more recently more generalized antivaccine views appear to be taking hold as well. Worse, even as this year's measles outbreak raged, antivaxers still showed up to tell the Somalis, in essence, to be strong and not to listen to all those public health officials trying to vaccinate their children and thus stop the outbreak. Mark Blaxill, for instance, spoke in Minneapolis just under four months ago.

And they're still at it. The Washington Post just published an article by Lena Sun entitled Despite measles outbreak, anti-vaccine activists in Minnesota refuse to back down. It's a scary read. Far from being chastened by the suffering they wrought on the vulnerable Somali community, who have already been unfairly demonized by racists for having "brought disease" to the US (never mind that they vaccinated their children with MMR at levels slightly higher than the native-born as recently as 2007) and even by Donald Trump when he was a candidate for supposedly being a hotbed of Islamic terrorism when they are not, antivaxers are energized:

Minnesota’s worst measles outbreak in decades has unexpectedly energized anti-vaccine forces, who have stepped up their work in recent months to challenge efforts by public health officials and clinicians to prevent the spread of the highly infectious disease.

In Facebook group discussions, local activists have asked about holding “measles parties” to expose unvaccinated children to others infected with the virus so they can contract the disease and acquire immunity. Health officials say they are aware of the message posts but haven’t seen evidence that such parties are taking place.

Not content with having poisoned the minds of the Somali immigrants against the MMR vaccine and sown distrust of public health officials frantically trying to contain the outbreak, antivaxers are actually actively undermining the efforts of those officials and even trying to persuade Somalis that "measles parties" (among the worst ideas ever) are a good idea to obtain "natural immunity" for their children. Worse still, Wakefield's associates, namely the crew riding the VAXXED bus across the country to spread antivaccine misinformation (and, if they succeed, measles outbreaks) are scheduled to arrive in Minnesota to tell the Somali community once again to be strong and not listen to the public health officials trying to prevent outbreaks:

The activists also are using social media to urge families who do not want to immunize their children or who believe their children have been harmed by vaccines to meet in Minneapolis this week with associates of Andrew Wakefield, the founder of the modern anti-vaccine movement. The associates have been touring the United States and abroad with the former doctor’s movie, “Vaxxed: From Cover-up to Catastrophe,” which repeats the debunked theory that vaccines cause autism and that scientists, pediatricians and the public health system are part of an elaborate conspiracy. A recent fundraiser at the clinic of a suburban Minneapolis pediatrician who supports “alternative vaccine schedules” benefited a second film that also will feature Wakefield, whose research has been retracted for falsehoods.

Fortunately, some headway is being made to combat this misinformation. Key to that has been engaging the Somali-American imams, who have been urging families to get their children vaccinated with MMR.

In the article, there were expressions of surprise that such a large measles outbreak, one that was directly traceable to "outreach" efforts by antivaccine groups dating back to 2008, has actually emboldened antivaccine groups rather than led them to lay low. I must admit that I was somewhat surprised by this, but not as surprised as many. With the rise of Donald Trump, who himself has a long, sordid history of antivaccine statements blaming vaccines (which he has called "monster shots" and portrayed as needles and syringes big enough for a horse), antivaccine activists have in general become emboldened. There has been a political shift in antivaccine groups. Contrary to the stereotype of antivaxers as hippy dippy, granola-crunching left wingers, today's antivaxer is more likely to be a Tea Party activist, suspicious of government, who views school vaccine mandates with every bit as much suspicion as he or she would view a new tax or Obamacare.

Indeed, I've discussed this politicization of school vaccine mandates before, using Texas as an example where antivaccine views have fused with libertarian small government politics to produce a toxic brew that opposes any effort to tighten up school vaccine requirements. They're even willing to betray their supposed commitment to "openness, by scuttling bills that would have required the publication of school-level vaccine exemption rates, so that parents can know if they are sending their children to a school where high exemption rates mean that outbreaks are more likely there. We've seen the very same thing in my state, where conservative politicians have done their best to undermine the efforts of the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services to bring down Michigan's shamefully high personal exemption rate. Basically, this new breed of antivaxers appears to be doing its best to make measles great again. School vaccine mandates used to be an issue with broad bipartisan support. I fear that is changing.

In Minnesota, the "white saviors" are still at it:

Earlier this summer, health officials and advocates received word that white women were passing out fliers and talking to families in some high-rise apartment buildings in predominantly Somali neighborhoods. The women reportedly claimed that the measles outbreak had been created by the Health Department to persuade Somali parents to vaccinate, said Lynn Bahta, a longtime state Health Department nurse who works to counter vaccine hesitancy.

Health officials never determined who the women were. But the reports reflect the tendency of anti-vaccine activists to “dig in,” Bahta said. “The more pressure on them, the more they dig in.”

Naturally, Minnesota antivaccine groups, like the Vaccine Safety Council of Minnesota and Minnesota Vaccine Freedom Coalition deny they had anything to do with the women spreading fliers, and maybe they didn't. They're not the only game in town—unfortunately. Meanwhile, though, on the Facebook page of the Minnesota Vaccine Freedom Coalition, local antivaxers are very unhappy at the Washington Post's article:

One commenter named Crystal Allen, for instance, says in response:

It's funny how they try to make this "outbreak" look like a big deal. According to their own numbers, 8,200 people were exposed, only 79 got it, nobody died and all fully recovered and all this occurred across several counties containing several hundred thousand people! That's nothing! It's just not that bad. With proper nutrition and rest, the measles is a nasty cold with a rash. It's not fun but it's also not a crisis.

Yes, because to antivaxers, "nobody died" means the measles is harmless. Of course, the main reason that, of the estimated 8,200 people exposed, "only" 79 caught the measles is because, thankfully, most of the population is still vaccinated. It was mostly the unvaccinated and undervaccinated who got measles. Measles is one of the most contagious diseases there is; if not for high vaccination rates one would have expected close to all of those people who hadn't had the measles before to have contracted the disease. Also notice how conveniently Ms. Allen neglects to mention the 22 who were hospitalized. That's more than one in four cases.who had high fever, breathing difficulties, and/or dehydration serious enough to require hospitalization. That's hardly a "harmless" disease. Yet, antivaxers always try to falsely portray the measles as not serious.

Unfortunately, given the current climate and how emboldened antivaxers have become, it is not difficult to predict more outbreaks of measles. The outbreak of measles among Somalis in Minnesota might have finally burned itself out, but there will be more, either among the Somalis, who still have low vaccine uptake, or elsewhere where antivaccine beliefs have taken hold. It's only a matter of time. In the face of an unequivocal demonstration of the harm their efforts have caused, antivaxers don't admit that they might be wrong. They double down.

oracknows Wed, 08/23/2017 - 01:00

Tags

Minnesota Vaccine Freedom Coalition

MMR

Somali

vaccine

Vaccine Safety Council of Minnesota

Politics

Doesn't surprise me in the least. I believe they prefer people to come down with diseases. I can't even be polite to the few anti-vaxxers I've come across here in meat space. I have friends who are on the cusp and I have to avoid talking about it at all because I know I'm not going to change their minds. What are they trying to do here, really? Wipe out a community? If vaccines are so horrible, why are their no campaigns to bring back smallpox? After all, that was wiped out because of vaccines and I'm pretty sure that some lab somewhere has some of the virus.

What are they trying to do here, really? Wipe out a community?

There is no evidence that the anti-vaxers themselves are trying to wipe out the Somali community, but there are far too many white supremacists who would like to wipe out that community who are piggy-backing off the anti-vaxers' efforts.

I consider both groups to be evil, but one is being willfully ignorant while the other is being intentionally malicious.

"Also notice how conveniently Ms. Allen neglects to mention the 22 who were hospitalized."

I saw a comment from an anti-vaxxer that addressed this. According to this person, those hospitalizations weren't really necessary.

Guess they have an answer to everything.

Why wouldn't this article disclose the name of the anti-vax pediatrician who is supporting Wakefield and opposing public health efforts in Minnesota? Nothing undercuts public health and vaccination rates like an anti-vaccine physician (like Gordon and Sears causing the measles outbreaks in Orange County). In Minnesota, close to these outbreaks, there exists the large anti-vaccine pediatric clinic "New Kingdom Healthcare" run by another quack AV pediatrician just like Gordon and Sears. His name is "Dr. Bob" Zajac and he was hosting clinics telling parents they still didn't have to vaccinate during the peak of the Minnesota measles outbreak (now scrubbed from his clinic facebook page). It wouldn't surprise me if Zajac is the unnamed pediatrician mentioned in the WaPo article

The women reportedly claimed that the measles outbreak had been created by the Health Department to persuade Somali parents to vaccinate

Why is the Health Department not suing for slander and libel?

The fact that only 79 people got sick is also partly due to the hard work by the health department to warn and protect contacts. There is a lot of effort and cost going into preventing spread.

The shameless continuing efforts to mislead their victims into continuing to leave their victims at risk did surprise me, if only for the reason that it's bad strategy, because continuing the outbreak might lead MN's legislators to decide steps to limit it are necessary,

Orac writes,

...trying to persuade Somalis that “measles parties” (among the worst ideas ever) are a good idea to obtain “natural immunity” for their children.

MJD says,

They'll probably further disrespect the MMR vaccine with shirts that say, Science-based medicine is a party pooper.

And if the white anti vaccine activists that came to mislead these people didn't consider that they're setting up a vulnerable immigrant community as a target for racists and anti immigrant activists, they should have.

They bear some of the responsibility there, too.

Why is the Health Department not suing for slander and libel?

Presumably because they would be considered a public figure, and it is almost impossible in the US for a public figure to win a libel case.

I certainly don't want to live under English libel laws, but IMHO the US takes things too far in the other direction.

"With proper nutrition and rest..."

No matter how many crap supplements you take, these people she'll tell you that you missed the proper ones.

Unless you're fine; in that case you took the right pill.

@Eric Lund, #9: they're also probably a tad busy doing real work like controlling outbreaks on top of their routine work, and have better things to spend scarce resources and time on.

Yes, it would be an extremely hard case, but even if that were not the case, it's likely not where they would focus.

I collect a variety of old books, including old home economics books, cookbooks, and child care books. Anti-vaxxers are always saying that "back in the day" no one feared measles, it was seen as no big deal, just an illness that everyone got.

I decided to look it up in some old child care books from the forties and fifties. Nope...they talk about the complications and risk of death. It sounds pretty serious in those old child care guides. They also recommend to call the doctor right away (since anti-vaxxers also try to say that no one went to the doctor for measles in normal cases.)

No no no!
There isn't bigotry against the Somali community because they're black people but
because they're against vaccines
( AoA, today) Kim Rossi claims she and her crew are indeed victims of hate-
You see, healthy unvaccinated children are a threat to the powers-that-be

As someone who had the measles in the fifties; no it wasn't a mild and easy Brady Bunch disease. I was sick for a long time (at least for a young kid it seemed like a long time) and was not pleasant. I have had rubella but not the mumps that I know of but I've been exposed at least 15 times.

I think with the Somali population; one big issue is there distrust of government. If you look at the government conditions they fled, you can understand their distrust of any government official.

@ Chris Hickie

Just for the record: Jay Gordon practices in Santa Monica, which is in Los Angeles County and quite a distance from Orange County. LA County is also home to some of the problem schools with very poor uptake and bogus medical exemptions. AVs there are probably a mixture of the older-stereotype 'granola' set – including minor Hollywood celebrities like Mayim Bialik – and OC-esque conservatives. There are other AV pediatricians on that chiro's list besides Bob Sears who are either in the OC or close by in San Diego County. All three of those SoCal counties – Orange, LA, and SD – were cited in the article on problem areas. While a few on the chiro's list weren't in the worst areas (Sonoma County in NoCal is awful) the correlation was high in general, and there weren't any problem areas without local providers of dubious medical exemptions.

Anyway, I doubt Jay bears any direct responsibility for the Disneyland outbreak, at least in the sense of his patients being involved. But as a celebrity doc, his channeling of vaccine fears spreads beyond his office neighborhood, and of course his patients could be involved in the next outbreak...

I never quite understood the idea of measles parties to acquire "natural immunity"... in other words, making sure that your kids get the disease, so that they don't get the disease. Isn't that like cutting off your own foot, so that it'll never need to be amputated?

Presumably because they would be considered a public figure
I never thought of that. I guess I had thought that a "public figure" needed to be human (or at least Lassie?).

I am not sure if US or English libel law is worse. A plague on both the Statutes.

@ Sadmar #15: If Gordon had been a quietly anti-vaccine pediatrician, I might agree with you. But Gordon has shown a repeated desire to thwart public health during measles outbreaks, going on TV news during a 2011 outbreak to tell parents not to vaccinate with the MMR vaccine ( http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2013/07/19/1-confirmed-case-of-measles-i… ) and then going on CBS News during the 2015 Disneyland outbreak ( https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doctor-explains-why-he-lets-kids-avoid-the… ). Gordon chose to do these things to oppose public health. Noboy forced him to do this. Compare that to the anti-vax pediatrician in Minnesota who is trying to lay low and scrubbing his Facebook page, and Gordon stands out like gooey duck on sildenafil. Plus: (1) Gordon made a DVD on vaccines in the mid 2000's that is very anti-vaccine; (2)he publicly appeared at anti-vaccine rallies in the 2000's, and (3) he maintained his anti-vaccine stance in his non-peer-reviewed book on how to prevent autism. The March 2014 measles outbreak in SoCal was in Orange County, so I guess you could say he didn't fuel that one, but the 2015 Disneyland outbreak had a lot of cases in LA County up where he lives and there were reports of cases in the schools around him, so no way he gets a pass on that one.

AS a side effect...

it seems our friend, Jake, in reaction to the outbreak and Dr Peter Hotez**, has seen his VERY OWN meme featured on television news.
He's coming up in the world but not in a good way

see Autism Investigated, @ Jake L. Crosby, @ Dr Peter Hotez

** Hotez says Jake's work has an " alt right" ring to it

Meanwhile back in Somalia the herdsmen are probably not holding rinderpest roundups.

In Australia, anti-vax doctors have to fly under the radar, and when they stick up their heads for publicity, they get exposed and investigated: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/secret-melbourne-cell-of-antivaxxer-do… .

Compare and contrast to the US, where anti-vax doctors have no fear of any professional repercussions while raking in the $$$ selling exemptions, books, supplements, etc.

Not good.

They might be being investigated in Australia but given the first reports to the regulatory authority are a year ago no one can say they're moving quickly. Now it's hit the media I suspect it will speed up - I await the Centrelink (who manage the Family Tax benefits which are covered by the 'no jab, no pay' legislation) investigation with interest. They tend to look unkindly on fraud.

Orac,
My brother is an influential member of my state legislature. He has commented to me about the persist nature of the antivaccination crowd. As a peds ICU doc I have related to him some tragic stories of children dieing from vaccine preventable diseases. He is in our corner but needs some ammunition for his fellow congressmen.
Other than your blog, do you have suggestions for resources to recommend and how I should proceed?

it seems our friend, Jake, in reaction to the outbreak and Dr Peter Hotez**, has seen his VERY OWN meme featured on television news.
He’s coming up in the world but not in a good way

Looks like poor poopsie Jake doesn't like his newfound "fame" very much. As usual the little tosser doesn't reflect on his own behaviour, instead blames others.

@ Chris Hickie #21; @ Ethel #22

Good news. The anti-vax doctor faces suspension by the regulator:
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/antivax-melbourne-gp-john-piesse-face…

Obviously just a coincidence that after a year of investigation, this is announced on the very day the case is highlighted by the media (sarcasm).

** Hotez says Jake’s work has an ” alt right” ring to it

I just skimmed that thread in the Twitterbox.
https://twitter.com/PeterHotez/status/898159584065531904

Master Crosby responded that despite the anti-immigrant dogwhistles and his neo-Nazi friends, he can't possibly be a nazi himself because "I've probably got more Jewish in me than you."

Hotez says Jake’s work has an ” alt right” ring to it

Hotez is correct. One only needs to peruse Jake's blog to see his undying passion for Donald Trump, etc.

Obviously just a coincidence that after a year of investigation, this is announced on the very day the case is highlighted by the media (sarcasm).

APHRA is far from a toothless tiger, but spends almost all of its time pretending to be one. However, what has happened in Australia (mainly through the efforts of Stop the AVN and a few vocal parents of babies that died from VPDs) is that the political will to tolerate anti-vaccine idiocy has largely gone at both Federal and State levels.

This is where the US is different to Australia. The US still has congressmen (and I think they are all men) and a President who are OK with supporting anti-vaccine idiots.

Hotez says Jake’s work has an ” alt right” ring to it

That is, of course, a massive understatement. The Gnat worships Trump, is totally on board with shutting immigrants out, and is misogynistic as hell.

I see that Jake is putting Brian's name on posts from Rebecca again, the coward.

Anti-vaxxers are always saying that “back in the day” no one feared measles, it was seen as no big deal, just an illness that everyone got.

I can tell you directly from my great aunt, who lost 2 children to measles, that she was shït scared of us children getting measles. Back in her day there was nothing you could do about measles.

I see that Jake is putting Brian’s name on posts from Rebecca again, the coward.

That cannot be true. Jake has turned up here emphatically denying he has ever modified a post on his blog.

The tosser.

I see that Jake is putting Brian’s name on posts from Rebecca again, the coward.

It pleases me no end - shows I've got to him, the mysoginistic, racist piece of ****. :-)

That's what makes me laugh. You have a lovely picture as your gravitar. I guess it's Jake's version of calling Brian Deer a woman (or version thereof) and puffing out his chest to show he's a REAL Man (TM)

As much as I would love to go back and comment, he's already shown just how low he's prepared to go.

He can rot in hell, as far as I'm concerned.

As I was saying recently, it he continues doing this I'm going to write to his mother. Since he's been thrown out of university, there's no point in seeking their help.

Trouble is, I've forgotten his mother's name. Does anyone recall who she is?

She may take the view that what he's doing is a manifestation of his developmental disorder. But I think he's better diagnosed as an abusive little shithead.

In any event, he's been told the likely consequences of what he's doing, and unless someone persuades me otherwise, he ought to live with it.

# 31 Chris

Do you recall where he denies modifying posts? Small point, I know.

@ Brian Deer, Jake's mum is Nicole Cranberg Crosby but good luck getting her to do anything about Jake. She set him on this path.

Brian Deer (#35) writes,

...unless someone persuades me otherwise, he ought to live with it.

MJD say,

Something needs to be done in that such shenanigans are long-term hurtful and damaging.

"She set him on this path."
Indeed. Had he not been told by his parents that his autism was caused by vaccination, he'd probably be better off today, as he wouldn't erroneously think that his disability was someone else's fault.

@Chris Hickie-Yes, and the Australian government also recently barred Polly Tommey and Suzanne Humphries from entering Australia for 3 years.

Well, the folks at AoA certainly did him no favors. They loved the fact that they could groom him to be their "attack dog."

Master Crosby responded that despite the anti-immigrant dogwhistles and his neo-Nazi friends, he can’t possibly be a nazi himself because “I’ve probably got more Jewish in me than you.”

That's very amusing, not least because a fair number of high ranking Nazis actually had Jewish ancestry.

[AoA] loved the fact that they could groom him to be their “attack dog.”

Indeed. And one day, that "attack dog" turned on his handlers.

Which we actually warned him about - it was only a matter of time when a situation would arise that Crosby's "absolutism" was going to cause a rift.....and unfortunately, he's been going down the rabbit hole ever since.

Indeed. Had he not been told by his parents that his autism was caused by vaccination, he’d probably be better off today, as he wouldn’t erroneously think that his disability was someone else’s fault.

As far as I can tell, Jake thinks that everything that doesn't go his way is somebody else's fault.

@ Chris Hickie

No, I was totally agreeing with you on Jay's rhetorical influence in outbreaks. It just struck me that "like Gordon and Sears causing the measles outbreaks in Orange County" wasn't quite right since Sears' patients were part of that cluster, and Gordon's probably weren't. I guess I also think "causing" is too strong, even for Dr. Bob. I mean these guys are causal factors, but not THE cause. Before SB277 anyway, parents didn't need pandering pediatricians to keep their kids away from their shots. Me, I'd go with "like Gordon and Sears making key contributions to the measles outbreaks in Southern California." Maybe it's my academic background, but I prefer to avoid overstatement in argumentation (unless I think it's clearly marked as figurative) lest it seem over-zealous to the point of possibly damaging credibility. Or, to put it another way, as your comment explicates very nicely, Jay has plenty to answer for even if none of his patients were directly involved in the outbreaks.

As I've suggested in previous threads, I'd be willing to cut some slack to docs who do delayed schedule vaxing if that effectively cut down the number of kids who aren't immunized at all. Jay makes some noises to that effect, but I don't necessarily take his word on the matter. Even with a delayed schedule, the kids should have had their shots by the time they enter kindergarten, yes? I see no excuse whatsoever for any doc issuing bogus medical exemptions, and if you and I were on a review board, we'd both be voting for these clowns to have their licenses suspended or revoked permanently.

About that alt-right bent...

Anti-vaxxers and woo worshippers used to be somewhat more left-leaning, back-to-nature partisans- on average- but recently rightists seem to have become quite vocal-

Natural News** and prn.fm especially have become much more focused on harnessing the ire of the angry white mob -
anti-Big Government, anti-intellectualism, anti-professionalism, anti- east and west coast elitism, anti-diversity and libertarian..

I don't know whether this reflects their founders' true inner beliefs or an attempt to ride on political coattails post-tea party/ Trump revolution in the wake of the financial crisis-
i.e. to get people to believe that they're on their side so customers will buy to reward them and thus insure SALES.

HOWEVER Bolen and Jake are quite in that camp although they have nothing to sell that I can discern so it might possibly be their true position.

They found an icon to emulate in the Donald-
a big mouthed, know-it-all, self-serving, entitled half -wit totally without a social conscience or an ounce of empathy.

** take a look

Brian,

See here http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2017/04/20/what-makes-a-physician-bec…

Brian Deer, a p.s.

In my opinion, Jake Crosby is such small fry that he really is not worth your effort. He has burnt pretty much all of his supporters in the anti-vaccination world, so they will no longer give him the time of day and he has no influence. You going after him could change that and get some people back on his side. Jake clearly has no scruples.

Better to point and laugh.

I've often wondered why Jake has such a seemingly angry response when I engage him in the comments section of this blog. I'm more convinced that it's because of who I am and where I come from than anything I've ever written about him.
Think about it... Jake fancies himself an epidemiologist, yet, all that I see he has to prove that he is an epidemiologist is a degree from GW in epidemiology. I also have an MPH in Epi from that school, but I went on to work at a state health department as an epidemiologist and be deeply involved in the 2009 H1N1 pandemic work. Then I went to Colombia to chase Chikungunya. Last November and December, I was in Puerto Rico to chase Zika.
What has he done? A paper with the Geiers on how to dumpster-dive the VAERS database? Old news. (Fake news, amirite?)
Add to my professional accomplishments that I'm Mexican-born, and his head must be exploding that this inferior person has done so much more than he seemingly can. Plus, I'm almost done with my doctoral dissertation. (I can almost taste it.) To top it off, I became a father last weekend, so now I have an anchor baby as well and go to school in a sanctuary city. ;-)
All without the sweet, sweet ancestral cash that people (smart people) say he has access to.
In essence, the only apparent way that I could represent everything Jake is angry at with the world is if I were a female, or transgender female... And Black, let's not forget his recent rants against Black Lives Matter, calling them a cancer.

I don't seem to recall The Gnat always being as racist and misogynistic as he is now. Sure, he was always prone to conspiracy theories, as well as antivaccine and other pseudoscientific views, but I don't remember the alt right stuff popping up until around the time Trump announced his candidacy. True, it could always have been there before, and he just never publicly proclaimed it before Trump's candidacy. As for so many others, it could well be that he viewed Trump as an opening to speak his true beliefs on race and gender relations in public. Or it could also have been that he drifted towards the alt right because, after having burned all his bridges to his previous social support system among the antivaxers at AoA who had previously supported him as a wunderkind and the future of their movement before he turned on them, the alt right was a new support system to replace the old. Who knows?

@Ren: congrats on the baby! And also on the fact that your dissertation is almost done. Many kudos to you for showing the eternal brat what can be done if you actually use your brains.

Awesome news Ren! Many kudos your way. Tough row to hoe, but cool to hear about the amazing things you're getting to study.

@ Ren:

A baby and a doctorate- what's next a NYT bestseller?**
Congratulations!

Jake hates you ( and Orac, Dr Hotez, Brian Deer and probably many of RI's minions) because we're doing what he wants to do-
science, investigation, writing, succeeding socially, being a professional, being called clever, making sense on the internet, fitting in diverse settings

He can have the consolation that he'll never run out of money

** and why not? OK, next year.

Yeah. Mommy and Daddy will make sure The Gnat never wants for anything, and I'm sure his inheritance will make sure he never has to find a real job for the rest of his life.

What worries me though is that that amount of money can fuel a lot of despicable projects ( e.g.fake studies, web nonense to scare the woo-entranced) and political actions that ultimately harm people * a la* the Kochs, De Vos *et famille* the Mercers et al,

@ Denice Walter:

NYT Bestseller on how to raise a science-oriented child? Has that been done?

Back to the subject at hand... I mentored a couple of kids from Eritrea about three years ago. They were here with their mother. The mother didn't know much English, so she relied a lot on them to translate. Well, that had to change because I started catching on that maybe not everything was being told to the mom. I wonder how much the antivaxxers are using the language barrier to murky the waters even more. I mean, as it is, we have to say that vaccines are not 100% safe, which they could easily translate to "not safe" and leave the 100% part out.

I hope the public health authorities in Minnesota are using community outreach and Somali translators who are trained to do so.

Ren - as you know, this is why public health departments prefer not to have family members or friends act as translators. Sometimes it's worth that expensive phone call to the medical interpreters.

Or it could also have been that he drifted towards the alt right

I wasn't following Jakes' Adventures Down the Rabbit-Hole closely, and didn't keep track of the different stages of his devolution... but I wonder if misogyny was his Gateway Drug. For some people it starts with red-pill anti-feminism and blaming the ladies for not putting out, and the rest of the belief-system follows. The ideologues of the Alt-Right are adept at stoking and exploiting any kind of resentment and frustration.

For some people it starts with red-pill anti-feminism and blaming the ladies for not putting out, and the rest of the belief-system follows.

Indeed, David Futrelle has an article about it here. Futrelle's blog was actually my introduction to the seed underbelly of the Internet, right around the time that the "incel" guy (who cares what his name was) went on his killing spree in Isla Vista.

I was just interacting with Crosby on Twitter - big surprise, he is a big "Sheriff Joe" fan, rushing to his defense - and hilariously, he seemed to think that the implication that I'm queer is supposed to be some kind of big insult. To be fair,I kind of started it by taunting him about not being able to get laid ("Those posts were EXAGGERATED, that's how humor WORKS".)

You can see a screenshot of his side of the thread here. (I wasn't able to capture the thread proper because Twitter says there are "too many replies" to show them.)

Ren (#56) writes,

I wonder how much the antivaxxers are using the language barrier to murky the waters even more.

MJD says,

Q. How can learned helplessness, based on the reality that vaccines are not 100% safe, ease the pain?

A. Continuous improvement

To reach perfection, it is said that 95% of the effort is spent overcoming the last 5% of the problem.

Fortunately, "Vaccine Safety Advocates" are often fixated on the last 5% of the problem.

Orac's minions (excluding: Politicalguineapig; Science Mom; Johnny, Narad; Denise Walters; Old Rockin' Dave; Panacea; Julian Frost; and Lawrence.) bring a refreshing perspective and often encourage the adversarial process regarding vaccine perfection.

@ JP:

Your tweets must have got to him I can imagine.

Interestingly ( for students of styles of thought) Jake tweets that Dr Hotez Is "wishing anti-vaxxers drown" -
if you read what Hotez actually wrote, you'll see that he wishes for something a bit more abstract ( paraphrase- that the storms will wash away "#antivax" and another bad idea- see @ Dr Peter Hotez)

Jake makes that statement into something threatening.

Right, I'm sure that doctors of tropical medical who spend their lives trying to help people they never met survive will just go ahead and PUBLICLY wish misguided parents dead in a hurricane.
SRSLY

Hey, I'm #3 on MJD's enemies list. A year or two ago, I didn't even make the cut.

Madder @16: In my 50s childhood, it was German measles parties, for young girls. It was thought then that a single dose of German measles (Rubella) gave you lifelong immunity, and parents wanted to make sure their daughters were immune before they were old enough to get pregnant. Rubella in pregnancy can be devastating to the fetus and there was of course no vaccine then. I don't think there were "parties" for any other kind of disease, especially measles - children were still dying in measles outbreaks then.
My mother actually hosted one of those parties when I came down with rubella; lying in bed, sick and miserable, it wasn't exactly fun for me having other girls climbing all over me trying to get infected.

Johnny: meh. MJD isn't important enough to claim an enemies list. He's a legend in his own mind.

I'm just happy to have contributed to his entry in the Encyclopedia of American Loons....

The Number One entry on MJD's enemies list should be MJD himself, judging from his commentary here.

That's some mighty sour grapes there, Panacea, considering that you come in at #7.

Of course, we're both behind PGP, and, well, I don't think there's any shame in that.

Johnny
The Bad One

Hey, I’m #3 on MJD’s enemies list.

Am I 3.5? He used a comma, and the semicolons would be just plain stupid if there were no hierarchy.

the semicolons would be just plain stupid

This discussion is still about MJD, isn't it?

Am I 3.5?

Equal third with Johnny. MJD obviously couldn't separate you at the finish.

I clearly need to up my game...instead of scrolling past MJD's posts I suppose.

Mrs Grimble @63: I met an alumni of my college who told us about coming down with rubella in college and being sent off to the infirmary (off campus but close by).

He said that once they were sure he had rubella (and wasn't going to die) every girl in the senior class of the local high school was paraded through his sickroom so he could infect them all before they went off to get married and have kids.

That was some time after 1962, I think.

Tom B @ #23

I'm quite a fan of the Skeptical Raptor blog https://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/, but I'm sure Orac and the (much more knowledgeable) regulars can give you some good sites. Just be REAL careful of the comments on the posts -- there's a lot of anti-vaxx filth there.

Johnny: I'm surprised I made a list- or that there is one, given that MJD is pretty scatterbrained- since I'm not in the medical field, and I haven't actually been on the blog much lately. I've spent a lot of this summer in transit.

MJD: It's funny that you're trying to pretend innocence now, since you were one of the people muddying the waters. How does it feel to know that you put kids in hospital and staked a vulnerable population out for the crows? Pretty good, right?

I'm losing it. I may have my own whale.to page, but these days I don't even make MJD's top ten. :-(

I clearly need to up my game…instead of scrolling past MJD’s posts I suppose.

Keep doing what you're doing; I made number 2 scrolling past his comments and rarely communicating directly with him.

You are wise.

"I made number 2 scrolling past his comments"

He has that effect on a lot of people.

Bwhahaha DB, nice one!

Standing Tall for Vaccines

milhayser — Fri, 11 Aug 2017 11:49:43 +0000

Standing Tall for Vaccines

"Who fears or rejects vaccines, why do they do so, and how might we reach them to change their minds?" On Aetiology, Tara C. Smith answers these questions with a new paper written as a primer for those who want to stand up for vaccination. She says, "for many individuals on the vaccine-hesitant spectrum, it’s not only about misinformation, but also about group identity, previous experience with the health care field, and much more." The stakes of the vaccine debate are high. On Respectful Insolence, a mathematical model from Stanford shows that slight dips in uptake of the MMR vaccine would cause the number of measles cases in the U.S. to balloon. Meanwhile, in Europe, measles has killed dozens of people in the last year amidst thousands of cases that could have been prevented with a shot (or sufficient herd immunity). Orac blames Europe's problems squarely on Andrew Wakefield, and as for the bubbling tensions in the U.S., Orac says "antivaxers have figured out how to weaponize their views by coupling them to right wing rhetoric about 'freedom.'"

milhayser Fri, 08/11/2017 - 07:49

Tags

A horrendously bad "vaxed/unvaxed" study rises from the dead yet again

oracknows — Mon, 08 May 2017 01:37:40 +0000

A horrendously bad "vaxed/unvaxed" study rises from the dead yet again

Some posts I really enjoy doing. I'm so fired up by the topic that the words flow, and I finish a post in record time. Other posts are more of a chore, written not so much because I'm excited by the topic, but because I feel duty bound to address it. I feel the need to write such posts when, for example, a bit of pseudoscience has gained traction in mainstream groups and readers keep writing me about it, to the point where I finally give in. This is one of the latter posts. None of this is to say that I don't still do my best with these posts to explain and argue my points. Fear not, I'll get some good Orac snark in. It's just that duty tends to be less fun than passion.

One of the most frequent topics for posts like this is a pseudoscientific or just plain bad study that, despite being retracted, keeps rising from the grave, like the proverbial zombie. I call them, appropriately enough, zombie studies. Depending on my mood when I write posts like this, I often add imagery featuring zombies (or, if you're into The Walking Dead, walkers). Other times, I'll include imagery featuring Jason Vorhees or Michael Myers, two supernatural slashers who would routinely through misbehaving teens for a whole movie, die (or appear to die) at the end of the movie, only to come back in the next installment in the series to kill again. Antivaccine pseudoscience (for example) is a lot like these monsters. In actuality, they're probably more like Jason or Michael Myers than walkers because you can actually kill walkers dead for good. Be that as it may, whenever a truly awful study that should never have been accepted in the first place for publication in a peer-reviewed journal is retracted, you can be sure that it won’t be too long before it is magically resurrected and rears its ugly head again in some form or another, to be wielded not just as a weapon to frighten parents with but as a bogus example of how the peer-reviewed medical literature “suppresses” science that doesn’t support vaccines, to be used to feed the conspiracy theories behind the antivaccine movement. Same as it ever was.

This time around, the zombie study is one that I've been checking in with and covering periodically ever since its inception in 2012, when antivaxers were fundraising for it. The principal investigator was Anthony R. Mawson, M.A., DrPH. Indeed, J.B. Handley himself spearheaded the fundraising effort. It is, unsurprisingly, the Holy Grail of antivaccine studies, the mythical "vaccinated/unvaccinated" study. Antivaxers, at least the ones who retain a bit of reason with respect to medical ethics, have come to realize that a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children is considered utterly unethical because it would leave half the children unprotected against vaccine-preventable diseases. They might not accept how unethical such a study would be, but they do realize that scientists do consider such a study unethical.

So they fall back on comparing health outcomes in children who are vaccinated to those who are unvaccinated (or undervaccinated). They're pretty much all crap, because those carrying the studies out are biased and/or incompetent. Examples include a telephone survey disguised as a "study" done ten years ago and a survey disguised as a "study" performed by a German homeopath. This study is different in that it isn't an antivaccine activist parent with no background in science or a homeopath but an actual academic. He is, however, clearly biased towards antivaccine views, as he has defended Andrew Wakefield's 1998 Lancet case series and is a vocal supporter of his.

I've written about this study before. Hilariously, when it was published in its first form, the full study wasn't published, only the abstract. Then the abstract was, in essence, retracted. Even more hilarious, it was a Frontiers journal, which is an even bigger dis because Frontiers journals are known for tending to be pay-to-publish predatory open access journals. If a Frontiers journal retracts your paper, it's plenty bad indeed. It turns out that the manuscript had been reviewed by a chiropractor and a peer reviewer without expertise,

Then, back in February, the Mawson zombie study rose from the dead again, as antivaxers spread around copies of the retracted article and crowed that it had been accepted for publication elsewhere, and indeed it has. It's fallen even farther down the food chain than a Frontiers journal, having been published by Mawson et al in the Journal of Translational Science, a journal published by Open Access Text, as Pilot comparative study on the health of vaccinated and unvaccinated 6- to 12- year old U.S. children.

There's nothing new in this study that makes it any better than it was in its previous incarnations. Indeed, its introduction alone contains a boatload of fail that gives away the antivaccine leanings of Mawson et al. For example, there's the implication of "too many too soon":

Under the currently recommended pediatric vaccination schedule [7], U.S. children receive up to 48 doses of vaccines for 14 diseases from birth to age six years, a figure that has steadily increased since the 1950s, most notably since the Vaccines for Children program was created in 1994. The Vaccines for Children program began with vaccines targeting nine diseases: diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b disease, hepatitis B, measles, mumps, and rubella. Between 1995 and 2013, new vaccines against five other diseases were added for children age 6 and under: varicella, hepatitis A, pneumococcal disease, influenza, and rotavirus vaccine.

The implication is, of course, the common antivaccine trope that as a result of the gradual expansion of the recommended vaccine schedule children are getting, yes, "too many too soon," with adverse health effects. Then there's this:

A complicating factor in evaluating the vaccination program is that vaccines against infectious diseases have complex nonspecific effects on morbidity and mortality that extend beyond prevention of the targeted disease. The existence of such effects poses a challenge to the assumption that individual vaccines affect the immune system independently of each other and have no physiological effect other than protection against the targeted pathogen [21]. The nonspecific effects of some vaccines appear to be beneficial, while in others they appear to increase morbidity and mortality [22,23]. For instance, both the measles and Bacillus Calmette–Guérin vaccine reportedly reduce overall morbidity and mortality [24], whereas the diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis [25] and hepatitis B vaccines [26] have the opposite effect. The mechanisms responsible for these nonspecific effects are unknown but may involve inter alia: interactions between vaccines and their ingredients, e.g., whether the vaccines are live or inactivated; the most recently administered vaccine; micronutrient supplements such as vitamin A; the sequence in which vaccines are given; and their possible combined and cumulative effects [21].

The wag in me can't help but provide Mawson with an example of a "complex nonspecific effect on morbidity and mortality" due to a vaccine. He's not going to like it, though, because it shows that the benefits of the measles vaccine go beyond just preventing measles. Basically, there is a prolonged period of immunosuppression after the measles that lasts up to three years. Vaccinating against the measles prevents that immunosuppression and therefore lowers the death rate due to other infectious diseases to which children are more vulnerable after having had the measles.

The bias is also apparent in the statement of purpose for the study:

The aims of this study were 1) to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated children on a broad range of health outcomes, including acute and chronic conditions, medication and health service utilization, and 2) to determine whether an association found between vaccination and NDDs, if any, remained significant after adjustment for other measured factors.

This is serious bias, as the authors assume that vaccines cause harm. It's not quite explicitly stated, but certainly implied. They clearly expected to find an association between vaccination and neurodevelopmental conditions, despite all the copious evidence that there is no such association.

I also can't help but turn a frequent antivaccine trope back on itself. Antivaxers and promoters of alternative medicine often criticize studies of drugs and vaccines because the drug and vaccine manufacturers are frequently the funding source. That is not an entirely unreasonable objection—to a point. I myself look more skeptically at studies funded by drug companies, but with this caveat. If the study is well-designed, executed, and analyzed, I take its results seriously, regardless of funding. However, since antivaxers seem to think that even a whiff of pharma funding of a study invalidates it, I can't help pointing out the funding of Mawson's study:

This study was supported by grants from Generation Rescue, Inc., and the Children’s Medical Safety Research Institute, charitable organizations that support research on children’s health and safety. The funders had no role or influence on the design and conduct of the research or the preparation of reports.

Generation Rescue is Jenny McCarthy's antivaccine organization, although it was originally founded by J.B. Handley, and the CMSRI is one of the looniest of the loony antivaccine groups. Sure, it's probably true that Generation Rescue and the CMSRI didn't directly influence design or execution of the study, but ask yourself this: Would these groups have funded an investigator if they weren't pretty sure how his study would turn out? I think you know the answer to that question.

Of course a study this flawed is close to guaranteed to find a positive result. The flaws begin with the selection of study population:

The study was designed as a cross-sectional survey of homeschooling mothers on their vaccinated and unvaccinated biological children ages 6 to 12. As contact information on homeschool families was unavailable, there was no defined population or sampling frame from which a randomized study could be carried out, and from which response rates could be determined. However, the object of our pilot study was not to obtain a representative sample of homeschool children but a convenience sample of unvaccinated children of sufficient size to test for significant differences in outcomes between the groups.

We proceeded by selecting 4 states (Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Oregon) for the survey (Stage 1). NHERI compiled a list of statewide and local homeschool organizations, totaling 84 in Florida, 18 in Louisiana, 12 in Mississippi and 17 in Oregon. Initial contacts were made in June 2012. NHERI contacted the leaders of each statewide organization by email to request their support. A second email was then sent, explaining the study purpose and background, which the leaders were asked to forward to their members (Stage 2). A link was provided to an online questionnaire in which no personally identifying information was requested. With funding limited to 12 months, we sought to obtain as many responses as possible, contacting families only indirectly through homeschool organizations. Biological mothers of children ages 6-12 years were asked to serve as respondents in order to standardize data collection and to include data on pregnancy-related factors and birth history that might relate to the children's current health. The age-range of 6 to 12 years was selected because most recommended vaccinations would have been received by then.

Notice how Mawson claims that this is a cross-sectional study, when in reality it's a survey targeting parents who homeschool. Of course, parents who choose to home school are not like your average parents. There are a lot of confounding factors that go along with home schooling, including the association between home schooling and antivaccine views. This association is very clear in the data, which show that 261 of the 666 subjects were unvaccinated. Of these 405 who were vaccinated, only 197 were "fully vaccinated." Thus, less than 1/3 of the children in the study were fully vaccinated according to the CDC's recommended schedule, and well over 1/3 were completely unvaccinated. This is not in any way representative of the population at large. Add to that the likelihood of selective memory and reporting, and the likelihood of this survey providing useful information is vanishingly small. Also, surveys are not the best means of gathering health data, and in this case it was a particularly bad situation. Mothers were asked whether their children were vaccinated, unvaccinated, or "partially vaccinated," and what conditions or diseases their children had had. There was no effort to make any independent assessments of the children's health, nor was there any attempt to account for bias, and there almost certainly was a lot of bias here:

A number of homeschool mothers volunteered to assist NHERI promote the study to their wide circles of homeschool contacts. A number of nationwide organizations also agreed to promote the study in the designated states. The online survey remained open for three months in the summer of 2012. Financial incentives to complete the survey were neither available nor offered.

Even more telling, consider how the subjects were recruited. The authors admit that the "object of our pilot study was not to obtain a representative sample of homeschool children but a convenience sample of unvaccinated children of sufficient size to test for significant differences in outcomes between the groups." In other words, no effort was made to construct a representative sample.

So what are we to make of the results of this study, which show:

The vaccinated were less likely than the unvaccinated to have been diagnosed with chickenpox and pertussis, but more likely to have been diagnosed with pneumonia, otitis media, allergies and NDD. After adjustment, vaccination, male gender, and preterm birth remained significantly associated with NDD. However, in a final adjusted model with interaction, vaccination but not preterm birth remained associated with NDD, while the interaction of preterm birth and vaccination was associated with a 6.6-fold increased odds of NDD (95% CI: 2.8, 15.5). In conclusion, vaccinated homeschool children were found to have a higher rate of allergies and NDD than unvaccinated homeschool children. While vaccination remained significantly associated with NDD after controlling for other factors, preterm birth coupled with vaccination was associated with an apparent synergistic increase in the odds of NDD.

Nothing. The bias and flaws in this study guaranteed no other result, particularly when you consider another confounding factor, namely that the parents of children who are fully vaccinated are very different in their health-seeking behavior than those whose children are unvaccinated. They tend to take their children to visit the doctor more regularly, which means that health disorders their children have are more likely to be diagnosed and treated. They're also less likely to be seeing naturopaths and other alternative practitioners.

I'll conclude by pointing out yet again that it is a myth that there are no studies comparing the health of vaccinated children compared to unvaccinated children. In fact, there have been several. It turns out that they don't show what antivaxers think a vaxed/unvaxed study will show. Basically, all of the vaxed/unvaxed studies not done by antivaccine-friendly scientists or quacks have shown either no differences in the prevalence of neurodevelopmental or chronic diseases between vaccinated children and unvaccinated children or have actually found better health outcomes in the vaccinated population. Mawson concludes by arguing that further "research involving larger, independent samples and stronger research designs is needed to verify and understand these unexpected findings in order to optimize the impact of vaccines on children’s health." Mawson's study is so biased, flawed, and incompetently carried out and analyzed that its results can be discounted as almost certainly worthless. It doesn't provide the rationale for "more studies." Quite the contrary.

Yet, that's how antivaxers are spinning it, as they always do.

Same as it ever was.

oracknows Sun, 05/07/2017 - 21:37

Tags

Clinical trials

Pseudoscience

http://oatext.com/Preterm-birth,-vaccination-and-neurodevelopmental-dis…

There are a lot of confounding factors that go along with home schooling, including the association between home schooling and antivaccine views.

This is particularly true of Mississippi, which at the time was one of only two states that did not allow nonmedical exemptions to vaccine requirements. So parents in that state who do not want to vaccinate their special snowflakes have no choice but to homeschool.

Oh, and one of the other confounding factors with homeschooling is one that would lead me, at least, to regard the parents as less trustworthy than others. I'll leave it at that, before this turns into an off-topic rant.

Another confounder (IIRC pointed out on FB), is that fully vaccinated children would have been more likely to regularly see a physician, therefore receiving diagnoses for illnesses and issues as opposed to unvaccinated children who might only see a doctor rarely.

Also...no attempt was made to validate what parents said. No medical records were requested. In fact, the DATES vaccines were given weren't requested - "to decrease the burden of the respondents". Which tells me the whole survey was a load of cr@p.

The fact that the same people who reject large, well controlled studies have no criticism of this is also very, very telling.

#3 MI Dawn -
That would be an apt description of this POS.
It isn't a "study", it is a survey of anonymous respondents from a biased pool of a very rare and unique group of persons: All home schooled. 39% completely unvaccinated when the anti-vaccinationists repeatedly assure us that completely unvaccinated children only make up about 1/2% of school children? Pending participants recruiting additional participants from their social circle.
No wonder it took over a year to find a scum sucking journal to accept it.

I suggest confounding the anti-vaxers by presenting an analogous and equally flawed survey:
- Select congressional districts in Cali, Oregon, Washington, NY, NJ, etc. that are heavily Democratic.
- Survey the voters about the intelligence of their children allowing anonymous responses and making clear that no evidence for the responses will be asked.
- Be amazed when the results come back that the children of Democratic Party parents are all reported to be very much above average with IQs of 140+ and the children of Republican Party parents are all reported to be very troubled and of average to below average intellect with IQs of <100 - Because no Democrat would ever lie or pretend they were Republican with a below average child just to make the Repubs look bad.
[Reverse the parties if the anti-vaccine believer is an All Gnatchrule Left-wing neo-Hippie instead of a Sovrun Libertarian Right-wing Anarchist Trumpet.]

How this "study" is even a thing is explainable only in context of the intellects and dishonesty of the fanatics that are embracing it.

More than intentionally pretending their children are vaccinated, I suspect what Orac described previously is going on - these parents seeing their vaccinated children through very, very negative lenses and looking to validate their prejudices about their unvaccinated one.

In a particularly ugly form of in-family favoritism, the problematic Vaxxed crew do "vaccinated v. unvaccinated" videos in which families talk about how wonderful their unvaccinated children and how less good their vaccinated children are. In front of said kids.

The same bias is probably at work here.

#6 Dorit -

Yeah, the Vaxxed team are a bunch of real sweethearts...
That's if you spell "sweethearts" thusly: "psychopaths".

As are the parents who play along with this disgusting differential in children appreciation within the family.

This study sounds terrible. However, wouldn't a properly done study also compare vaccinated vs unvaccinated homeschoolers? Otherwise, wouldn't the differences between the populations be more pronounced?

In a particularly ugly form of in-family favoritism, the problematic Vaxxed crew do “vaccinated v. unvaccinated” videos in which families talk about how wonderful their unvaccinated children and how less good their vaccinated children are. In front of said kids.

That is despicable. I haven't seen those videos, fortunately.

"However, wouldn’t a properly done study also compare vaccinated vs unvaccinated homeschoolers? Otherwise, wouldn’t the differences between the populations be more pronounced?"

A properly done study of vaccinated versus unvaccinated would only be ethical in the days of Edward Jenner, the late 1700s. Back then, the benefits of vaccination were not known. Today, you couldn't possibly randomize one group into getting no vaccines and another into getting a vaccine. Can you imagine deliberately exposing children to polio, measles, influenza?

Here's a modest proposal for a vax v. unvax study. I hope you see the satire in it: ht_tp://www.chadhayesmd.com/vaccinestudy/

Heidi: yes. That's why this study cannot be considered representative of the population at large. Because it only compared vaccinated vs unvaccinated homeschoolers, and thus the results are greatly distorted . . . and that's assuming the data collected is even reliable, which it is not.

If Dr. Mawson had submitted this study as his dissertation, his doctorate would not have been granted.

While I agree with your dissection of the study, I disagree with "Even more hilarious, it was a Frontiers journal, which is an even bigger dis because Frontiers journals are known for tending to be pay-to-publish predatory open access journals." This is exactly what antivaccinationists sometimes resort to, that is, calling open-source journals who receive a fee to publish articles, vanity press and other journals for receiving pharmaceutical advertisements. There are good open-source journals, e.g. PLOS group, and bad journals; but what counts is not where something is published, even a blog, but the actual content of the article. Bringing up the journal or publisher is, in my opinion, a form of ad hominem attack and detracts from your otherwise excellent dissection of Mawson's study.

I strongly disagree. The reason is simple. The primary reason antivaxers publish in these bottom-feeding predatory journals is because they can't get published anywhere else. Believe me, if Mawson could have gotten his study accepted for publication in a halfway decent journal, he most certainly would have. Indeed, he started at the more "respectable" level of predatory open access journals, Frontiers, and then when even Frontiers figured out his study was too bad even for its journals he went to an even lower tier of dodgy journal.

There is nothing wrong at all with pointing out when a study is published in a crappy journal known for publishing basically anything, as long as you pay it enough. That's the dark side of open access; While there are quite a few reputable open access journals, there are a lot of predatory ones too. In fact, I would go further. I would argue that, whenever you see an article in one of these journals, your skepticism should be turned up to 11. Similarly, I consider funding sources fair game, too. This study was funded by antivax groups (Generation Rescue and CMSRI). It's all a package.

What is NDD? The only thing relevant I found when I searched was "Nutrient Deficit Disorder" which is a quack diagnosis--"He isn't autistic! He has NDD!" It doesn't seem relevant here as you can cure NDD by buying supplements.

NDD = Neurodevelopmental disorders.

The authors should be congratulated for the only study in about 50 years that did not find prematurity associated with neurodevelopmental disability.

NDD = Neurodevelopmental disorders.

Which is a huge catch-all and presents another confounder for this survey. I didn't see that this was clarified but CMSRI is Claire Dwoskin's charity.

what counts is not where something is published, even a blog, but the actual content of the article

As somebody with your claimed credentials should know, this is not the world we actually inhabit. People who follow such things can and do take into consideration where the article was published. I have heard of departments where your publication only counts if it was in Nature, Science, or Physical Review Letters (these are physics departments; replace PRL with Cell if you are in a biomedical field).

As Orac implies, the business model of these journals is to provide the appearance of peer review while actually not imposing any quality control beyond whether the check for the publication fees clears. Inevitably, we point to articles such as this one to make the point that these journals are not worth the pixels they are printed on.

Orac's point is not limited to OA journals, either. Medical Hypotheses is an Elsevier title. I have also encountered a journal called Physics Essays--I don't recall exactly who the publisher is, but it is otherwise the physics equivalent of Medical Hypotheses.

Thank you--yes, that alone is depressing enough. Many of these people diagnose their own progeny with all sorts of nonsense, then cure them the same way.

Joel A. Harrison, PhD, MPH (#14) writes,

Bringing up the journal or publisher is, in my opinion, a form of ad hominem attack...

MJD says,

Orac has journal fever (i.e., bias) which often brings entertainment value to the subject.

Q. If Orac's prodigy published in a "lesser" journal would he use the same respectful-insolence zeal?

Oh, crap. I missed one. Mawson took what I like to call the "minimal publishable unit" (MPU) approach, divvying up his data to publish a second paper in the same crappy journal using the same survey data to look at vaccines and preterm birth as risk factors for neurodevelopment disorders:

Argh. Do I have to subject myself to this one too?

"Have" is such a strong word.

In an ideal world, there would be an Orac post on that bad study. But I know Orac has many calls on his time.

I figured the facebook post I saw was this study resurrecting itself. Graphic about how vaccinated children are eleventy billion times more likely (OK, OK 30x or so in one category) more likely to be terribly ill,disabled and damaged.

I didn't realize he found a journal to re-publish it (why am I surprised some journal will take his money?)

And I'll just put my soapbox away before going on my "least publishable unit" rant, I've been yelling at more things than is good for my blood pressure lately.

And I strongly disagree with you. Once again, it doesn't matter if it was on a blog. I think your articles are excellent; but where is the peer-review? Just as antivaccinationist blogs, this is just a blog. Does that mean your articles have NO validity?

I wrote an article several years ago reviewing Andrew Wakefield's book, "Callous Disregard." I went point by point through his claims against vaccine safety. The article was 15,000 words. I submitted it to several journals. Each said they would be interested if I cut it to 2,500 words. I was considering finding a blog to post it when one open-source vaccine journal editor accepted it and arranged, since I am retired and not affiliated with anyone, to publish it waiving any fees. The journal, Open Vaccine Journal, was one of many published by a for-profit company, some of their journals quite reasonable due to editor and others less so. And since it wasn't one of their profitable journals, the company has discontinued it, maintaining the published articles in an archive.

Antivaccinationists, Age of Autism, included in their attacks on me that it was for-profit vanity press journal that I paid to get published. I challenge you or anyone else to find fault with my article. And I remind you that almost every major journal has had retractions and articles that were less than good. How about NEJM's article years ago on coffee and pancreatic cancer?

It is OK to mention funding source; but, again, if I had not found a journal to publish my article and posted it on a blog, would that change its content? Or that your articles are on a blog, does that make them less valid?

Don't stoop to the level of antivaccinationists. The fact that Paul Offit was one of the developers of an excellent rotavirus vaccine and the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia shared royalties with him and other developers doesn't change the validity of his journal articles.

You did an excellent job of dissecting Mawson's article. Attacking the journal was unnecessary and affirms that what antivaccinationists do is legitimate. Mentioning the funding source is OK; but should NOT be emphasized. Focus on the science and logic!

For those interested, you can find my article: "Wrong About Vaccine Safety: A Review of Andrew Wakefield’s “Callous
Disregard”" at: https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOVACJ/TOVACJ-6-9.pdf

@ Eric Lund:

All science is tentative. One study, whether in the best journal or not, is just one study. This is a point that should be emphasized again and again. The absolute best study, even a double blinded randomized trial, is subject to random variables that can influence the results. Also, there is a bias in publishing against publishing negative results, so even the best journals often get it wrong. Peer-review helps; but is no guarantee. I know of several instances personally where a journal sent a manuscript to someone for peer-review and he gave it to a grad student. Once again, I repeat, what is important is the science and logic AND to explain over and over that one study should NOT be relied upon. Replication, which doesn't have to be a perfect replica of a previous design, is one of the sine qua nons of science.

This blog should serve as a model for science and logic, not stoop to the same level as antivaccinationists. Of course, some of them are so outrageous that they deserve this being pointed out. They love to resort to ad hominem attacks which, in my opinion, are clear evidence of their inability to actually deal with the science and logic.

Besides my article on Wakefield, I have written another 10 articles debunking antivaccinationists, one 45,000 words, so even this blog would probably not be interested. For those interested, you can find the summaries of my articles which link to the full pdfs at: http://www.ecbt.org/index.php/facts_and_issues/article/expert_commentary

The mechanisms responsible for these nonspecific effects are unknown but may involve inter alia:

SRSLY? Who uses legalese in medical "journals"?

^ G-ddamn blockquotes.

Don’t stoop to the level of antivaccinationists. The fact that Paul Offit was one of the developers of an excellent rotavirus vaccine and the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia shared royalties with him and other developers doesn’t change the validity of his journal articles.

You did an excellent job of dissecting Mawson’s article. Attacking the journal was unnecessary and affirms that what antivaccinationists do is legitimate. Mentioning the funding source is OK; but should NOT be emphasized. Focus on the science and logic!

Journals are not blogs and are evaluated by different standards—higher standards. Also, pointing out that a dodgy predatory journal is a dodgy predatory journal is legitimate criticism, as is pointing out that a study is published in a dodgy predatory open access journal, as long as it's not the central reason for dismissing the study (which it wasn't in this case). Basically, to me characterizing the journal is no different than characterizing the funding source—and just as much fair game, as long as it isn't central to the criticism.

I tried to be very calm in my initial response, but now I'm starting to get irritated, because you appear to me to be acting as though my citing how this is a dodgy predatory open access journal is somehow central to my criticism of Mawson's study when it's obvious that it isn't. We should probably just let this argument drop, because nothing good will come of pursuing it, particularly if you continue to characterize me of "stooping to the level of antivaccinationists." Them's fightin' words, so much so that I wrote and almost posted a response that we would've both regretted. Fortunately, I put it aside for a while before coming back to it and was thus able to delete the more...colorful...passages before hitting "Submit comment."

Can you imagine deliberately exposing children to polio, measles, influenza?

Something something Salk vaccine field trials something.

"This is not in any way representative of the population at large."

To do a study of unvaccinated kids with meaningful results, you have to have a sample with more unvaccinated kids than in the overall population. This is a strength of the study, not a weakness.

At least you didn't call the results statistically insignificant this time, illiterate shill.

The problem of poor science/pseudoscience and predatory "pay to view" journals is becoming a really serious one.

These journals are multiplying in number; their content is inferior and of poor quality, and the public (and many in the scientific arena too) cannot distinguish the useless from the useful.

What can be done about them? Science publishing as we know it needs to address the issue somehow.

Argh. Do I have to subject myself to this one too?

Mawson's motto seems to be "Trust me, thistime I've got it right." I guess someone will have to endure his "publications" until he actually does get one right. Just another form of job security or punishment for some past sins.

To do a study of unvaccinated kids with meaningful results, you have to have a sample with more unvaccinated kids than in the overall population. This is a strength of the study, not a weakness.

Jake, I understand you pretend to know epidemiology?
If so, then you will know that you might need more of one group (unvaccinated) in your sample, but to achieve this you address it through your sampling process, for instance recruiting two unvaxed kids for every vaxed kid, but still maintaining the unbiased randomisation so that the samples you picked were representative of the background population.

You cannot find a subgroup who have generated your "more unvaxed" through the selection bias of differential parental choice about vaccines.

I don't pretend to be an epidemiologist, but the principle of what I am saying here should be obvious to even you.

Given that the ranking of journals (and, yes, I know about the pitfalls of impact factors) is a critical metric of academic performance, one would have to wonder why anyone would publish in such an outlet.

It simply isn't true that the merit of studies can be assessed just by reading them. If Wakefield's seminal deception isn't evidence of that, then what is it? Peer review at least gives a sense that a person or persons who are very familiar with the specialist field have said it doesn't suck.

The idea that all words on a page are of equal merit if you know how to read is just crazy.

Broad and Wade said there were too many biomedical journals 30 and more years ago. Nowadays most of the entire output is crap, as the general journal editors are fond of suggesting.

Oh, goody. The Gnat is buzzing again. The Gnat, for someone training to be an epidemiologist (allegedly), sure seems pretty ignorant of epidemiology. He also seems to be oblivious to the use and abuse of p-values. You know, I forgot to check if Mawson controlled properly for multiple comparisons. Any bets on whether he did so correctly or not? :-)

I bet if I discussed p-hacking and the arguments between Bayesian and frequentist interpretations of p-values and statistical significance his little Gnat head would explode.

It simply isn’t true that the merit of studies can be assessed just by reading them.

I disagree with this assertion as a blanket statement. Certainly, for many studies, just reading the paper, looking carefully at the figures and tables, and determining if the data support the conclusions can allow one to make a good assessment of the merit of the study. However, that is not to say that such assessments are easy or straightforward or that there aren't pitfalls that trip up even experienced reviewers. Also, such assessments assume that the scientists who wrote the paper describing the study are basically honest.

That's where Wakefield's 1998 case series comes in. In the case of scientific fraud, you are correct that reading a paper isn't enough to be able to assess its merit. However, on the optimistic side, I like to point out that, if there's anything that PubPeer has shown, it's that careful examination of papers by many people interested in detecting fraud often leads to fraud being detected.

I still don't understand what the hypothesis is that justifies comparing completely unvaccinated children as a category to anyone unless you buy into the completely unfounded idea that any vaccine does something irreversible to you, which doesn't quite go with claims that there has been a change in recent generations - after all, almost all adults have got at least one vaccine.

What's the alleged biological mechanism that makes comparing completely unvaccinated children valid, but something like Smith and Wood or DeStefano et al that looks at children getting more or less vaccines not valid?

What am I missing?

@dingbat:

"Jake, I understand you pretend to know epidemiology?"

Pretend epidemiology: "You cannot find a subgroup who have generated your “more unvaxed” through the selection bias of differential parental choice about vaccines."

You have no f*cking idea what selection bias is or how it works.

"Something something Salk vaccine field trials something."

Something something Barrack Obama, something, something, Baby Face.

Seriously, though, did Salk have IRB approval? Because I just got approval for my dissertation project, and, well, it was hard to get.

You have no f*cking idea what selection bias is or how it works.

Jake,
I take it from your answer that neither do you.

Put another way, do you think there was any selection bias present in this sample conducted by Mawson?
Yes or No?

I wonder if he thinks there was any in Wakefield's twelve.

I guess Salk was guided by similar principles as those here:
http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/91/4/12-113480/en/

"You have no f*cking idea what selection bias is or how it works."

Are you sure that it's because you're autistic that women won't date you, Jake? It seems to me that it might have something to do with your demeanor, your inability to be cordial, or your propensity to get triggered.

See, when someone gets something wrong, you're better off pointing that they're wrong and then offering the correct solution. For example, you could have quoted what Boston University School of Public Health has on their site regarding selection bias:

"Selection bias can result when the selection of subjects into a study or their likelihood of being retained in the study leads to a result that is different from what you would have gotten if you had enrolled the entire target population."

In this case, this vax v. unvax study clearly had subjects in their study survey who were more likely to be surveyed than others. Again, Epi 101, if sampling is done in such a way that probability of exposure is not the same in the two groups, then the study is showing selection bias.

Watch how Jake ignores the above comments and goes straight at my assertion of his propensity to be triggered.

The declaration of Helsinki gives more details on trials outwith the "Humanitarian crisis" scenario.

@Ren #41

In the 1950's IRB, not so much, IIRC those really became a thing in the 1970's

I will say research done before an after wide-spread implementation of an effective protocol may have different ethical concerns. Why some trials compare with "usual care" rather than a true placebo.

And IRBs are constantly evolving. Seems every time I renew one of ours there is some new question or nuance that has to be addressed. Sometimes procedural (do you remove consent forms once you are done enrolling patients), but sometimes because of evolving ethical standards.

There are statistical methods to handle small numbers of the subjects of interest. Propensity score matching is one. Small numbers can be dealt with through appropriate analysis.
Also, many home schooled children are home schooled because of their NDD. I saw no effort to account for this in the study.

@ Brian Deer:

While it is true that your excellent investigative journalism uncovered flaws/fraud in Wakefield's 1998 article, there were obvious problems that could be seen in the article itself. First and foremost, it was supposed to be an article looking at GI tract and regressive disorders. So, the mention of what the parents thought as the cause was totally irrelevant. It was a dead giveaway that the article had an agenda. And it was, at a case series. So, even if Wakefield had been on the up and up, the article, as a case series, claiming to find an association, at best, would have been the basis for subsequent research. Case studies and series are NOT for hypothesis testing but hypothesis generating. And after your investigative series, one of the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals, The Lancet, took more than a half dozen years to finally retract it. More and more articles are being retracted, most from less reputable journals; but even from the "best" journals. See website, Retraction Watch, http://retractionwatch.com

There have been occasions where an article was rejected by journal after journal and eventually found some obscure journal to publish it, only to later become a classic.

There have been a number of recent reports critical of peer-review. Until one develops another format for reporting research, journals are the usual venue, and each journal can only publish so many studies and, especially the print journals, are limited in space , so I disagree with Broad and Wade. A colleague once told me how he had included a "caveats section" in an article which was published in a good journal; but they cut it due to space.

As I mentioned in a previous comment, my review of Wakefield's paper was 15,000 words. I know you have read it and thought it quite good. As I wrote above, I tried numerous journals. No way could I have cut it to 2,500 words, so I was fortunate to find a journal editor willing to publish it. Once published, at least, it was available for people to read and decide for themselves its merits. My final choice would have been a blog.

And I repeat, that one article should NEVER be relied on. Even the best of research, published in the best of peer-reviewed journals, is tentative. And, on the whole, journals do NOT publish negative results which means even peer-reviewed publications often give a biased picture. Eventually, negative findings do get published; but sometimes long after the impact of the original publication has been felt.

One approach is to go back to how academia was 60 - 70 years ago when teaching and community service were more valued instead of publish or perish; but given that, in US, universities make a lot of money from grants, indirect costs, the pressure to get grants and publish is enormous.

But there are more researchers and, though a lot of garbage, more and more good stuff as well. With the limited space of the more prestigious journals, how would you get the information out?

I would love to see a system where abstracts of ALL research was available on an easily accessed website, e.g. PubMed, with links to pdf of articles articles and data, etc (the articles wouldn't have to be limited in size, appendices, etc.) Keep in mind that one of the criticisms of the "prestigious" journals is that they get much of their funding from the pharmaceutical industry. In several of my articles for Every Child By Two I refute this with numerous examples of their publishing articles critical of the industry.

And the "prestigious" journals limit the number of articles posted as open source, so when I want one of their articles, I have to drive to university to photocopy. Otherwise, many charge up to $40 for a 10 page pdf. If the goal of publishing, of science, is to disseminate information, certainly not well served by these journals.

And I remind you that your original investigative series on Wakefield wasn't in a peer-reviewed journal. It was excellent, well-researched and has subsequently been confirmed by other sources as well; but, at the same time, I can give examples of articles in major newspapers that didn't come remotely close to the quality of yours.

Orac misses the point I was trying to make which is, if he had not mentioned anything about the journal, his dissection of Mawson's study was EXCELLENT and was all that was necessary. This blog and the other Science-Based Medicine blog represent SCIENCE and LOGIC. Both blogs have articles that are excellent representations of science. In my opinion, by using science and logic to refute antivaccinationists and other anti-science claims, one reinforces scientific thinking, a role model for scientific thinking.

You have been the target for numerous ad hominem attacks, none valid or justified. In fact, in my opinion any ad hominem attack not only shows the authors inability to make a valid argument; but their being unethical as well. I mean by ad hominem, attacking someone for being a shill, for being bought and paid for. However, though unnecessary and probably counterproductive, some antivaccinationists are so outrageous, so infuriating, that attacking them as some sort of moron on steroids is something I plead guilty to.

As for the pharmaceutical industry, yep, many of the studies they sponsor are flawed. Ben Goldacre's excellent book, "Bad Pharma", documents this; but even more he documents with extensive footnotes flaws in even all peer-reviewed journals.

My first comment was NOT meant to attack Orac. Maybe I could have worded it better; but just to make clear that he usually does such an excellent job of dissecting antiscientific thinking as he again did in this article that it is an unnecessary distraction to mention the quality of the journal.. And that even the most egregiously greedy journal can publish something of merit that for some reason did not make it into one of the more "prestigious" journals.

To do a study of unvaccinated kids with meaningful results, you have to have a sample with more unvaccinated kids than in the overall population. This is a strength of the study, not a weakness.

For someone who is an alleged epidemiology student, that is one dumb statement.

At least you didn’t call the results statistically insignificant this time, illiterate shill.

Says the kid knows nothing about statistical power, confounding or selection bias among other things.

“Something something Salk vaccine field trials something.”

Something something Barrack Obama, something, something, Baby Face.

Oh, relax. It was in reference to both "only be ethical in the days of Edward Jenner" and it's support of "exposing children to polio, measles, influenza." I was hurrying to get out the door.

Seriously, though, did Salk have IRB approval?

The trials were led by Thomas Francis, but anyway, they postdated the Nuremberg Code. There's a brief history here; Lambert & Markel conclude that "in organizing the trials, researchers at both the NFIP and the University of Michigan Vaccine Evaluation Center proceeded according to the ethical standards of their day."

I'd have to go back to the original publication series to see whether there was something that would approximate an IRB, which I can't do at the moment.

To do a study of unvaccinated kids with meaningful results, you have to have a sample with more unvaccinated kids than in the overall population. This is a strength of the study, not a weakness.

For someone who is an alleged epidemiology student, that is one dumb statement.

Yah, I was going to ask him for a mathematical proof of Crosby's Sampling Assertion.

# 50: Science Mom:

"Alleged epidemiology student?" Surely, he studied under Mark "I must have missed a zero" Geier.

http://briandeer.com/wakefield/dtp-garth.htm

“Alleged epidemiology student?” Surely, he studied under Mark “I must have missed a zero” Geier.

http://briandeer.com/wakefield/dtp-garth.htm

Oh yea, thanks for refreshing my memory. Incompetent birds of a feather or something like that.

"a mathematical proof of Crosby’s Sampling Assertion"

I expect the number 'i' would appear at least once in said proof.

Aw, I can't get the study to load - did it already get retracted again? :)

Disappointed because I wanted to see a few more of their comparisons - and laugh at the yyyyyyyuge confidence intervals.

"In this case, this vax v. unvax study clearly had subjects in their study survey who were more likely to be surveyed than others."

Who are the "others" and how does that equate to below?

"Again, Epi 101, if sampling is done in such a way that probability of exposure is not the same in the two groups, then the study is showing selection bias."

These journals are multiplying in number; their content is inferior and of poor quality, and the public (and many in the scientific arena too) cannot distinguish the useless from the useful.

When a publisher is known to be fraudulent (claiming to be UK-based when in fact it operates out of Hyderabad; claiming to have peer-review when none exists; etc). it creates an obligation to point and laugh at the authors who use it to pretend that their press-releases are actually papers.
It is also fair to wonder why the authors could not publish through one of the alternative journals known to have actual standards, and resorted to a pukefunnel instead.

OT(ish) but Wakefield just appeared at the end of Channel 4 news in the UK. Go Cathy.

To do a study of unvaccinated kids with meaningful results, you have to have a sample with more unvaccinated kids than in the overall population. This is a strength of the study, not a weakness.

To search for lost keys with meaningful results, you have to look under the streetlight rather than in the dark alley where your dropped it. This is a strength of the search, not a weakness.

@ Jake Crosby:

You write: "“Again, Epi 101, if sampling is done in such a way that probability of exposure is not the same in the two groups, then the study is showing selection bias.”

You apparently don't understand different types of sampling. One is done to try to equate as much as possible the two groups being compared. The other, representative sampling, deals with whether either group is representative, finding can be generalized to some larger group. In the Mowrer study, the choice of home schooled who received vaccinations certainly wasn't a random sample of home schooled in general, not even close.

@ Herr Doctor Bimler:

I suggest you read carefully what I wrote in several previous comments. There are too many studies trying to get published in too few journals. What is your solution if one believes they have done a good study and can't get it into one of the "respected" journals, either because doesn't fit their present areas of interest, too long, or just too many submissions.

Read also Ben Goldacre's book, "Bad Pharma", which has a well-documented extensive footnotes that make a strong case that many journal articles, etc. can't be trusted, despite peer-review.

I remind you that Wakefield's 1998 article passed peer-review in one of the most prestigious medical journals, the Lancet, and it took an intrepid investigative journalist, Brian Deer, to uncover all the problems with it, the fraud. And what about NEJM's peer-reviewers and the article of coffee and pancreatic cancer? Once published, it was subject to the same kind of scientific refutations as demonstrated by Orac and others. .

Sampling is fine - but there was not even an attempt to confirm the results of the survey....nobody looked at medical records.

How can the Gnat defend any conclusions made, if there was never any confirmation of even the answers being correct?

Good grief, my epi professors would have a field day with this study.
No defined population, no sampling frame, no randomization, no response rate, no power calculation, no addressing of any of the obvious sampling biases.
No verification of vaccination status.
No verification of NDD diagnosis.
No verification of any other diagnosis.

Also, convenience samples are generally for hypothesis *generating* studies, not hypothesis verifying studies.

It's too bad we don't get to see the survey tool also, so I can imagine what my survey professor would say about that.

@Joel:

Ren wrote that, not me.

It’s too bad we don’t get to see the survey tool also, so I can imagine what my survey professor would say about that.

Chris Hickie linked to the survey form in a previous thread:
http://www.nheri.org/pdfs/Survey%20PDF%202012-08-21.pdf

Aw, I can’t get the study to load – did it already get retracted again?

OAText have unpublished both Mawson papers.
http://retractionwatch.com/2017/05/08/retracted-vaccine-autism-study-re…

Cache is here, if anyone cares:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:U4jtg9e4f2wJ:oatex…

Yeah, of course you would need to look at a larger group of unvaccinated kids than you would normally have by just randomly picking a group of 666 kids . . . because randomly picking a group of 666 kids you would end up with less than 10 who were completely unvaccinated. Really, you'd need a group of *thousands* of unvaccinated kids to confidently pick out health differences between a vaccinated and an unvaccinated group.

But sampling by using a survey of homeschooled kids is not going to be representative of the population. I don't know what kind of bias that is (I'm just an engineer, not even pretending to be an epidemiologist), but it is surely a problem.

While not a study, in large parts of the world children that get vaccinated live and children who aren't tend to die early.

In the US we have 1 to 3 people year die from rabies (usually they didn't know they had been infected and it was to late for the vaccine). In the rest of the world about 49,000 people die each year because they can't afford the rabies vaccine.

For anyone with a brain larger than a gnat, this shows being vaccinated is orders safer VS being unvaccinated.

Aw, I can’t get the study to load – did it already get retracted again? ?

Disappointed because I wanted to see a few more of their comparisons...

The link does seem to be dead. If you want to read the paper, you can see it at
http://www.rescuepost.com/files/mawson-et-al-2017-vax-unvax-jnl-transla…

I went searching for the paper at http://oatext.com, and the results were interesting.

They have a search box, and when I plug Journal of Translational Research into it, this "study" pops up as number 2 on the list. The URL is the same as our host links to in his post. But I didn't see any other hits for Journal of Translational Research, just a bunch or partial matches (I admit that I didn't look at all 995 results). When I add quotes around it, the result is zero hits.

I want to say that the paper is so bad that they not only retracted it, but retracted the entire journal. But I'm sure there is a different explanation.

@ herr doktor

Thanks for the update and link!

Golly, herr Doctor, I have to learn to type faster. I've a post in moderation that is going to mostly come out as a 'me too'.

(I thought that 2 links were safe, and 3 triggered moderation)

@Joel:

Ren wrote that, not me.

How do you get into a graduate program without being able to type (and there are apps that do it for you) <blockquote> and </blockquote>?

@Reverend - lots of your parent's money, apparently.

(I thought that 2 links were safe, and 3 triggered moderation)

It wasn't the links - I messed up my e-mail.

HDB @66: Thanks!
Yeah, my survey prof would have a field day with this too. Let's start with the income question: that's almost always one of the last questions because people don't like answering it.
Why on earth does the child'd hair color matter?
Those are some super leading questions about why they homeschool and why the kids aren't vaccinated.

Here's something else I want to know: why on earth does this paper even mention the BCG vaccine (for systemic TB in children) when it is *not* a vaccine that is given in the US?
I mean, it's just not relevant at all.

I want to say that the paper is so bad that they not only retracted it, but retracted the entire journal. But I’m sure there is a different explanation.

Try searching for Mawson, or for "Journal of Translational Science". The dudes at OAText are low-life grifters and a decent Search function is not high on their priorities. Nor is a formal retraction procedure, which is why there is no notification or explanation, only a couple of 404s where the PDFs used to be. They have Mawson's money, is what they care about.

I don’t know what kind of bias that is (I’m just an engineer, not even pretending to be an epidemiologist), but it is surely a problem.

I am not an epidemiologist either--I am a physicist by training and trade--but there are multiple problems with drawing a study group exclusively from homeschooled children. There are what are called confounding factors: for instance, homeschool parents are disproportionately likely to be anti-vaccine. And there is a selection bias as well. Not to mention response bias, because this study depended on parents filling out the survey truthfully and returning the forms to the investigators.

Doing such a study right is actually quite hard. One cannot rely on public school children alone for such a survey either, especially when collecting data in Mississippi, which only allows medical exemptions to vaccine requirements. There, if you choose only public school students for your study group, you are guaranteed to find that vaccinated children are healthier than unvaccinated children, because the unvaccinated children will invariably have some medical condition which means that they cannot or should not be vaccinated.

Selection bias is an issue in my field, because I work with geophysical data sets, and big events tend to be rare. We have to be careful that a major event doesn't bias our results.

Just found the following on the WA DOH Website. Thought it might be of some interest.

Latest School Report, Most Kindergartners Are Immunized

OLYMPIA – The Department of Health recently released school immunization results for 2016-2017, and for the second year in a row, 85 percent of kindergartners had received the required vaccinations to start school.

Nearly 5 percent of kindergartners have an exemption or waiver from immunizations on file for a medical, personal, or religious reason. This means more than 4,000 children in Washington aren’t protected from diseases that vaccines prevent. While the exemption rate hasn’t increased since 2011, it’s more than double the national average of 2 percent.

About 8 percent of kindergartners are out of compliance with school immunization requirements. These students don’t have all of their immunizations up to date, haven’t submitted an exemption, or are missing paperwork. The remaining students are “conditional,” or getting caught up on their vaccinations or paperwork.

More than 95 percent of schools submitted data this year. Explanations of school immunization rates, as well as trends and data, can be found at the department’s website.

Parents and guardians can access their child’s immunization records at MyIR and locate school immunization rates on SchoolDigger.com.

Washington provides vaccines at no cost for all kids up to age 19 through the Childhood Vaccine Program.

Here’s something else I want to know: why on earth does this paper even mention the BCG vaccine (for systemic TB in children) when it is *not* a vaccine that is given in the US?
I mean, it’s just not relevant at all.

Offhand, I'd guess they were citing Aaby's Guinea-Bisssau work for that part of "put reference here."

"Who are the others?"

Jesus H. Christ.

@ Joel #62: I get it. I really do. In today's academic world of publish or perish for tenure, the pressure to have publications to get tenure or post doc grants or whatever can be pretty intense.

My college does emphasize teaching and service over publication. Officially. And yet the RPT folders of my colleagues have tended to have a lot of presentations, posters, and publications in them.

I have a teaching idea I've been working on for four years now. I've tried to get published in Nurse Educator or the Journal of Nursing Education but the idea wasn't ready for prime time, and it was rejected. It happens every day to perfectly good articles, as well as to horrid ones, for the very reasons you cite: not enough press space.

There is a place for open access journals to improve the landscape, especially for novice writers and researchers looking to get their foot into the door. I'm doing that, with the article rejected by the aforementioned journals.

However, there are key differences between what I'm doing and what Mawson has done. My article did undergo peer review; it took the editors awhile to find someone qualified to peer review it. I do not have to pay for publication; while open access, the journal is supported by my university. I had to heavily revise the article to get it ready for prime time.

That's how the process should work. If you're having to pay to get something published because you've been rejected by every one else, including small onine OA presses, then the problem is your work and not the system.

There's still a chance the work could be good, but a rational reader will subject it to extra scrutiny. It does matter.

@Joel

If your work is so very good, you can cut it and maintain the essence. Going to a crappy journal just to get published just isn’t a good enough argument. Personally, I am damned happy that Orac has taught me about these journals so I don’t fall prey to them. That means I will miss your brilliant writing--well, better that than get sucked into the void.

From Jake's latest temper tantrum about this study:

"Please also be sure to troll the bitch who has led the charge for the study’s removal."

By "bitch," he means Dr. Tara C. Smith of Aetiology fame. I'm sure women just swoon at the level of respect and admiration Jake shows for the opposite sex.

Jake also seems to think that he wields some immeasurable amount of power:

"Autism Investigated sent a letter to the publisher Frontiers telling them we would make sure their index on the National Library of Medicine would be taken away."

Is that the royal "we"? Unless some of those Iraqi oil dollars can wield that much power, I'd say that this is another one of those temper tantrum empty threats.

"Please tweet the link to the republished study to Frontiers on Twitter, repeating the threat of National Library de-listing."

Yes, please do, loons.

Is that the royal “we”?

As I remember from his earlier post, he thinks he can convince Orange Thinskin, thru his appointed toadies, to order the National Library of Medicine to 'delist' Frontiers.

Like Trump, I doubt Jake has read the Constitution, or if he did, he never made it down to those pesky amendments.

@ Panacea and darwinslapdog

I really wish people would take the time to carefully read what I wrote; but I guess that is expecting too much. I covered a number of points.

Panacea wrote: "There’s still a chance the work could be good, but a rational reader will subject it to extra scrutiny. It does matter." Actually, as I explained, even the so-called best journals have had numerous retractions and those decent studies they published have often not been replicated, so one should be careful about how much one believes from any article. Read Ben Goldacre's book, "Bad Pharma," and do what I do, put a post-it on page of footnotes and check them out.

darwinslapdog writes: "If your work is so very good, you can cut it and maintain the essence. Going to a crappy journal just to get published just isn’t a good enough argument. Personally, I am damned happy that Orac has taught me about these journals so I don’t fall prey to them. That means I will miss your brilliant writing–well, better that than get sucked into the void."

First, as I explained, I could have posted it on a blog. My article refuted each claim in Wakefield's book, point by point, and I did it with direct quotes from numerous sources so as not to rely on one article as antivaccinationists often do. My article had 150 references. It would have been absolutely impossible to cut down from 15,000 to 2,500 words. And, as I wrote, once it was available online, it didn't matter who put it up, people could read it, check out the references (I gave hyperlinks to most of them) and decide for themselves. I repeat, once it was available online, anyone could judge for themselves. Who put it up was irrelevant.

Try read my article yourself and if you have even a modicum of a brain, please tell me how it could have been shortened from 15,000 to 2,500 words? And I also explained that there is much more research going on than could possibly be published in the major journals, including replications that don't back up key articles. Please explain how we would find out about them?

Everyone should in today's society understand some of the basics of science and take the time to read carefully articles and understand that every piece of research is tentative.

One last thing, most of the even egregious for-profit companies do arrange some type of peer- review. May not be great; but what type of peer-review does one find on blogs such as this; yet, readers such as I think many of the articles are good to excellent. Being an obsessive-compulsive, I actually click on links, go to mentioned articles, and download them, often reading them.

@Joel: That the reputable journals have had retractions is not the issue. It is not an excuse to pay to have your work published in what is in essence a scam journal. Smaller, less well known journals, sure. But when you pay to get published its a vanity press and it simply isn't worth it to you.

I don't know how you could have cut down 15,000 words to 2500. Perhaps you could have serialized it. Or maybe you had redundancies you haven't acknowledged. But a publisher can't take up that kind of space, especially in a print journal.

JK Rowling's books got longer and longer as the Harry Potter series went on. To their detriment. Her editors lost control over her, and it didn't do her work any favors. A good editor helps a writer tighten up and clarify the core message. It's your work; you don't have to change it. But the editor is under no obligation to publish it, either. And sadly, neither of us is JK Rowling.

@ Panacea:

I guess you are unaware of the PLOS and BMC open source collection of journals, many top rated with excellent editorial staff and peer-reviewers. They charge fees to publish and, at the same time, they have NO advertisers. More and more researchers are turning to such journals because they get a much wider readership. As I wrote in a previous comment, when I have found abstracts of articles that aren't available online, I have to drive to university library and photocopy or if the local university library doesn't have the journal, have to ask friends/colleagues to photocopy at their respective universities. Otherwise, most of the "prestigious" journals charge up to $40 for a pdf of an article that may be less than 10 pages long. Not exactly conducive to sharing of science. So, open source journals are more and more playing a roll.

If it is vanity to get ones article published in an open source journal that charges, what type of vanity to create ones own webpage and post away?

You write: "I don’t know how you could have cut down 15,000 words to 2500. Perhaps you could have serialized it. Or maybe you had redundancies you haven’t acknowledged. But a publisher can’t take up that kind of space, especially in a print journal."

It is really STUPID to make such statements when you haven't even bothered to read my article. I guess you pull your thoughts out of your, you know what.

And, none of the print journals are going to serialize an article like mine. And, as I wrote earlier, the journal that posted my article, as many of the open source journals sometimes do, waived any fees on my part. And the editor is a well-respected virologist and assured me that it was reviewed by FIVE qualified reviewers.

As I explained and you are apparently too dense to understand, I wanted to get my article online so that people could see it. Anyone who seriously reads it and is open-minded will see that Andrew Wakefield's clams about vaccine safety are just bogus. I guess you think that anyone who takes the time and effort to refute others who are hurting public health, if they can't get their refutations published in a peer-reviewed journal, regardless of how good they are, should just forget it?

Read my article you frigging idiot!

https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOVACJ/TOVACJ-6-9.pdf

Joel, I don't have to read your article to identify potential problems with an analysis that long. If you'll note I didn't suggest it was badly written in anyway.

I really don't have time to read something that long about an issue I'm already familiar with.

You have a tendency here, though, to rely on argumentum ad nauseum. I understand; I can be verbose myself.

I don't understand why you have to drive to your university to get articles behind paywalls, though. I can get pretty much anything online from my university library, including NEJM, JAMA, Lancet and more.

And I still haven't said paying for publication means bad. It simply means, I take a much harder look at it.

Quit being so defensive.

While I agree with your dissection of the study, I disagree with “Even more hilarious, it was a Frontiers journal, which is an even bigger dis because Frontiers journals are known for tending to be pay-to-publish predatory open access journals.” This is exactly what antivaccinationists sometimes resort to, that is, calling open-source journals who receive a fee to publish articles, vanity press and other journals for receiving pharmaceutical advertisements. There are good open-source journals, e.g. PLOS group, and bad journals; but what counts is not where something is published, even a blog, but the actual content of the article. Bringing up the journal or publisher is, in my opinion, a form of ad hominem attack and detracts from your otherwise excellent dissection of Mawson’s study.

I am going to disagree with what you have written here. An ad hominem attack is one where the character or personal traits are attacked in order to undermine an argument. However, ad hominem does not occur when the character or personal traits are part of the argument.

In this case, it is well known that there are stables of predatory open access publishers who lie about their editorial boards, lie about peer-review and happily publish any old junk so long as the author pays. Practicing scientists generally steer clear of these journals, meaning they only publish work that cannot pass peer review elsewhere.

If someone tells me that a paper was published in a Frontier's journal, I immediately know it didn't pass proper peer review and probably would not have passed peer review in another journal. Therefore, it is junk science.

That doesn't mean that there is not junk science published in other journals (look at Scientific Reports for examples), but if you have to stoop to a predatory open-access journal to get published, then there is something seriously wrong with the work.

As I remember from his earlier post, he thinks he can convince Orange Thinskin, thru his appointed toadies, to order the National Library of Medicine to ‘delist’ Frontiers.

Nonono, it's better (boldface added):

"Autism Investigated sent a letter to the publisher Frontiers telling them we would make sure their index on [sic] the National Library of Medicine would be taken away."

I have a Kraken to be unleashed, you dykes!

“Autism Investigated sent a letter to the publisher Frontiers telling them we would make sure their index on [sic] the National Library of Medicine would be taken away.”

Jake is going to be beside himself when he discovers that OAText has done the same to Mawson's papers.

I suspect a letter writing campaign will work less well on an outfit run out of Hyderabad, but with a fake mail address in London.

^ Oh, rats, Ren already got that. So much for reading comments from the bottom up.

Quit being so defensive.

This. We've (tinw) been through it all before, anyway.

@ Ren he is truly off the rails. I found this stupid turd of a tweet on his sh!teshow of a twitter feed:
Deplorable Autist @JakeLCrosby Apr 16

"Science Mom" of @JusttheVax is actually Camille Clark, once known as "Autism Diva" (and still just as big a bitch).

The Gnat can be hysterically stupid sometimes in his speculations.

@Science Mom: wait, what? I thought you were Bonnie Offitt. ;) :p

Julian, I thought you were Bonnie Offit. ;^Þ

I am Bonnie Offitt!!

I am Bonnie Offitt!!

I have never been accused of being Bonnie Offitt. But I have been accused of being Paul Offitt.

Why Paul Offitt would be commenting on the internet using the name Chris Preston was never properly explained. But that is anti-vaccine logic for you.

Didn't you guys know that I'm Brian Deer?

(not that I mind being compared to an award winning journalist & all)

If someone tells me that a paper was published in a Frontier’s journal, I immediately know it didn’t pass proper peer review and probably would not have passed peer review in another journal. Therefore, it is junk science.

I know Jeff Beall channelled his inner Savonarola and was wont to denounce Frontiers as an instrument of the Devil profit motive, but they could still get their act together and stop publishing bafflegab (or at least bring down the ratio of bafflegab to that of longer-established profiteers like Elsevier). It's not going to be easy, of course, because of the way they incorporated the Multilevel Marketing business model into their structure, and decentralised the incentive to accept bad papers in exchange for $$$.

Full disclosure: I have reviewed manuscripts for Frontiers journals. In fact I have published with Frontiers journals, so I have a vested interest in them rebuilding their reputation.

Well, Joel, you wasted a good paragraph up there at #87 quoting me in full rather that simply referencing the comment #. You call it “meticulous”, I’m not surprised, as you say you are OCD (-ish at least) This is further demonstrated by your going on and on with your argument even though perfectly good arguments and alternatives have been suggested. Did you ever submit your draft to an editor? I have found that when forced to to so, I can cut my writing drastically and still make my point.

@ Panacea:

You write: "Joel, I don’t have to read your article to identify potential problems with an analysis that long. If you’ll note I didn’t suggest it was badly written in anyway. I really don’t have time to read something that long about an issue I’m already familiar with."

Really, you don't have to read something? You are already familiar? What an arrogant idiot!

You write: “I don’t understand why you have to drive to your university to get articles behind paywalls, though. I can get pretty much anything online from my university library, including NEJM, JAMA, Lancet and more.”

First, to get it online from a university library one has to either be an employee or student to have an account. I am neither. Second, I’ve asked friend’s to get me articles and our university libraries online electronic databases do not include many journals. In fact, fewer and fewer each year as the library funds are reduced and the journals charge more and more.

You write: “And I still haven’t said paying for publication means bad. It simply means, I take a much harder look at it.”

I agree and have said so in several of my previous comments, except if I think an article important, I become more critical, regardless the source and I keep in mind at all times that even a well-done piece of research’s findings are tentative.

Once again, use a little of your “precious time” and read my paper and then comment on it. You might learn something, if that is possible:
https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOVACJ/TOVACJ-6-9.pdf

@ Chris Preston:

You write:

“If someone tells me that a paper was published in a Frontier’s journal, I immediately know it didn’t pass proper peer review and probably would not have passed peer review in another journal. Therefore, it is junk science. That doesn’t mean that there is not junk science published in other journals (look at Scientific Reports for examples), but if you have to stoop to a predatory open-access journal to get published, then there is something seriously wrong with the work.”

Really, “you immediately know it is junk science.” And, I guess one should know that any research published in a journal that gets much of its funding from the pharmaceutical industry is suspect? And anything written on blogs like this are . . . well, you know. I’ve dealt with your idiotic statement in several of my previous comments. What amazes me is the arrogance of certainty that exactly mirrors that found on many antivaccinationist websites. They too automatically know which studies are good and which biased. Must be nice. Can you walk on water as well?

@ darwinslapdog:

You write: “Did you ever submit your draft to an editor? I have found that when forced to to so, I can cut my writing drastically and still make my point.”

Yes, I did. In fact, prior to trying to get it published anywhere, I had friends/colleagues (over 10), several who are excellent editors, critique and edit it. And the editor who finally accepted my article actually did edit it and more changes were made following evaluations from FIVE peer-reviewers. I am “meticulous”. I have edited books, theses, articles; but never rely on my own editing of my own writings. I mentioned some of the people who reviewed/critiqued my articles in an Acknowledgments section; but some preferred to remain anonymous, given that antivaccinationists have been known to harass people.

In fact, even the 10 articles I wrote for Every Child By Two were looked at by up to 10 friends/colleagues. As I wrote in several previous comments, I could have just posted it on a blog and it was the article on Wakefield that led to Every Child By Two allowing me, as a volunteer, to post additional articles on their website. I don’t work for them; but they seem to like my articles and post them. And each article is long with quite a few references.

Antivaccinationists rely on one or two articles, or, sometimes, just take something from an article out-of-context. I write my articles intentionally to demonstrate how one writes a scholarly review, that is, not relying on one or two; but building my case with numerous credible articles. In a way, one could consider my articles a form of legal brief.

Well, since I'm such an idiot, I see no point in reading your analysis. Probably over my head anyway.

And if you think that's what I actually mean, you should rethink it.

Didn’t you guys know that I’m Brian Deer?

I can outdo that: I've been accused of being "Brain Deer."

@Joel Harrison #109

“I mentioned some of the people who reviewed/critiqued my articles in an Acknowledgments section;”

I note that you listed Steven A. Rubin PhD in your acknowledgements. That would be the same Steven A. Rubin who along with Stanley A. Plotkin in their excellent paper recorded the rate of meningitis in Canada following administration of a urabe containing vaccine to be 1 case in 62,000 doses?.

"In Canada, the observed rate of meningitis after vaccination with Urabe strain was calculated to be 1 in 62,000 doses of the vaccine manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline"
Stanley A. Plotkin and Steven A. Rubin (" Mumps Vaccine chapter 20")

Maybe you’d like to explain why you erroneously wrote it up in your article, as 1 case per 100,000 doses………..

"Based on reports of aseptic meningitis, the Canadians estimated its occurrence in association with the vaccine as 1 case per 100,000 compared with 1 in 400 following
natural mumps"

If someone tells me that a paper was published in a Frontier’s journal, I immediately know it didn’t pass proper peer review and probably would not have passed peer review in another journal. Therefore, it is junk science.

I would have phrased this differently. I would have said that if a paper is published in a Frontiers journal I know that the probability of its being junk science is much, much higher than if it had passed peer review in an established journal.

@ Wendy Stephen:

You write: “Maybe you’d like to explain why you erroneously wrote it up in your article, as 1 case per 100,000 doses………..”

If you actually carefully read my paper, you would see that I referred to the UK decision in 1988 to continue use of the Urabe containing vaccine while trying to obtain an adequate supply of a Jeryl Lynn containing vaccine. This decision was made based on a 1987 Canada Diseases Weekly Report and a visit to Canada, which, as you know, clearly indicated that the Urabe vaccine associated aseptic meningitis was a benign condition. Benign doesn’t mean totally nice, just no need for heroic medical interventions and no disabilities on follow-up. The stats you give were contained in a December 1990 Canada Diseases Weekly Report, two years after the UK decision. If you had bothered to check out reference [57] in my paper it would have been obvious., I know you would love to find fault with anything related to me; but sorry to disappoint you as I used the stats available to the UK at the time, so what I wrote wasn’t “erroneous. “

Below are the actual quotes from the two Canadian Reports.

You claimed in comments quite some time ago that you are NOT an antivaccinationist; yet, are obsessed with the Urabe strain of mumps containing vaccines which has not been used in UK or Canada in over 20 years. Not once have you written something like: “There were problems with MMR vaccines containing the Urabe strain of mumps; but the vaccine currently being used in UK, US, and Canada contains the Jeryl Lynn strain of mumps which has a good safety record and I would recommend it for anyone’s children.”

In addition, you indicated that you would e-mail me the official document regarding your daughter’s case. So far, I haven’t received it. You can e-mail it to Every Child By Two and they will forward it to me. I am currently working on an article on Mumps and intend to do my best to cover everything, including as many case reports and studies on the Urabe strain vaccine. Currently I have over 200 documents, articles, chapters, reports, etc. So, send me any relevant papers related to your daughter’s case. If not, I will evenutally obtain them, just more work getting colleagues in UK involved.

CANADA WEEKLY DISEASES REPORTS

“Based on the assumption that approximately 250 000 to 300 000 doses of this vaccine may have been given in the past 12 months, the expected rate of reported CNS reactions would be 1 per 100 000. This is consistent with the reported rate of the CNS reactions for this vaccine worldwide which ranges from 1 in 70 000 to 1 in 200 000. This is also comparable to the incidence of about 1 in 100 000 reported in the literature for CNS involvement after use of a trivalent vaccine containing other measles and mumps strains or another monovalent mumps vaccine.
The “background” incidence of aseptic meningitis (of unknown etiology, or due to mumps) requiring hospitalization can be estimated historically from hospital discharge diagnoses. The average incidence in any given 4-week period for the years 1978 through 1983 in Canada was about 1 case per 100 000 children age 1 to 14. This is remarkably similar to the estimates of vaccine-associated CNS illness. All of these estimates are insignificant when compared to the rates of meningitis/encephalitis following natural measles (1in 2000) or mumps (1 in 400) infections.

Canada Diseases Weekly Report, September 5, 1987 Available at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2016/aspc-phac/H12-21-…

In Table 22-10 of Rubin’s chapter on Mumps in the 6th Edition of the book, Vaccines, it does give 1/62,000 based on an article by Furesz which states; “Since the laboratory findings confirmed conclusively that the meningitis observed in recipients of TRIVIRIX vaccine was caused by the Urabe mumps vaccine, the latter vaccine was not considered safe for immunization of Canadian children. Effective May 1990, TRIVIRIX measles, mumps and rubella vaccine is not longer licensed for sale in Canada.”

Canada Diseases Weekly Report, December 15, 1990. Available at: http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2016/aspc-phac/H12-21-…

Joel, the definition of an antivaccinationist is………………….

“One who opposes vaccination”

I have asked you previously to provide evidence of any conduct on my part which might support your continued accusations that I am an antivaccinationist. You have failed to do so, probably because it doesn’t exist. I do however have an interest in the urabe mumps vaccine which I have never sought to hide. What is extremely important to me is that the Urabe vaccine ‘story’ is portrayed accurately, not manipulated into being anything more than it realistically was, but also that it is not played down into a non event as you repeatedly seek to do.

In your article you questioned what the UK decision to license the URABE MMR vaccine was based upon.

In response to your own question, you note that in 1987 the UK conducted MMR vaccine trials in approximately 5,000 children.

A clinical trial with 5,000 of a cohort is a respectable sized trial to establish the safety, efficacy and efficiency of a product, however what you failed to mention in relation to your own question was that just over a mere 600 children received the URABE containing Pluserix vaccine (the vaccine you are referring to), the remaining 4,400 did not. Only feedback from the 600 could have been relied upon to influence the UK decision to license and implement a URABE containing MMR as to its safety and efficacy. By comparison a trial with a cohort of 600 children on board, isn’t nearly so impressive as your quoted 5,000. Why would you seek to convey to the reader that the clinical trial relied upon to establish the safety of the Urabe containing Pluserix MMR which influenced the decision to introduce the urabe MMR into the UK, was far greater than it actually was?

Additionally, you reference three “reported studies using the Urabe strain that found no serious problems” where none of the brands involved remotely resembled, let alone matched, the urabe containing Pluserix MMR vaccine which the UK authorities were seeking to introduce in 1988. Just as negative safety issues and adverse reactions etc following the use of one brand of vaccine cannot be visited on to another entirely different brand, neither can the positive results from studies involving entirely different brands with entirely different component parts, excipients and dosages be used to assert the safety of the Pluserix MMR vaccine. Anyone who sought to do so would be entirely remiss not to mention unscientific and I have seen no evidence anywhere that the UK decision to introduce the Urabe MMR was based on the studies you propose.

@ Wendy Stephen:

You write: “I have asked you previously to provide evidence of any conduct on my part which might support your continued accusations that I am an antivaccinationist. You have failed to do so, probably because it doesn’t exist. I do however have an interest in the urabe mumps vaccine which I have never sought to hide. What is extremely important to me is that the Urabe vaccine ‘story’ is portrayed accurately, not manipulated into being anything more than it realistically was, but also that it is not played down into a non event as you repeatedly seek to do.”

You continue to ignore my asking why you haven’t once in any comment I have seen by you in any way encouraged people to get their kids vaccinated. All you do is harp on the Urabe vaccine, not later developments. As I suggested, if you were NOT antivaccine, you could have said that an earlier MMR that contained a strain of mumps called Urabe was found to be associated with unacceptable adverse events; however, a new strain of mumps called Jeryl Lynn, that has been used in UK and Canada for about 20 years has a good safety profile and I recommend it to all parents for their children. The fact that you go on and on about something that occurred over two decades ago and don’t make it clear to the reader that, even if it was a problem, that it isn’t today, easily can be read by anyone as valid today. Antivaccinationists, for example, continue to harp on the Cutter Incident, something neither I nor anyone I know downplays; but it happened in 1955 and led to far more stringent requirements for vaccines and oversight. However, if all one were to hear was the Cutter Incident they would think that the polio vaccine of today is unsafe. So, yes, whether you like it or not, you come across as antivaccine.

And anyone who reads my paper would see that I did NOT “play down” the adverse event findings associated with the Urabe; but made clear that it was still far safer than the wild-type disease and that, at the time, the data available did NOT indicate it differed in its adverse event profile from the Jeryl Lynn. You continue to twist things to give the impression that the UK continued using the Urabe without taking into consideration possible adverse events when they decided to use it as it was better than the natural disease and immediately began trying to get an adequate supply of the Jeryl Lynn containing vaccine. In another post you found that the UK had approved a Jeryl Lynn mumps vaccine in 1972; but you assume that the pharmaceutical company kept their production facility ready for a program that the UK began in late 1988. Without any evidence that the company was producing or capable of immediately producing quantitities of the vaccine, you assume so. In law courts that is termed “facts not in evidence.” Actually, I am trying to find out; but it isn’t easy.

I noticed that you failed to admit that you misread my paper regarding the 1 in 100,000 vs 1 in 62,000. And even if I had gotten it wrong, whether 1 in 100,000 or 1 in 62,000, the Canadian report gave the risk for aseptic meningitis from the wild-type mumps as 1 in 400. So, the Urabe was still the safer bet. And if you actually carefully read Steven Rubin’s chapter, safer in regard to a number of other adverse events associated with the natural disease. And your choice of word “erroneous” was obviously not just to point out a possible error. I edit books and articles written by quality people and always find a few errors. I remember once in a graduate statistics course arguing with the prof about an error in a formula. Turns out his copy was a later printing, so the authors had corrected it. It was an excellent book with a couple of errors. Happens all the time; but that wasn’t your intention. Antivaccinationists and other unscientific types believe if they find one or two errors that it discredits an entire work. Not true anymore than if a defense lawyer discredits one witness, the jury should then ignore the entire prosecution’s case.

And you continue to try to find fault with my paper and again are wrong. From my paper:

“Before the beginning of the program, vaccine trials were conducted in the UK, starting in early 1987 [69]. By the beginning of October 1987, data had been collected for five months from three districts: Somerset, Fife and North Hertfordshire. The data included health diaries kept by the parents covering the three weeks before vaccination and three weeks after [58]. Approximately 5,000 children were included in these studies [70]. However, the diaries were not the only means used for reporting adverse events (see below)” (Wrong About Vaccine Safety, p. 13. Available at: https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOVACJ/TOVACJ-6-9.pdf

If you checked out reference [70]. I was citing a UK committee:

“Dr Cameron Bowie spoke on the MMR trials which had been carried out using Health diaries on approximately 5,000 children . . .”

Joint Sub-Committee on Adverse Reactions to Vaccination and Immunisation, March 8, 1988. Available at:
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120907090205/http://www.dh…

And do notice that I wrote: “However, the diaries were not the only means used for reporting adverse events (see below).”

And the UK looked at the Canadian data and other studies. Yes, not every vaccine was exactly the same; but they looked at everything available at the time. And, once more, despite the Urabe assocation with adverse events, it was till much safer than the natural disease. Can you accept that? ? ?

You continue to misread what I write because you need to given your obsession with the Urabe vaccine.I consider any child injured whether from the natural disease or a vaccine a tragedy; but since life isn’t black and white, I choose to weigh benefits vs risk. If the risks from the natural disease outweigh those from a vaccine, I choose to vaccinate. However, I also choose to not only compensate children hurt by vaccines; but a society where all children are given whatever help, medical/educational etc. is necessary to allow them to reach their full potential. Given what I so far know about the Urabe, if it was the only available vaccine available I wouldn’t hesitate to give it to children.

It really is a waste of my time responding to you as you refuse to admit when wrong, e.g. 1 to 100 000 and you continue to focus on only part of my paper. As I said, I am working on a paper just on the Mumps. As opposed to you, if I find more evidence against earlier versions of Mumps vaccine or even the current, I will include it. You said a while back that you would e-mail me the decision on your daughter’s case and any relevant papers; but I haven’t received them, so I guess I will have to request colleagues in UK to help. Do you have something to hide? So, are you going to send the info via Every Child By Two or not? ? ?

Joel @117

“In another post you found that the UK had approved a Jeryl Lynn mumps vaccine in 1972; but you assume that the pharmaceutical company kept their production facility ready for a program that the UK began in late 1988. Without any evidence that the company was producing or capable of immediately producing quantitities of the vaccine, you assume so”.

No Joel, I make no assumptions. I learned from the 17th May 1988 MMR Working Party Minutes that even as far back as May 1988, (four months before the launch of the UK MMR campaign) an approach had been made to the Department of Health in the UK advising that MMR II vaccine “wished to join the MMR market”.

Even before the launch of the campaign in the UK there is a clear indication that the MMR II production facilities were ready for the UK program otherwise they would not have indicated that they wished to join the market. MMR II was implemented in November of 1988 and continued without interruption even after the withdrawal of the urabe containing brands.

Additionally, the Minutes of the JCVI meeting on 6th November 1992 record how

“Department of Health officials visited the MSD factory in Philadelphia and obtained agreement for the supply of the additional amounts required by the UK”.

I’d say that was ample evidence that the company was (a) capable of supplying the UK market with MMR II even before the campaign was launched and (b) was immediately capable of increasing their supplies to the UK to meet our entire demand when asked to do so, after the withdrawal of the two urabe containing brands.

@ Wendy Stephen:

You write: “No Joel, I make no assumptions. I learned from the 17th May 1988 MMR Working Party Minutes that even as far back as May 1988, (four months before the launch of the UK MMR campaign) an approach had been made to the Department of Health in the UK advising that MMR II vaccine “wished to join the MMR market. Even before the launch of the campaign in the UK there is a clear indication that the MMR II production facilities were ready for the UK program otherwise they would not have indicated that they wished to join the market.

According to the document you refer to: “Dr Salisbury reported that he hoped the SKF MMR vaccine would be license shortly since its constituent parts were already licensed. Wellcome contacted him to say they wished to join the MMR market. Their vaccine contains the Jeryl-Lynn strain of mumps. The MSD vaccine already has a product licence. Dr Thorne asked whether there would be central purchasing . . .”

JCVI Working Party on the Introduction of Measles, Mumps and Rubella Vaccine, May 17, 1988. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120405095146/http:/www.dh.g…

“Wished to join” doesn’t mean that they were ready on a moment’s notice to begin production!

And my article makes clear that they did, indeed, once awareness of problems in Canada, “despite the benign nature of vaccine-induced meningitis” start to obtain MMR with Jeryl Lynn.

In the UK, “despite the benign nature of vaccine-induced meningitis, a decision was made to replace the brands containing Urabe (Immravax by Merieux, and Pluserix MMR by SmithKline Beecham) with that containing Jeryl Lynn” [91].
[91] Peltola H (1993). Mumps vaccination and meningitis. Lancet; 341(8851): 994-995.

However, as another document makes clear: “The Health Departments had had a difficult time with regard to MMR supply, problems caused in the main by the manufacturers. Other vaccine manufacturers producing MMR which contained the Jeryl Lynn strain of the mumps virus included RIVM (under a very prescriptive license from MSD making sale in the UK impossible) and Rubini in Switzerland (a vaccine which lacked sufficient study in the field to be certain that there would not be a Urabe-like problem). Merck and Merieux were collaborating to produce a Jeryl Lynn strain vaccine [90].

[90] UK Department of Health. Joint Committee on Vaccinationa and Immunisation. Minutes of Meeting, May 7, 1993. Available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120907090205/http://www.dh…

So, yes, a Jeryl Lynn containing vaccine had been approved ; but that doesn’t mean that the company, despite their interest, was able to produce the quantities necessary as indicated in the above document. In addition, the UK had decided to use the Urabe containing MMR and it wasn’t until after they learned of the Province of Ontario’s recall on July 18, 1988 of the TRIVIRIX that they looked into it and decided to obtain Jeryl Lynn containing vaccines. This means than the URABE containing vaccine, Pluserix, would have been in production and once they agreed to MSD, MSD would have had to play catchup. So, as usual, it is you who overplay your hand. Once again, as made clear in quote from UK document, the manufacturers of Jeryl Lynn containing MMR had production difficulties. DO YOU UNDERSTAND? ? ?

As for: Additionally, the Minutes of the JCVI meeting on 6th November 1992 record how
“Department of Health officials visited the MSD factory in Philadelphia and obtained agreement for the supply of the additional amounts required by the UK”.

Incredible. You don’t understand the basics of calendar time. November 6, 1992 is four years after the UK started the vaccination program. And the report doesn’t mention anything about the production capabilities of the MSD factory in Philadelphia, that is, at what time was their facility capable of both supplying US and UK? There is NO indication from any document I have obtained that they could have done so in Fall of 1988. Otherwise, why would MSD, after indicating their interest in marketing their vaccine, not avail themselves of their production capabilities in Philadelphia? Why did UK document from 1993 discuss difficulties in production by manufacturers of Jeryl Lynn containing MMR?

And still, you refuse to simply state something endorsing use of the current MMR, obsessing on the Urabe. I guess given your inability to actually understand simple dates, why should one expect more of you?

And, again, you posted in a comment some time ago that you would send me the documents related to your daughter’s case; but I guess that won’t happen?

I am busy proof-reading a microbiology textbook which will be used by thousands, a much more valuable use of my time.

Joel @119

“And my article makes clear that they did, indeed, once awareness of problems in Canada, “despite the benign nature of vaccine-induced meningitis” start to obtain MMR with Jeryl Lynn”.

Joel, it is acknowledged that that the “problems in Canada” were known to the UK authorities long before Pluserix entered the market. It is not correct to say that ONCE awareness of the problems in Canada became known, supplies of MMR II were obtained.

In case you missed it, the MMR II proportion of the UK market INCREASED (ie from the 15% share of the entire UK market it had held since 1988) in 1992 after the withdrawal of the two urabe containing brands at which time MMR II became the only brand used. This came about when the laboratory confirmed rate of urabe vaccine induced aseptic meningitis was found by a UK Public Health Laboratory to be much higher than previously thought. The Chief Medical Officer of the time, Dr Kenneth Calman, distributed an official letter to all doctors etc in the UK on 14th September 1992 advising them of the new statistical findings from the UK facility and how, from then on, only MMR II vaccine would be available.

That all took place long AFTER the “problems” in Canada were known about and two years AFTER the Canadians had removed the licence for Trivirix. The situation in Canada was not the catalyst for either the decision to remove the urabe containing MMR’s in 1992 or the timing of a decision to switch to only MMR II. That all came about solely as a consequence of our scientists determining that the rate at which aseptic meningitis was occurring in UK children was much higher than originally thought.

If your article states anything other than that to be the sequence of events, then it is wrong

@ Wendy Stephen:

You write: “It is not correct to say that ONCE awareness of the problems in Canada became known, supplies of MMR II were obtained.”

But that is NOT what I wrote, which was:

“And my article makes clear that they did, indeed, once awareness of problems in Canada, “despite the benign nature of vaccine-induced meningitis” start to obtain MMR with Jeryl Lynn.”

The UK started an effort to obtain the MMR with Jeryl Lynn. Thank you for once again proving my point that you really don’t read carefully or understand what people write. Try carefully reading my article.

And once again, you refuse to admit you were wrong, wrong about claiming I “erroneously” used 1 in 100 000, wrong about using 1992 arrangement to get supplied from MSD in Philadelphia, ignoring that the UK MMR program began four years earlier and so it goes.

One other thing that, if you actually read my article you missed: “Note that the Canadian decision to withdraw the vaccine was based partly on laboratory data from the UK. . . . Canada was not the only country to base its decision partly on data from the UK; but “the [JCVI] committee was told that all the countries which had had a choice had switched from Urabe to Jeryl Lynn; the UK data had been accepted by all these countries” [79]. In other words, it was the quality of the UK surveillance data that prompted its worldwide use for vaccination decisions; and although the “UK’s quality of surveillance was unsurpassed . . . Many lessons had been learnt from MMR. It was agreed that better surveillance was needed as well as a consideration of how adverse events were followed up [79].”

You claim that all you want to do is: “What is extremely important to me is that the Urabe vaccine ‘story’ is portrayed accurately, not manipulated into being anything more than it realistically was, but also that it is not played down into a non event as you repeatedly seek to do.” AND "If your article states anything other than that to be the sequence of events, then it is wrong," So, you are commenting on what I wrote; but have obviously NOT read it. How pathetic!

Yet, that is NOT what you are doing. Your daughter lost hearing in one ear and you want to blame someone. You need to portray the British decision and those who made it as either incompetent or worse. You need to claim that I downplayed the risks and problems with the Urabe strain containing MMR. What you refuse to accept is that, as with anything that people do, they do their best and then learn from their mistakes. I simply described in my paper the events as they transpired and that, in fact, at the time, the UK surveillance for adverse events was probably either the best in the world or up there.

You criticize the sample sizes and follow-up times; but they were not out of line with most studies of this type. Years later, in the US we approved the first rotavirus vaccine based on a study sample of over 10,000 and on post-marketing surveillance a rare problem, intussusception, was found, so it was taken off the market. Until the next vaccine based on a sample of 72,000 was approved, each year several dozen children died and 10s of thousands were hospitalized to prevent a dozen or so cases of intussusception and one possible death. I’m sure you approve.

You claim to NOT be an antivaccinationists; yet I asked you, not only in this exchange, but numerous others to simply state something like: “Based on my understanding several decades ago an MMR vaccine containing a strain of the mumps called Urabe was associated with unacceptable adverse events and I believe this could have been avoided if the decision process had been better. With that said, today’s MMR vaccine has an excellent safety profile and I recommend that all parents should vaccinate their children.”

If you can’t say something positive about current vaccines and continue to twist and distort what happened 20 years ago, then YOU ARE AN ANTIVACCINATIONIST.

And once more you fail to answer if you will send me the documents on your daughter’s case. As I wrote, I am working on an article on mumps and intend to create numerous tables, including one for hearing loss, both stats on natural disease and vaccines, as many papers as I can find. I don’t down play anything as I think, as I’ve written numerous times, that even one injured child is a tragedy; but, living in the real world, one has to make choices and I choose vaccination over the natural diseases. Who would you be blaming if UK had withdrawn MMR and your daughter was injured from one of the natural diseases which would have had, without vaccines, a much higher probability of occurring?

So, post a comment promoting the current MMR and answer if you intend to send me the documents on your daughter’s case.

And just to be clear, you come across as not only an antivaccinationist; but a bitter obsessed person.

Joel @121

“I simply described in my paper the events as they transpired and that, in fact, at the time, the UK surveillance for adverse events was probably either the best in the world or up there”.

You certainly did cover the adverse event surveillance system in place AT THE TIME but it’s a pity you got that wrong as well. And as for being “the best in the world or up there” it might surprise you to know that even our own authorities acknowledged that in respect of urabe, the system had failed to identify the scale of the problem.

In your article you asked what type of surveillance system did the UK use? In response to your own question you mention the Yellow Card Scheme and say that “suspected ADR’s can be reported by anyone; this is usually done by healthcare professionals …including doctors, pharmacists and nurses…………but patients and care givers also made reports”

Given that you are talking about what was in place AT THE TIME you should be aware that nurses were only allowed to report via the Yellow Card system after November 2002 (ten years after Urabe was withdrawn), Pharmacists in November 1997 (5 years after Urabe was withdrawn) and patients and caregivers since November 2005. What you have described is the scope of the yellow card system today not how it was back at the time you are talking about.

The BMJ (vol 301 1st December 1999) “The Yellow Card Mark II) said of the system.....

"There is of course considerable under reporting"

Additionally, the 1995 edition of POST (Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology) stated the following……..

"The Urabe experience was exacerbated by the failure of the yellow card surveillance system to detect the scale of the problem.............."

Also from the Minutes of ARGOS (Adverse Reaction Group of Sear) (CSM 1992 8th meeting) it was said of the Urabe problem that……….
"The BPSU has failed to adequately identify an important public health problem"

If the BMJ, POST and ARGOS are all willing to concede the failures in respect of urabe surveillance and the limitations of the yellow card scheme, why cant you?

@ Wendy Stephen:

You write: "it might surprise you to know that even our own authorities acknowledged that in respect of urabe, the system had failed to identify the scale of the problem."

So what. At the time they did the best they could. Admitting later that in hindsight they could have done better is not an admission of negligence. It has normal rational people progress and improve things. You obviously are not rational.

And my article doesn't just give the Yellow Card Scheme as the only source. You are really dishonest when you take only one of the ways that the UK conducted surveillance which my article covers. Typical antivaccinationist. They think the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System in the US is the only program for post-marketing surveillance of vaccines; but it is only one of several.

And you keep ignoring that the Urabe was still much safer than the natural disease and that all experts considered aseptic meningitis as a benign condition and the risk of hearing loss from the vaccine exponentially less than from the natural disease.

So, I gave what was used at the time, which was the basis for decisions in many other countries. And you continue to fail to admit the erroneous claims against me that you have made in previous comments on this exchange.

I've tried to be polite; but you are either psychologically disturbed or just plain dishonest. You want to blame people based on hindsight and, again, you refuse to endorse current vaccines or to answer if you will send me documents on your daughter's case.

I sincerely suggest you seek therapy!

Joel @ 123

“And my article doesn’t just give the Yellow Card Scheme as the only source. You are really dishonest when you take only one of the ways that the UK conducted surveillance which my article covers. Typical antivaccinationist”

Well, if you really want to go there!

The other types of surveillance you identify in your article were….

(1) The BPSU which I have already pointed out was described in the ARGOS Minutes as having failed to adequately identify the Urabe problem.

"The BPSU has failed to adequately identify an important public health problem"

(2) “Adverse Reactions Surveillance – Dr. Bowie advised that active surveillance of MMR vaccine in Somerset had just started”

The JCVI in their Minutes of the Meeting on 7th March 1990 noted………..
“the surveillance of MMR vaccine in Somerset is unlikely to detect issues of concern, problems exist with under reporting”

(3) The surveillance diaries given to vaccinated children

The three week follow up diaries given to vaccinated children as part of the surveillance would have missed a significant number of cases of aseptic meningitis which occurred after the 21 day cut off.

Miller, E. et al in their paper “Risk of Aseptic Meningitis After Measles, Mumps and Rubella vaccine in UK Children”, published in the Lancet, Vol 341, April 17th, 1993 noted that “half the aseptic meningitis cases identified in children aged 12-24 months were vaccine associated with onset 15-35 days after vaccine”

The Canadian Medical Association Journal, Vol 138, January 15th 1988 reports on a case of mumps meningitis in a 14yr old, twenty six days post vaccination with the urabe containing Trivirix.

In their paper “Clinical and Epidemiologic Features of Mumps Meningoencephalitis and possible Vaccine-related Disease”, Vol 8, Paediatric Infectious Disease Journal November 1989, McDonald et al report on a 4yr old who developed mumps meningitis twenty six days after receiving Trivirix.

The Canadian Diseases Weekly report 5th September 1987 "a history of recent vaccination suggested an association between the vaccine and the development of meningitis although the time between the 2 events was 26 days - somewhat longer than the incubation for the wild virus"

In your article you stated that……..
“It is highly unlikely that many, if any, cases of aseptic meningitis would have been missed.”

I put it to you based on all the material I have placed before you from reputable sources, it was more likely than not, that a huge number of cases were missed.

If you don’t get that, it’s not me what needs therapy.

@ Wendy Stephen:

Again, it was the best surveillance system for the time. Yes, it missed cases; but, in your immense STUPIDITY, you fail to accept that it was cases of a BENIGN condition. Do you understand the word "BENIGN."

And you continue to use studies and data conducted later to blame something that occurred in the past. How really really STUPID.

And, again, for the umpteenth time, you fail to endorce the current MMR vaccine and to let me know if you intend to send to me documents related to your daughter's case.

Just for your dense brain, there is NO surveillance system that I know of that captures everything and it was NOT necessary because the cases of aseptic meningitis reported in Canada and the UK were enough to decide on halting use of the URABE. Does it really matter if they didn't capture all or even close to all cases if they captured enough to make a valid decision? Don't you understand anything?

I suggest you post regularly on Age of Autism. You can state that the world is flat and it is vaccines that distort of perceptual abilities and I'm sure some comments will applaud you.

Since you fail continuously to respond to my questions and continue to drag up the future to criticize the past and since you fail to understand that the surveillance systems at the time captured enough cases for decision making, there is only one way to describe you, STUPID ON STEROIDS!

Joel@127

“Again, it was the best surveillance system for the time. Yes, it missed cases;”

Joel, in your article you argue against the fact that the UK surveillance system for adverse events was “inadequate” saying that to be, “not true”

Now you agree that it missed cases, what is that if not inadequate? Many of the references I have provided to you in previous posts from reputable bodies readily acknowledge the inadequacy of the surveillance.

That has got nothing to do with it being the best that was available at the time, and I agree that no system would be entirely effective in capturing everything. The point is that not only do you present an inaccurate picture of the state of the UK surveillance system in your article, suggesting it to be entirely capable of detecting a problem with Urabe were it to be occurring, you steadfastly reject any suggestion that it was inadequate.

And as for this bit……….

"Does it really matter if they didn’t capture all or even close to all cases if they captured enough to make a valid decision?"

I can only draw you back to this quote from one of my previous posts……..

"The Urabe experience was exacerbated by the failure of the yellow card surveillance system to detect the scale of the problem.............." POST July 1995

Consider this. Had the system not been so flawed and the “scale” of the Urabe problem picked up on earlier, that “valid decision” you speak of, would have been made much earlier. When the issue is one of adverse reactions following administration of a medicinal product, I put it to you that it DOES “really matter” that (a) problems are detected (b) the scale of the problem is accurately (as far as possible) recorded and (c) immediately acted upon as necessary.

@ Wendy Stephen:

In a previous comment I wrote that NO surveillance system is perfect, that is, captures every case. The reason for, as the UK had in 1988, having several different surveillance systems is that each has its strengths and weakness and each will capture some cases not captured by one of more of the other systems. So, the sum of cases captured by all the systems will be greater than any one of them. However, NO system, even today captures ALL or even most cases. Typical antivaccinationist, either or, black and white.

And I stand by what I wrote: “Does it really matter if they didn’t capture all or even close to all cases if they captured enough to make a valid decision?”

I remind you that the Canadians decided to stop using the Urabe based on only 15 days follow-up (not at the time knowing that Miller four years later would find they needed a longer follow-up time) and their less than perfect surveillance system and the UK decided to try to get Jeryl Lynn based on what they learned from the Canadian’s, that the decision was actually made prior to the data obtained from their surveillance systems. The UK surveillance data did not change the decision to switch to the Jeryl Lynn; but it did lead to the Urabe completely losing its approval. Newspapers go by the motto: “if it bleeds it leads”, that is, they exaggerate. Typical of an antivaccinationist that you cherry pick articles where you can find them, regardless of their validity and the article only refers to one of the UK surveillance systems.

You write: “Consider this. Had the system not been so flawed and the “scale” of the Urabe problem picked up on earlier, that “valid decision” you speak of, would have been made much earlier. How could it have been made earlier than when they learned about the Canadian report? If not for the Canadian report, the UK would have begun using the Urabe and then waited until reports came in from their surveillance systems. Even if they caught every single case, it would have delayed the decision to switch to the Jeryl Lynn. It would have delayed their trying to obtain Jeryl Lynn from the very beginning. You are totally illogical.

You write: “When the issue is one of adverse reactions following administration of a medicinal product, I put it to you that it DOES “really matter” that (a) problems are detected (b) the scale of the problem is accurately (as far as possible) recorded and (c) immediately acted upon as necessary.”

First, as I wrote above, they did early on decide to try to obtain Jeryl Lynn. The problem was detected. In the US, our Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting system received reports of intussusception associated with the rotavirus vaccine. Only a very few; but immediately an investigation began. Investigators went out to the various hospitals to double check the actual records. They didn’t need to get every case to act. The problem was detected. As for the scale of the problem, again, once they realized that the Urabe was associated with aseptic meningitis, they did act, they began trying to obtain Jeryl Lynn; but as I’ve written umpteen times, aseptic meningitis is a benign condition, the risk of it from the natural disease is much higher, and the natural disease causes several other more serious problems, so, they had the choice of halting vaccinations until they could get enough Jeryl Lynn (and as I cited in a previous comment, there were production problems with the Jeryl Lynn), or risk a benign condition from the vaccine or the greater risks from the natural disease. Even if you doubled the number of cases captured of aseptic meningitis associated with the Urabe it would still have been better to use it than the natural disease. And they still would have needed to get the Jeryl Lynn. And the system wasn’t “so flawed”, it captured enough to make a decision and that is all one can expect. We do have better systems; but they developed based on what we learned from earlier ones and even they do NOT capture everything.

The UK system was NOT inadequate as it obtained the data needed to make a valid decision. You can cite all the studies you can find that they didn’t capture all the cases; but it doesn’t matter. Decisions aren’t based on perfect or complete data, except in the minds of antivaccinationists.

So, in 1988 when the UK had already contracted for the Urabe vaccine and it was in production, based on what they learned from Canada, they decided to switch. If their surveillance systems had captured every single case it would have made NO difference. You fail to understand this. You fail to understand that using several systems the UK data was considered the best available at the time and was used by many other countries.

It is really a shame that you hadn’t contacted the UK Vaccine Committees in 1987. I’m sure your immense knowledge, including of future developments, would have been welcome. You really are STUPID ON STEROIDS.

If one used your approach, we would have very little modern medicine because early approaches would NOT have proceeded because years in the future there would have been better treatments and better data.

As I wrote, you are obsessed with the Urabe. In your obsession you twist and distort events. And you NEVER once state that, despite what happened in the past, the current MMR vaccine has a good safety profile and you recommend it.

It is a tragedy that your daughter may have lost hearing in one ear from the Urabe vaccine. I say may have because what you have said is that the decision was that it was “likely” not certain; but people die from the common cold. You are so bitter at what happened to your daughter that your are obsessed.

When I wrote that the WHO continued to use the Urabe, you needed to point out that they discontinued it in 2015, which means they used it on millions of children with an excellent benefits/risk ratio for over a decade after Canada and the UK stopped its use. I’m sure that sometime in the future they will replace the Jeryl Lynn with a better vaccine, so I guess at that time you will point it out as if it was wrong to have used it all the years prior.

You are a disturbed individual and what you write, since it implies incompetence and dishonesty by those who decide vaccine policy, could influence parents to not vaccinate their children today. Nowhere do you clarify that vaccine surveillance and vaccines have improved. You are both tiresome and keep making a fool of yourself.

And, once again, you fail to respond to two questions I have posed umpteen times:

Do you recommend that parents vaccinate their children with the MMR vaccine currently being used in the UK?
Are you going to send me the documents related to your daughter’s case?

Are you totally incapable of giving two simple answers to two simple questions? Given how you twist things and what I and others have written, I wonder what the documents regarding your daughter’s case actually say? What are you hiding?

Thanks for the measles yet again, Andy: Antivax vultures swoop in to spread misinformation among the Minnesota Somali immigrant community

oracknows — Fri, 05 May 2017 04:00:18 +0000

Thanks for the measles yet again, Andy: Antivax vultures swoop in to spread misinformation among the Minnesota Somali immigrant community

Earlier this week, I took note of an ongoing measles outbreak in Minnesota. This outbreak affects the large Somali immigrant community there, and the reason for the outbreak is simple. Over the last decade, uptake of the MMR vaccine has plunged dramatically in the American-born children of the Somali community, from 92% to 42%, far below the level necessary for herd immunity. The reason for the drop is that antivaccine fear mongering has taken hold in the community, thanks to American antivaxers who targeted the community and Andrew Wakefield himself, who's visited the community at least twice (once during a previous measles outbreak in 2011) to promote his discredited idea that MMR causes autism. What opened up the community to antivaccine ideas was an unexplained autism cluster in the community that was widely reported on in 2008 but has subsequently been found not to have been real, with American-born Somali children not having a higher prevalence of autism than the American children in the same area.

When last I discussed the outbreak, the number of children stricken with measles had reached 32. Now, four days later, the number is up to 41 and still climbing as it spreads beyond Hennepin County:

State officials reported seven new cases of measles Thursday, bringing the case count to 41 in an outbreak that has now reached its first adult and spread beyond the state’s Somali community.

Health officials also said two of the 41 patients had been vaccinated for the highly-contagious disease.

As the outbreak grows, it has also spread beyond Hennepin County. There are now two cases in Ramsey County and one in Crow Wing County. A case in Stearns County that was announced last week has since been ruled out as measles, health officials said.

State health officials expect there to be more cases and repeated their call for unvaccinated Minnesotans to get shots.

Basically, the measles outbreak appears to be gaining steam, and who knows how far it will spread and when it will finally burn itself out? It's all because antivaxers saw an opportunity to "help" (in their eyes) parents from a Third World Country with little or no knowledge of autism. Unfortunately, their "help" consisted of taking the discredited pseudoscience of a British fraud named Andrew Wakefield and convincing large swaths of the Somali community that there really was good reason to worry that the MMR vaccine causes autism. The message took hold, along with many of the conspiracy theories that go along with it. The good news is that most Somalis in Minnesota don't appear to be antivaccine, just anti-MMR. The bad news is that other antivaccine ideas are spreading, with more parents buying into antivaccine tropes, such as "too many too soon" and the idea that children are "overvaccinated."

And right in the middle of this rapidly growing measles outbreak, who should appear to make things worse, but more antivaccine loons, led by Mark Blaxill? That's exactly what happened on Sunday:

A national speaker who believes there are links between vaccines and autism told a group of Somali-American parents Sunday night that they should choose whether to vaccinate their children by weighing risks and benefits. He also said the government has lied in its previous vaccine research and that the danger of measles is overstated.

About 90 people met at Safari Restaurant in Minneapolis to hear Mark Blaxill, who is on the executive leadership team of the nonprofit Health Choice, present information on measles outbreaks, autism rates and what he said were the fraudulent results of a 2004 study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the link between autism and vaccines, a theory that health officials have debunked.

"It should be the right of every parent and family to make their own decisions," said Blaxill.

We've encountered Mark Blaxill on many occasions before over the years, for instance when he wrote a book with the now-deceased Dan Olmsted in which he laid down an amazing quantity of pseudoscience about polio, pesticides, and the poli vaccine. More recently, he appeared in Andrew Wakefield and Del Bigtree's antivaccine propaganda opus VAXXED.

I was somewhat intrigued. No, I wasn't intrigued by any of the claims and arguments that Blaxill made (although I will briefly touch on them). They're nothing that I haven't heard before many, many times. Rather, I was interested why Blaxill's affiliation was not listed as Safeminds, an antivaccine group he'd been with for a very long time, although he's still apparently involved with the antivaccine Canary Party. I had never heard of the group he's with now, Health Choice, but its team includes a rogues' gallery of antivaccine "luminaries." It even includes Ginger Taylor! It also looks as though the group has a broader focus than just antivaccine activism:

Health Choice is a non-profit organization focusing on awareness of health choices, education on nutrition, healing, and prevention of chronic illnesses for children and adults. Our group was formed in response to a study published in Academic Pediatrics that represented 43% of children (32 million) in the US suffers from a chronic health condition. It is our belief that these rates will continue to increase if parents are not aware of the unhealthy choices in their lifestyle such as industrial processed foods, side effects of vaccine choices, and other environmental and lifestyle factors. We want to help Americans understand how to have a healthy lifestyle, return to a state of wellness and promote sound choices for their children.

Make no mistake, Health Choice is clearly antivaccine, but it appears to go beyond nust vaccines. It's also based in Minnetonka, MN, which is outside of St. Paul and right where an antivaccine group would need to be to influence the Somalis, saying things like:

Blaxill — who says that he's not anti-vaccine — also explained Minnesota law and how parents can opt out of vaccinations, providing forms and access to a notary public for parents. Several nonprofits advocating parental choice in vaccinations were present, including the Minnesota Vaccine Safety Council, Health Choice and National Health Freedom Coalition.

Ah, yes. The old "I'm not antivaccine" gambit, so beloved of, well, antivaccine loons everywhere. Of course Blaxill is antivaccine. He was associated with Safeminds and Age of Autism, two very antivaccine organizations. He spreads misinformation that falsely claims that the MMR causes autism. Basically, he walks the antivaccine walk and talks the antivaccine talk. I've already discussed the Minnesota Vaccine Safety Council before, particularly how it's co-opted words like "freedom" and "rights" to conflate them with the desire of antivaccine parents to refuse vaccinations for their children.

Funny how he uses a favorite antivaccine trope about "bullying":

"The vaccination schedule for children in this country has exploded since 1986," Blaxill said. "And we simply do not know all of the possible negative side effects of these vaccines as a collective group of immunizations."

And Blaxill said every citizen should know they do not have to feel pressure to vaccinate if they do not agree with the government's immunization programs.

"I have seen bullying by government agencies across the country, especially targeting new immigrants, to make them feel they have no other choice but to go along with an immunization schedule for children that, in my opinion, is too many and too soon for many of these kids," Blaxill said.

Worse, Blaxill's message is finding fertile ground among the Somalis:

Attendees Sunday night had varied opinions about vaccines and autism, despite the fact that any link has been thoroughly discredited by the scientific community.

Measles can be dangerous, said parent Ikram Mohamed, but the illness only lasts a short time.

In contrast, "Autism is not a curable disease," said Mohamed, as several Somali-American mothers in the front row cheered her on.

Mohamed, a mother of five who said she had delayed vaccination in four of her children due to fears about autism, said doctors need to inform parents that they can delay or opt out of vaccines.

Here's a news report on Blaxill's talk:

Truly, Mark Blaxill, Andrew Wakefield, and the rest of the antivaccine activists preying upon this community are despicable and deluded, promoting pseudoscience that is harming the Somali community. The result has been this:

Since the outbreak was first detected three weeks ago, health investigators have contacted about 2,500 people who were exposed to known cases, including at child care centers, health care settings and household exposures. People who were exposed and were not vaccinated are being asked to stay home from work, school, child care and other public gatherings for three weeks.

The public health control effort has involved 70 state workers at a cost of $207,000, the department said. Some county and private health care organizations have also been involved in exposure follow-up efforts.

Measles is no longer naturally occurring in the United States. State health officials believe, the current outbreak was most likely caused by an infected person who had caught measles in a foreign country.

There's little doubt that the outbreak will get worse before it gets better, and it's the fault of American antivaxers, including Andrew Wakefield. Thanks, Andy and Mark. Thanks yet again for the measles. You bastards.

ADDENDUM: This morning, The Washington Post featured a story on the Minnesota measles outbreak, Anti-vaccine activists spark a state’s worst measles outbreak in decades. It shows the pernicious effects of Wakefield's antivaccine propaganda:

The young mother started getting advice early on from friends in the close-knit Somali immigrant community here. Don’t let your children get the vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella — it causes autism, they said.

Suaado Salah listened. And this spring, her 3-year-old boy and 18-month-old girl contracted measles in Minnesota’s largest outbreak of the highly infectious and potentially deadly disease in nearly three decades. Her daughter, who had a rash, high fever and a cough, was hospitalized for four nights and needed intravenous fluids and oxygen.

“I thought: ‘I’m in America. I thought I’m in a safe place and my kids will never get sick in that disease,’ ” said Salah, 26, who has lived in Minnesota for more than a decade. Growing up in Somalia, she’d had measles as a child. A sister died of the disease at age 3.

This is an aspect I hadn't thought of: In Somalia, measles is a deadlier disease than it is in the US because of the conditions and malnutrition there. Somali immigrants know this, and mistakenly felt safer in the US. Of course, the reason so few children get the measles these days is because of mass vaccination with MMR to the point where there is effective herd immunity. I can't help but wonder whether antivaxers took advantage of that, telling them they were safe. I know their message was that measles is not a threat to them in Minnesota, but autism is. Then they peddle the lie that vaccines cause autism.

Meanwhile, Wakefield, the scumbag that he is, is washing his hands of responsibility:

Anti-vaccine advocates defend their position and their role, saying they merely provided information to parents.

“The Somalis had decided themselves that they were particularly concerned,” Wakefield said last week. “I was responding to that.”

He maintained that he bears no fault for what is now happening within the community: “I don’t feel responsible at all.”

He's definitely responsible for this reaction to pediatricians speaking up after Blaxill's talk last Sunday:

Two pediatricians in the audience stepped up to a microphone to denounce the claims.

“I am very concerned, especially in the midst of a measles outbreak, to have folks come into a community impacted by this disease and start talking about links between MMR and autism,” said Andrew Kiragu, interim chief of pediatrics at Hennepin Medical Center in Minneapolis. “This is a travesty.”

He and the other doctors were interrupted by boos and yelling.

“For God’s sake, I want to know if vaccines are safe,” Sahra Osman shouted. She has a nearly adult son who received an autism diagnosis when he was 3. “My people are suffering! We’re not ignorant. I read a lot. I know a lot. I educate myself. . . . You don’t know what you are talking about.”

No, Andy. You are responsible. So is Mark Blaxill. So are the entire crew at the Age of Autism and every Minnesota antivaccine group who's promoted Wakefield's failed idea to a vulnerable population. If any children die, the blood will be on your hands.

oracknows Fri, 05/05/2017 - 00:00

Tags

autism

Pseudoscience

https://jameslyonsweiler.com/2017/04/21/ipak-focus-2017-why-is-everyone…

Blaxill is one of the featured speakers at an antivax conference in Pittsburgh next month under the auspices of the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge. Other luminaries will include Bob Sears and James Lyons-Weiler (who appears to be working closely with at least one "medical freedom" group lobbying against vaccine mandates).

The conference is called "FOCUS 2017:VACCINE SAFETY SCIENCE AND SCIENTIFIC INTEGRITY"

Whoops, should've warned you first about shielding your irony meters.

Eleven Somali children were hospitalized so far because of this. They're literally working to make sure more are. It's horrible.

Except for SB277 in California, it's starting to feel like the last two years of progress are circling the drain, especially after my state of Arizona just announced vaccine exemption rates are now climbing again (now over 5%) after two years of slightly increased vaccination rates (which unfortunately agrees with what I'm seeing in clinic):
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2017/04/28/arizona-va…

It's no solace knowing that vaccine rates will eventually come back up after there have been enough VPD outbreaks.

There's a lot of anti-immigrant sentiment being stirred up by this as well, with complaints about why are people allowed into the country without being vaccinated, or complains about "those people" bringing disease into America. Most people don't realize this is an issue of the Somali community being targeted by American groups and that issue didn't exist until after the Somali community was established here. Nothing good can come out of this.

I was afraid of that happening. Donald Trump explicitly targeted the Somali community in Minnesota during the election as a "breeding ground for ISIS." That laid the groundwork. There's also the nativist xenophobic slur that immigrants bring disease into the country. That isn't the case here, as you point out, but racists and nativists can lie about what's happening in Minnesota to fit that narrative. American antivaxers plus one Brit (Andrew Wakefield) targeted the vulnerable Somali population, and they are suffering the consequences. However, as the outbreak inevitably spreads beyond the Somali community (as it's begun to do), I fear a lot more anti-immigrant hatred will be whipped up against the Somalis.

NPR has reported about anti-vaxx groups invading the Somali Community. Kudos to NPR for calling the anti-vaxxers what they are and not buying into the fake facade of "health choice". http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/05/03/526723028/autism-fe…

I fear a lot more anti-immigrant hatred will be whipped up against the Somalis.

When I saw the title of this post I thought to myself, jokingly, "Orac will be hearing from counsel for the Vulture Anti-Defamation League." That thought turns out to be a case of "ha ha only serious". Vultures play an important role in the ecosystem. Wakefield, Blaxill, et al., do not. There are lots of people out there looking for any excuse--or no excuse--to hate on immigrant communities, especially those whose members are dark-skinned. This is happening with the Somali community in Maine, and they don't have the excuse of a measles outbreak, like the wingnuts of the Minneapolis suburbs do. Mark Dayton is a better governor than Paul LePage, but there is only so much Dayton can do.

Apparently Mawson's bogus study that Orac wrote about a few days ago actually did find a publisher.

The anti vaxxers on the WaPo comment threads are crowing about it. Thankfully, they're getting shot down for the moment.

http://www.oatext.com/Pilot-comparative-study-on-the-health-of-vaccinat…

Orac: Could you please not compare vultures to anti-vaxxers? What Eric Lund said, basically. Vultures serve a purpose, whereas anti-vaxxers are fundamentally useless. (Note, Gnat, on the other thread.) I live near a vulture surfing area, by the way.

Eric: At this point, a cage full of mice would be able to be a better governor than Lepage.

The anti-immigrant sentiment Terrie mentioned dominates the comment threads under the stories about the outbreak on the website of the Minneapolis StarTribune. A fair number of these, unfortunately, otherwise represent a 'skeptic' view of anti-vax. We need to be careful about this stuff in our own forums. Kudos to Orac for putting the blame where it belongs, and showing more sympathy than animus for the Somali parents. FWIW, those comments at the Strib do not represent the majority view of Minnesotans in general or folks in the Twin Cities metro area. The threads there are dominated by a dedicated group of right-wing cranks who post all the time and up-vote each others comments. The disturbing thing about the outbreak stories is that the regular MAGAs have been joined by new commenters articulating anti-immigrant rhetoric as a sub-theme under a main-theme of 'pro-science/pro-vax'. While I do find this worrying, I'd guess these remarks may reflect a fairly small group of self-styled 'pro-science' advocates who are Sam-Harris-fan-boy Islamaphobes, and feel empowered to let their asshat flags fly at the Stribby the broader nasty/smug tone already there.

For our own part, though, while they may be quite unrepresentative of 'our' community and relatively small in number, this scum is 'our' scum. 'We' need to be careful not to encourage them at the least, and we ought to counter their BS pro-actively, IMHO.

I have to say, I prefer vultures over anti-vaxers as well, but well, vultures are among my favorite birds.

http://www.autisminvestigated.com/jimmy-kimmel-hole-in-heart/

I assume Young Master Crosby has thrown an offensive hissy fit over the realization that folks whose babies are born imperfect want them to actually live. I have a kid with multiple medical problems, including a genetic heart disorder, so I have heard this despicable song and dance before.

Young Master Crosby could benefit from getting away from the mother who taught him that he was damaged, and go find a qualified therapist to get over his issues. And, maybe, with lots and lots of work: make Young Master Crosby socially tolerable.

While Young Master Crosby has shown more intellectual ability than my disabled son, at least I can be proud of my son's accomplishments. These include both being employable and a really nice young man.

The threads there are dominated by a dedicated group of right-wing cranks who post all the time and up-vote each others comments.

This is why you should avoid reading newspaper comment threads unless you want to pray for a giant asteroid strike. In my experience, and the experience of others I trust, almost all newspaper comment boards have such a group of commenters. As I said above, they are looking for any excuse to hate on immigrants. They will use the fact that most Somalis are melanin endowed if they have to (it is, after all, the real reason), but most would prefer to have some other excuse, however feeble, because most of them still realize that many of their neighbors consider their real reason unacceptable. That Wakefield et al. have persuaded so many Somali parents to skip the MMR vaccine over autism fears gives the haters all the reason they need.

I assume Young Master Crosby has thrown an offensive hissy fit over the realization that folks whose babies are born imperfect want them to actually live.

No doubt he has, but that isn't the link he posted here. His post is quite off topic, and mostly content free, which is apparently how he likes things, based on most of the comments on his backwater of a blog.

My heart leaps up when I see vultures returning in early spring (this year we had a gratifying visit by these majestic birds to my backyard, where they roosted in the tall pines).

Antivaxers returning to troll the comments here, not so much.

This is why you should avoid reading newspaper comment threads unless you want to pray for a giant asteroid strike.

Ditto YouTube comment sections.

He must be getting desperate for viewers or commenters....since he's really only got that Hans Litten troll.

Now up to 44 cases.
http://www.startribune.com/three-new-minnesota-measles-cases-bring-outb…

Ditto YouTube comment sections.

Also applies to any story on Yahoo.

How about a nice billboard
"Rubella during pregnancy can cause autism in the baby.
The MMR protects against Rubella.
The MMR prevents one cause of autism."

Would it help?

Nah.

People speeding by would glance up at the billboard and see:

"MMR...cause...autism"

Bother.

I did see a hopeful thing over on The Pump Handle the other day, the results of a study of community vaccination advocates on vaccination rates in two small cities in Washington state. It was effective! It's very heartening, especially when there all the stuff like this around.

The anti vaxxers on the WaPo comment threads are crowing about it. Thankfully, they’re getting shot down for the moment.

Have people reminded the antivax crowd that OAText is not so much a publisher as a polluter, a source of (1) spam and (2) dumpster fires disguised as journals?

In an article from the Star Tribune (April 1, 2015) titled, Autism hits Somali kids harder, University of Minnesota study finds: Autism not more common among Somalis than whites.

Author Jeremy Olson writes, "The net result was that one in 32 Somali children in the study met the diagnostic criteria for autism, compared with one in 36 white children."

http://www.startribune.com/dec-2013-autism-hits-somali-kids-harder-says…

MJD says,

I agree...."Andy. You are responsible. So is Mark Blaxill."

Really this whole post was an excuse for Orac to show off his Discovery Channel fetish, re the photo.

Jacob: Oh, buzz off. Go get yourself a new hobby, like a blowup doll or joining your fellow neckbeards on Reddit. And yeah, Jimmy Kimmel loves his kid, it's a shame your parents didn't, but you could still spite them by not being a turd like them.

The Gnat just blew irony meters across the Internet....

A ray of hope regarding reading comments - Jezebel ran an article on this issue recently - www.jezebel.com

This site is geared for women, including fashion, celebrities and fluff - but also many hard hitting sarcastic articles on recent political developments. Definitely a feminist slant with some fun fluff for a laugh.

The comments raged against Wakefield and anti-vaxxers. Nary a voice from an anti-vaxxers. It was like a ray of sunshine.

Mr and Mrs Lappet-faced Vulture are a very cute couple.

MJD: You're just as responsible, dude.

#27
" neckbeards "
Hahahahaha. I find this term/describtion hilarious.

MJD: You’re just as responsible, dude.

I disagree. "Doctor" Wakefield, Mark, and all the other loons at AoA have plenty of blood on their hands, sure, but MJD is so far out there that nobody follows him. All the other crazies read his brain droppings and think 'that's just a little too far out for me', and ignore him. As far as I know, the only other person who believes his silly idea is Dunn, the co-author of his non-blockbuster book.

He wants to be a player in the anti-vax world, sure. But even they aren't crazy enough to take him seriously.

#4
Yes. A real concern.
The only targeting that should ever happen
at any time to any group, is that done by
professional authorised epidemiologists who
are working with the best data and motives.
All else is political, and likely selfish, and quite
likely somewhat nefarious, and again quite likely,
as seems to be the case here, one with potentially
tragic consequences, and broader community disruption.
Who are these self appointed fuckwits who think they are
some sort of bizzare parallel health information service?
Reminds me strongly of those bent- arse militia people
in USA.

Young Master Crosby, you were not damaged by vaccines. You were damaged by very bad parenting. Plus associating yourself with Mitchell.

Just forget the whole mess, and get real professional help. With luck you can guilt mommy and daddy into paying for it.

Chris: With luck you can guilt mommy and daddy into paying for it.
I hate to say it, but I think the Crosbys are genetically incapable of feeling guilt. Or anything, for that matter.

Johnny: I would like to believe that, yes, but keep in mind we're dealing with a fairly naive population here. If MJD claims to have a PHD, they're probably not going to research him and realize that he doesn't know anything about anything.

Regarding mjd - i see hope for him - i think Insolence may be " turning" him - one day. As someone who is probably on the spectrum, it's sad that he tries to blame vaxxines or latex for his kids problems, when its fairly obvious it's genetic - especially reading his comments which are not quite "clicking" despite his efforts. He's blaming latex or vaxxines or whatever when its obvious they inherited from their dad. But not the end of the world if you try to adjust.

As for Jake - similar problem. Shit - i wanted to be a model when i was young - why blame vaccines for ruining that unrealistic ambition? Found another career - survived. Get counselling and move on. You inherited autism probably - you are making it a wrakness when ir could be a strength. Grow!

PGPig (#31) writes,

You’re just as responsible, dude.

@ Orac,

The reply below is submitted for clarification and as a brief rebuttal to PGPigs unfortunate insolence to comment #25.

MJD says,

I've never denigrated the MMR vaccine in that it clearly states it is not manufactured with...

http://latexallergyresources.org/sites/default/files/news-attachments/L…

And MJD wonders why I don't let him out of moderation purgatory. Here he goes again with his latex fetish.

If MJD claims to have a PHD, they’re probably not going to research him and realize that he doesn’t know anything about anything.

Even if he does have a Ph.D., that doesn't mean he knows anything about anything. There have been examples of this phenomenon on this very blog.

There's also the old joke about generalists and specialists. A generalist is someone who knows nothing about everything. A specialist is someone who knows everything about nothing.

I missed MJD claiming to have a Ph D - where did that happen?

While I agree that in theory some loons might fall for MJD's silly ideas, in fact, nobody has. Search the web for MJD and, and you won't find anyone who support him. The only thing supporting his ideas are his own work. If he didn't cite his work, nobody would.

I have to give him credit for the fact that he hasn't created sock accounts anywhere that I've found to try to create the illusion that he has followers.

But, hey, maybe I'm wrong. I often am. Maybe there is someone out there that believes him. I can't find them, but maybe someone else can.

New post: since you all can't get enough of AI...
http://www.autisminvestigated.com/mmr-autism-measles/

In other News of the Weird, I walked into the family room this morning to see my spouse watching an episode of Investigation Discovery about the Jeffrey Bradstreet suicide/murder/alien abduction. Family members have concluded he was murdered (the FDA is on the suspect list) but his trophy wife isn't buying it.

https://www.investigationdiscovery.com/tv-shows/scene-of-the-crime-with…

Meantime, the coverup of a chiropractic healer's fatal shooting fails to draw national media attention (how conveeenient that the alleged shooter died in a hospital, hmmm....).

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/suspect-in-burlington-chiropra…

Erin at Health Nut News is not fooled.

MJD doesn't have a doctorate in anything. He doesn't even have a master's. He has a BS in Chemistry.

Dina Fine Maron's February 19, 2015 article in SciAm:

In the U.S. it was one of the only recent efforts to audition new methods for getting more parents to follow childhood vaccine recommendations. The majority of U.S. parents—83 percent—vaccinate with the recommended schedule but the gap in full vaccination has help set off the multistate measles outbreak that has gripped the U.S. since late last year. The spread only underscores how little researchers know about ways to boost vaccination rates among American communities. Scientific American interviewed nine experts studying or experimenting with ways to get parents to vaccinate their kids and analyzed the available peer-reviewed literature. The picture that has emerged elucidates a gap in public health knowledge and strategy when it comes to getting hesitant parents to accept vaccine recommendations for their kids. It also reveals that the sweet spot for intervention are parents that are on the fence, not those who have already decided against vaccines.

Indeed, in the case of the Washington State peer educators program, researchers did not expect the vaccine-resistant parents to switch course—the hope was to inform parents who have not yet made up their minds. The program’s backers are still analyzing whether they achieved the short-term goals of raising awareness and affecting parental attitudes. Certainly, swaying more parents in low-vaccine communities to favor immunization would likely curb outbreaks, because so many vaccine-hesitant parents appear to live in clusters.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-get-more-parents-to-v…

FWIW, Jake's latest fatuous post at his pathetic web site demonstrates that he still can't understand the Polymerase Chain Reaction, which is now both so vital an experimental tool and so ubiquitous that it's used in freshman biology labs. A renowned expert on PCR techniques, Stephen Bustin, testified at the Omnibus Autism Proceeding and summarized the results of his thorough evaluation of the O'Leary lab here:

https://www.intechopen.com/books/recent-advances-in-autism-spectrum-dis…

Let's just say that Jake's reliance on yet another discredited Wakefield study while ignoring the great weight of the evidence to the contrary is, um. informative--or it's lying.

https://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/category/legal/autism-omnibus/omnibus…

Thank you for reminding me about The Pump Handle, JustaTech. Here's Kim Krisberg's May 1 2017 article at The Pump Handle,

An evaluation of the three-year intervention, published last month in Health Promotion Practice, is very encouraging: parents who described themselves as “vaccine hesitant” fell from 23 percent to 14 percent, while parental concerns about their peers’ decisions not to vaccinate rose from 81 percent to 89 percent.

PumpHandle:

http://scienceblogs.com/thepumphandle/2017/05/01/study-training-parents…

Abstract of the Health Promotion Practice article:

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1524839917697303?journalCod…

@ #42 Johnny

I couldn't find much else about MJD's latex fetish either. Well, I did find out that he apparently had a web site a few years ago that managed to gain some minor bit of attention for its design (or lack thereof) and unethical/illegal use of images (http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/dailysucker/2011/11/13/mallard-adhesive…). Apparently, the site has not stuck around.

So, the Gnat is getting desperate it appears.....

brian: "Let’s just say that Jake’s reliance on yet another discredited Wakefield study while ignoring the great weight of the evidence to the contrary is, um. informative–or it’s lying."

It amazes me how many Americans think the MMR only came into this world in 1988, when the first on in the USA was introduced 1971. And that one was modified just seven years later due to better MMR vaccines used elsewhere using a different rubella. I bet some of the parents who are afraid of the MMR vaccine probably received one in the 1970s or 1980s.

People who cannot even look up the history or type of vaccine used in their own country should not be pretending to be "researchers."

So this is what it comes down to? Advertising your blog posts on someone else's blog instead of letting us go over and read organically? You know, like when you want to go to the circus to see the clowns and up and do it without the clowns having to advertise it?

Weird.

Anyway, the situation in Minnesota is expanding rapidly. There are more suspect cases than you can shake a stick at. Of course, the odds of being a case are disproportionately higher if you're not vaccinated than if you are. Also, a lot of cases are in those too young to be vaccinated. They're the ones who are going to have to be followed-up consistently for sequelae. See, that's not something that people like Jake think about when they go off about vaccines.

Jake still hasn't answered a few questions from the other day, but that's par for the course, right? Shall we ask him again or just go on enjoying our weekend?

I think I'll enjoy the weekend.

Heck, I'll save you the effort of going over to Jake's.

Here's what he wrote:

"There is no available measles vaccine, only the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine. The former prevents measles, the latter causes measles to linger in the guts of children who developed autism and GI disease as a result of MMR. Measles has made a comeback in the US and UK because there is no measles vaccine available – just the MMR which every child should be protected from. Below is a nearly 20-year old story about the withdrawal of the measles vaccine in the UK by the manufacturer because of – get this – high demand for its use. That demand followed publication of exonerated Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s paper on MMR-injured children. Former CDC director Dr. Tom Frieden is complicit in covering up their injuries."

Followed by this article from The Independent: ht tp://www.independent.co.uk/news/measles-jab-withdrawn-due-to-high-demand-119…

Given how infectious measles is, the lack of MMR coverage for children in that community & how tight-knit a community it is, I'm sure we're going to see a lot more cases before this ends.

A real shame, especially since such a high percentage of kids have required hospitalizations.

Oh, good grief. Young Master Crosby has absolutely no idea that the MMR vaccines introduced in the UK in 1988 were not the same as the MMR vaccine introduced in the USA in 1978! Also, that the "demand" for single measles vaccines were due to Wakefield make idiotic stuff up in a news conference. Stuff that was not in his now retracted fraudulent paper!

It is stupidity topped with complete idiocy!

I walked into the family room this morning to see my spouse watching an episode of Investigation Discovery about the Jeffrey Bradstreet suicide/murder/alien abduction. Family members have concluded he was murdered (the FDA is on the suspect list) but his trophy wife isn’t buying it.

Erin at Health Nut News is not fooled.

According to other members of the Loonisphere, Erin is only pushing the Dead Doctor Conspiracy as a false flag operation to discredit the antivaxx movement and heighten the atmosphere of fear:
http://www.waronwethepeople.com/sex-drugs-internet-fraud-the-secret-lif…

It is like a fractal Fake Flag made up of lots of little Fake Flags.

Do read it. I learned, for instance, that you can detect a photoshopped image by tilting your computer screen and viewing it at an angle, whereupon a fake image will change colour as the underlying real pixels show through.

"I learned, for instance, that you can detect a photoshopped image by tilting your computer screen and viewing it at an angle, whereupon a fake image will change colour as the underlying real pixels show through."

This is an application of Porter-Duff composition of which I was previously unaware.

I wonder what happens if you leave the screen alone and tilt your head, or if you get the same effect whether the tilt is with respect to X, Y or Z axis. And if you use GIMP instead of Photoshop will you see satanic verses?

... you can detect a photoshopped image by tilting your computer screen ...

Well, they've accomplished something in my mind. They've made me regard the idiot Monckton as knowledgeable by comparison (I'm referring to his clueless analysis of a published JPEG of Obama's birth certificate).

“There is no available measles vaccine, only the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine. The former prevents measles, the latter causes measles to linger in the guts of children who developed autism and GI disease as a result of MMR."

Every time Jake writes something, I'm amazed at what little he knows with as much time as he has spent on education. Good grief this elemental molecular biology and physiology.

Do read it.

"On April 13, 2016, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charged Dr. Joseph Mercola, America’s wealthiest online natural health products saleman, on five counts of unfair and deceptive trade through Mercola.com. The very next day, according to the FTC Press Release, Mercola agreed to pay out as much as $5,334,067 to more than a thousand defrauded customers who paid between $1,200 and $4,000 each for a falsely advertised 'tanning bed.'"

Oddly, the signature dates on page 20 of the "agreement" (PDF) were from February 9 and appear to be a faxed image. Yes, it's a proposed stipulation. I'm not in the mood to go look up the actual status. Kind of a weird thing for the FTC to be serving up, though.

There is no available measles vaccine, only the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine. The former prevents measles, the latter causes measles to linger in the guts of children who developed autism and GI disease as a result of MMR.

What's striking to me is that he admits measles vaccine works--that any vaccine works. Or is it only the sacred measles-only vaccine that St. Andrew was flogging to replace the MMR he tried to fraudulently discredit that works, while all other vaccines are worthless and/or harmful?

Well, that's fascinating stuff herr doktor - though I got dizzy less than halfway through that diatribe, trying to figure out the conspiratorial permutations.

I can go you one better. Did you know that "investigative journalist", Sherri Kane is actually a Provocateur in a Troll Triad? A Psy.D. says so:

"Troll Triad is a cyber psychology, forensics and group-profiling construct introducing a three-pronged archetypal model defining groups of online users who engage in defamation of character, slander & libel...Troll Triad attempts to introduce and describe groups of online users who use Information and Communications Technology to defame, manipulate, curry favor and seek support from other like-minded online users. Troll Triad is also a conceptual framework and template describing how future groups of successful iPredators will be partitioned into three archetypal segments.
This troika includes the Cerebral, Provocateur and Crier Archetypes. When these three elements mix correctly, the Troll Triad becomes a masterpiece of human predation alchemy."

https://darkpsychology.co/sherri-kane-horokane-len-horowitz-exposed/

It's entertaining when the woo-ful turn on each other in paranoid delusional fashion. One of my all-time favorite examples involved the Man Who Walked Through Walls, Major Gen. (ret.) Albert Stubblebine and his sidekick Rima Laibow of the Natural Solutions Foundation, who were exposed by those in the know* as government/pharma agents.

*in other words, nuttier than a Collin Street Bakery fruitcake.

...the Man Who Walked Through Walls, Major Gen. (ret.) Albert Stubblebine and his sidekick Rima Laibow of the Natural Solutions Foundation

Are they the Puthoff and Targ of the 21st Century?

Major Gen. (ret.) Albert Stubblebine and his sidekick Rima Laibow of the Natural Solutions Foundation, who were exposed by those in the know* as government/pharma agents.

Laibow is a shameless, unrelenting grifter who has never missed a single opportunity to put out her hand for more of her readers' money. But for some reason her detractors in the Alt-Med community do not feel they can criticise her on those grounds.

nuttier than a Collin Street Bakery fruitcake

I did have to wonder, after reading the Mercola-Elizabeth expose, whether to thank Big Brother for raising the crazy-pill ration to twenty grammes a week.

Are they the Puthoff and Targ of the 21st Century?

Those two are still alive; Stubblebine isn't. The lot have been disappointing me in terms of Dead Pool picks for some time, as I refuse to reuse choices as a matter of principle.

Well, one could start a rumor that the AVX crowd are Crusaders who use Korans as toilet paper and have targeted the Somalis as a way to get Muslims infected. It's just words, after all.

"one could start a rumor that the AVX crowd are Crusaders..."

Funny as a concept, playing with phosphorous in reality.

Let's stick with honesty and the vast amount of scientific consensus from across the globe.

@ Orac's minions,

It's legal, and healthy, to be a pro-vaccine safety advocate.

It's socially awkward, and often unhealthy, to be an anti-vaccine advocate.

It's impossible to be a pro-vaccine safety advocate and an anti-vaccine advocate.

In my opinion, Orac attempts to make the impossible become possible by using raw-imagery, respectful insolence, and demoralizing humor.

A specific example:

The introductory image shows 2+ bloody vultures devouring a baby antelope, then, Orac uses a baby blue background as a means of beautification when applying respectful insolence (see comment #40).

Finally,

What is a rate-limiting-step for vaccine continuous- improvement?

A. Andrew Wakefield
B. Vaccine induced Autism
C. Orac and his minions
D. Vaccine contraindications
E. All of the above

It is well known that when in doubt, choosing (C) increases the probability of successfully answering the question.

It's not just words to these people. Bad idea.

Oh, so the American Loon believes that "we" are preventing vaccines from being safer & more effective?

Sorry, but looking at the current R&D pipeline for vaccines, what I see is a continual improvement in manufacturing, processing and efficacy - plus utilizing a host of new understandings of immune science to develop vaccines capable of tackling Cancer and other conditions.

You really need to get out more, because the rest of us do.

Oh, so the American Loon believes that “we” are preventing vaccines from being safer & more effective?

Well, yeah. Look at it from his point of view.

MJD believes that he has found a major safety flaw in vaccines. This flaw is responsible for a great deal of pain and suffering, and, by the way, also explains how vaccines cause autism. He has attempted to spread the word, and "Make Vaccines Safe Again" #MVSA.

Nobody believes him*. Nobody is more vocal in that disbelief than the minions at RI, and indeed our host has gone to great lengths to muzzle him.

Therefore, our host and his minions are only too happy to carry on with an unsafe product that poisons kids and condemns them and their families to a life of pain and suffering, because reasons.

It's more or less logical, isn't it?

*Well, everybody agrees that latex allergies exist, and can be a problem. It's really a matter of scale, and that whole silly autism thing.

@MJD:

It’s legal, and healthy, to be a pro-vaccine safety advocate.

Lying and exaggerating the risks and adverse events of vaccination is NOT pro-vaccine safety advocacy. This has been pointed out to you before.

Baby antelope? Looks like generic carrior to me.

I meant "carrion".
In other news, UK's "The Guardian" includes a video essay on a survivor of polio in Nigeria.

I intended to key in "carrion".
In other news, UK's "The Guardian" includes a video essay on a survivor of polio in Nigeria.

Johnny (#71) writes,

Therefore, our host and his minions are only too happy to carry on with an unsafe product that poisons kids and condemns them and their families to a life of pain and suffering, because reasons.

MJD says,

If there is acquiescence from our gracious host (Orac), the analogy described below may bring clarity.

The use of rubber bullets. The consequence of such ammunition is counter-intuitive (i.e., less logical) based on the weapons design and intent.

In comparison the use of said bullet-like material in vaccine packaging, which can release antigenic contaminants, is counter-intuitive based on the vaccines design and intent (i.e. do no harm).

Johnny, I make no apology for the round-about way of structuring this analogy in that Orac has placed limitations (e.g., auto-moderation) on my ability to provide precise and accurate teachings on this critical vaccine-safety initiative.

And I make no apology to putting you in automoderation, because your vaccine Latex fetish irritates the crap out of me and many of my readers.

The Minnesota measles outbreak is up to 48 now, 45 confirmed unvaccinated. Great help those anti-vaxxers have been. http://justthevax.blogspot.com/2017/04/andrew-wakefield-is-anti-vaxx-gi…

I live in the Twin Cities and had to go see my PCP. They are heavily screening for any possible measles cases in an attempt to halt the spread, asking screening questions almost before you can give your name. And I live on the other side of the city from most of the outbreak.

MJD @68: The box is grey, not blue, and it is automatic to indicate a comment by the blog owner.

Perhaps get your screen and/or eyes checked?

It’s entertaining when the woo-ful turn on each other in paranoid delusional fashion. One of my all-time favorite examples involved the Man Who Walked Through Walls, Major Gen. (ret.) Albert Stubblebine and his sidekick Rima Laibow of the Natural Solutions Foundation, who were exposed by those in the know* as government/pharma agents.

It gladdened my cold little heart, and may even bring joy to Orac's energy cells, to see the anti-vax hard-liners* condemning Wakefield as a vile money-sucking Big-Pharma opportunist, interested only in selling his own vaccines.
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=665184310335252&id=10…

* "Hard-line" as "demanding a total ban on vaccination, rather than an option".

Terrie -- I just got back from taking my daughter to the doctor (nothing serious) and can confirm they are now screening for measles exposure. Another new addition: instead of just handing masks out at checkin if you have flu-like symptoms, they now have hand sanitizer and a facemask dispenser that you have to physically walk around to get to the checkin, in hopes of getting people masked as early as possible if they have symptoms. I have no idea how well it's actually working, but I appreciated the effort.

Orac:

It’s also based in Minnetonka, MN, which is outside of St. Paul and right where an antivaccine group would need to be to influence the Somalis

No, it's actually in the west metro, so it's a suburb of Minneapolis. The Twin Cities are very much fraternal twins. ;-) But rather more significantly here, Minnetonka is in the wealthier part of town. There's a big, sprawling lake (Lake Minnetonka, once considered sacred to the natives and so of course now exploited to the hilt by wealthy Minnesotans) surrounded by some of the richest communities in the state, including the city of Minnetonka itself but also Woodland (one of the wealtheist cities in America, per capita), Orono, Deephaven, Tonka Bay, Minnetonka Beach, Minnetrista, Wayzata.... There are some huge houses with gorgeous lakefront property there. It's not terribly far from Chanhassen, either, the wealthy suburb where Prince lived. There are pockets of wealth around the Twin Cities, but it's that West Metro area where the *really* rich are particularly concentrated.

So it's got a lot in common with the communities a lot of the recent antivax efforts have come out of. Rich, highly educated, overwhelmingly white, a very privileged lifestyle. I actually have family living out in that area, and you really feel it when you drive through there. Minnetonka itself is one of the more cosmopolitan towns around the lake, with a substantial commercial district, but even there the average household income is double the average household income of Saint Paul. (Go to the really rich little bedroom suburbs nearby, and the average income is more than quadruple what it is in Saint Paul. And there *are* wealthy neighborhoods in St. Paul to pull the average up. Difference is fewer poor families to pull the average down in the more exclusive suburbs.)

So yeah. Even locally here, this crap is being pushed onto the most disadvantaged groups by the most privileged groups, who are either oblivious to that distinction, or who revel in it, feeling that they are sharing their brilliance without really understanding what it's actually going to mean for those families.

According to other members of the Loonisphere, Erin is only pushing the Dead Doctor Conspiracy as a false flag operation to discredit the antivaxx movement and heighten the atmosphere of fear:

In tangentially-related Dead Doctors news, possibly responding to the internecine conspiracy-weaving, Thom and Candice Bradstreet have taken down / cashed in the GoFundMe page they set up to profit from Jeff Bradstreet’s suicide:
http://www.gofundme.com/xscefs

Only the Archived version remains.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170411111920/https://www.gofundme.com/xsc…

herr doktor bimler:

I noted with some interest the following from the original site:

"If there are any funds in the GoFundMe account remaining after such effort is completed, then those funds will be returned to donors or donated to an autism charity. Full disclosure will be made as to the use of funds and any disbursement of any remaining funds."

Where, I wonder, would one go to find such an accounting? Surely such fine, upstanding citizens would not dream of failing to carry out such a self-imposed obligation.

sarcasm off

It gladdened my cold little heart, and may even bring joy to Orac’s energy cells, to see the anti-vax hard-liners* condemning Wakefield as a vile money-sucking Big-Pharma opportunist, interested only in selling his own vaccines.

Hey, Jake was crapping all over him before his latest routine.

It is like a fractal Fake Flag made up of lots of little Fake Flags.

Do read it.

I'm intrigued why the document linked in this passage, which is styled as an "exhibit," is hosted by the Hawaiʻian Department of Land and Natural Resources:

"Big Pharma’s concerns were so great that the United Nations (UN) AIDS Secretariat to the UN Theme Group on AIDS was directed to censor Horowitz’s scientific publication in the British peer-reviewed journal Medical Hypothesis."

^ As one might have expected, decrementing the "Ex-C" counter yields yet more PDFs, although it seems to stop with 52, which is a scan of some book pages detailing the objections of Pele practitioners to geothermal energy.

“Big Pharma’s concerns were so great that the United Nations (UN) AIDS Secretariat to the UN Theme Group on AIDS was directed to censor Horowitz’s scientific publication in the British peer-reviewed journal Medical Hypothesis.”

I rather enjoyed the advertisement at the end of the 'article' for Oxysilver with added 528 Frequency Resonance. I had forgotten that such things existed.

Thanks for the measles yet again, Andy

oracknows — Mon, 01 May 2017 01:00:37 +0000

Thanks for the measles yet again, Andy

There are many harms attributable to the antivaccine movement and its promotion of antivaccine beliefs. Certainly, the harm those of us who have been combatting antivaccine misinformation fear is the return of vaccine-preventable diseases, which is something we've seen in the form of outbreaks, such as the Disneyland measles outbreak two years ago and, in my own state, pertussis outbreaks. The Disneyland outbreak was a wake-up call to California legislators, who in its wake passed SB 277, a law that eliminated personal belief exemptions (PBEs) to school vaccine requirements. Now, only medical exemptions are permitted, and so far the law has worked well. In Michigan, we're still struggling. The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services issued a new rule that requires parents seeking a PBE to attend an education and counseling session at a local county health office before the PBE is issued. Not surprisingly, local antivaxers are not happy and have managed, by painting this rule as a horrific affront to "freedom" and "parental rights," to persuade legislators to try to pass a law that would not only revoke the rule and explicitly bar MDHHS from issuing similar rules in the future, but it would prevent local health officers from barring unvaccinated children from school during an outbreak. The law failed to pass the first time it was introduced, but Michigan legislators are nothing if not extremely persistent in pursuing harmful policies, and a new version of the same old bill is again under consideration. It matters not one whit to our stupid legislators that the rule change is starting to work to increase vaccine uptake. Unfortunately, we have a fair number of antivaccine and antivaccine-sympathetic legislators.

Although the antivaccine movement in the US has classically been associated with upper middle class and affluent white people, they are not the ones who are likely to suffer the most when herd immunity breaks down. I've written extensively here about how the newest (and perhaps most pernicious) antivaccine conspiracy theory, the so-called "CDC whistleblower" conspiracy theory promoted by Del Bigtree and Andrew Wakefield's propaganda film disguised as a documentary VAXXED, explicitly targets the African-American community, complete with promotional visits featuring the Nation of Islam going to speak in Compton and being involved in protests outside the CDC. Wakefield, as you recall, is the British gastroenterologist who in 1998 published a case series in The Lancet linking MMR to autism. It has since been retracted and shown to have been fraudulent, and Wakefield has had his UK medical license stripped from him. Unfortunately, that only makes him more of a hero to the antivaccine movement, and he's spent the last 19 years playing that role to the hilt.

The "CDC whistleblower" conspiracy theory is based on the story of CDC scientist William Thompson, who in 2013 apparently contacted biochemical engineer turned incompetent antivaccine epidemiologist Brian Thompson to vent about a study he co-authored in 2004 that examined whether there was a correlation between vaccination with MMR and subsequent risk of autism. Not surprisingly, the study failed to find a correlation. However, there was one subgroup, African-American boys, in which the unadjusted data showed a 3.4-fold increased risk of autism. (I'm simplifying for space considerations in providing background, obviously; if you want the gory details, read here and here for a contemporaneous account of the origin of a new conspiracy theory, as well as my review of the book Vaccine Whistleblower and Andrew Wakefield's fraudumentary VAXXED.) Thompson had had disagreements with how the data were presented and how he thought the CDC has "suppressed" the unadjusted data. Unfortunately for him, Thompson didn't realize that Hooker was recording their conversations, and Andrew Wakefield found out about it. Thus, he became the "CDC whistleblower" who seemingly validated what I like to call the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement, specifically that the CDC "knows" that vaccines cause autism but covered it up. It didn't matter one whit that the correlation was found only in a small subgroup (African-American boys), but it did matter because African-Americans already have reason to distrust the medical community based on history. The "CDC whistleblower" myth feeds into that sad history, which is why Wakefield loves to invoke the Tuskegee syphilis experiment.

This is also not the first time Andrew Wakefield has targeted people of color with his pseudoscience. By any objective measure, for the most part the CDC whistleblower conspiracy theory and VAXXED have not had much resonance in the African-American community other than in the Nation of Islam and among a handful of parents like Sheila Ealey who really believe vaccines caused their children's autism. The first time around, unfortunately, Wakefield was much more successful. Now, nearly a decade after he first started targeting the community, they are continuing to suffer measles outbreaks. I will begin with the story as it stands now and then go back and look at how it got to this point. The story takes place among a seemingly unlikely group of people in an unexpected location. It's also a story that I can't believe I've never blogged about before, given how long it's been going on.

Measles outbreaks among Somali immigrants in Minnesota

Before I first encountered this story several years ago, I had no idea that there was a large community of Somali immigrants in Hennepin County in Minnesota, but there is. In fact, it's the largest community of Somali immigrants in the US that began forming over a quarter of a century ago and now numbers in the several tens of thousands. Right now, the community is the center of a new measles outbreak, which is just the latest. From the StarTribune a week ago:

As a registered nurse and a consultant to the Minnesota Department of Health, Asli Ashkir has spent nearly a decade talking with Somali parents about autism, vaccines and the importance of getting their children immunized.

Last week she redoubled her efforts. A measles outbreak in Hennepin County has sickened 12 children — all of them unvaccinated and all of them from Somali families, according to the department — throwing a spotlight on low immunization rates among Somali children.

Now state and county public health workers are doing their best to contact Somali parents and underscore the value of immunization. “I know when parents have facts, they do the best they can to make the right decision,” Ashkir said.

I note that the total number of children sickened had reached 32 by the weekend, and the toll is still growing.

The story shows why the Somali community in the Twin Cities area is so susceptible to measles outbreak. All you have to do is to look at this graph of MMR vaccine uptake by year:

MMR uptake among Somali immigrants in Minnesota: This is the effect of nearly a decade of antivaccine propaganda.

The graph above shows what can only be described as a catastrophic plunge over the course of just one decade in MMR uptake among American-born children of Somali descent, from 92% to 42%. There is, for all intents and purposes, no herd immunity in this community. The interesting thing here, though, is that this plunge is very specific. It's noted in the story that there is not a fear of vaccination in general among the Somali immigrant population. Rather, it's fear of just one shot: the MMR. It is a fear that antivaxers stoked, beginning sometime around 2008, and they have unfortunately been wildly successful in inculcating fear of the MMR in Somalis in Minnesota. Indeed, a 2014 study examined attitudes towards the MMR vaccine in Somali and non-Somali children in Minnesota and found:

Somali parents were more likely than non-Somali parents to have refused the MMR vaccine for their child (odds ratio, 4.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.2–18.0). Most of them refused vaccines because they had heard of adverse effects associated with the vaccine or personally knew someone who suffered an adverse effect. Somali parents were significantly more likely to believe that autism is caused by vaccines (35% vs. 8% of non-Somali parents). Somalis were also more likely to be uncomfortable with administering multiple vaccines at one visit (odds ratio, 4.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.4–11.9) and more likely to believe that children receive too many vaccines.

It was a small survey, but it was the only one I found in the peer-reviewed medical literature thus far. Its results are not surprising, however, to anyone directly involved with the Somali community, particularly public health officials. There haven't (yet) been studies published about this latest measles outbreak, but there was a study about the 2011 measles outbreak in Minnesota, which, to that point, was the largest such outbreak in 20 years, with 21 cases identified. Its conclusions were also unsurprising. The source was found to be a 30-month-old US-born child of Somali descent infected while visiting Kenya and then spread to the Somali and non-Somali population primarily through the unvaccinated:

Three case-patients had unknown vaccination status, 1 was vaccinated before the recommended age (11 months), and 1 was a health care worker who was thought to be immune (IgG-positive documented >10 years previously). Sixteen of 21 (76%) were unvaccinated; 7 of 16 (44%) were too young for routine vaccination. Nine (56%) children were age-eligible for routine vaccination but unvaccinated, 7 because of safety concerns owing to the misinformation that MMR vaccine causes autism; 6 of these children were of Somali descent. Two other children did not refuse but were behind on immunizations.

This is how the outbreak spread:

This outbreak began with an unvaccinated US-born child who was exposed to measles in an endemic region of Africa and developed disease on return to the United States. Low vaccination rates in the local Somali community, and subsequent exposures among susceptible homeless shelter residents, fueled ongoing transmission of measles. Delay of the source case-patient’s measles diagnosis also may have contributed to transmission before public health interventions. Although post-exposure prophylaxis, vaccination, and voluntary isolation and quarantine were implemented after the first known case, there was ongoing transmission in 1 of the 2 affected shelters. This transmission was attributable to several factors, including exposures that occurred before the first identified case, an exposure of an infant too young for MMR vaccine according to the routine schedule, as well as exposure of an infant who was too young for the early MMR vaccine outbreak recommendation. Other contributing factors were caused by the challenges of quickly assessing and documenting immune status in a large group of individuals living in a temporary, communal setting. These challenges allowed transmission to individuals who initially were assumed to be immune, but who lacked documentation. After ongoing transmission was seen, immune status testing was implemented for those who lacked documentation.

Notably, two-thirds of the cases in this outbreak were hospitalized, and many of these were hospitalized for respiratory complications in addition to dehydration, highlighting that measles is a severe infection even in well-resourced countries.

If measles is as harmless as antivaxers claim that it is, then why were two-thirds of the people stricken with measles in this outbreak hospitalized for complications? That's a rhetorical question for antivaxers, obviously.

The first question that faces Minnesota public health officials is, of course: How did we get here? The second is: What can be done to combat MMR fear-mongering? I can't help but note that the fear of the MMR that is so prevalent among Somali immigrants in Minnesota, while primarily about the MMR, is bleeding over to other vaccines. Some Somali immigrants are starting to show susceptibility to the "too many too soon" myth and, as a result, spacing out the remaining vaccines other than the MMR that they are willing to administer to their children, believing that early vaccination can "damage an infant's language skills." Basically, if you live in Minnesota, combatting antivaccine and anti-MMR views in the Somali immigrant community is imperative. Even if you don't live there, given that the Twin Cities area is a hub of national and international transportation, measles could be as short as a quick plane flight to where you live.

So let's look at how we got here. Andrew Wakefield has his fingerprints all over this, but it didn't start with him. As is his usual MO, he opportunistically took advantage of a situation, as he did when he discovered that Brian Hooker had been recording telephone conversations with a disgruntled CDC scientist.

2008: Autism in the Somali immigrant community

The story of how the myth that MMR causes autism became so firmly entrenched among Somalis living in Minnesota began sometime around 2008, with a cluster of autism cases among the community and a news story, as described by Bahta et al. in Minnesota Medicine:

Parents in Minnesota’s Somali community have voiced concern that their children are disproportionately affected by autism spectrum disorder (ASD) compared with children of other ethnicities. Many in the community blame the MMR vaccine. In an August 2008 news story on WCCO-TV, one parent was quoted as saying, “It’s the vaccines.”

Shortly after the story aired, the Minnesota Department of Health reached out to members of the Somali community to gather more information. Health department staff attended meetings with Somali parents, many of whom were unfamiliar with ASD. Repeatedly, they stated that they don’t even have a word for autism in their language. In telling her story, one mother reported that in their attempt to understand ASD, she and others discovered groups that supported the claim that vaccines, particularly MMR, cause autism. Misinformation can spread rapidly in the Somali community, which has a rich oral tradition of passing information to one another. It is now widely accepted among Somali Minnesotans that MMR is to blame for autism.

The antivaccine movement was all over this story in 2008. For example, David Kirby, author of the book Evidence of Harm: Mercury in Vaccines and the Autism Epidemic: A Medical Controversy, which was one of the early works using pseudoscience to link thimerosal in vaccines to autism was writing articles like 'Autism May Be Caused By “Chemical Exposures”' specifically about the Somali community in Minnesota, with a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" that the "idea that 'chemical exposures' (vaccine related or otherwise) might cause autism still brings virtual apoplexia to certain scientific circles." He had previously hammered the same theme on the antivaccine blog Age of Autism, noting from the data presented that "rate of autism among Somali children in the public schools had been reported at 1 in 28 kids" and that the "80 or so Somali parents who attended were disappointed, by all accounts, that Dr. Punyko had no way to tell them if autism among their children was, as they strongly suspect, more common than among non-Somalis the same age."

But was autism more than twice as common among the American-born children of Somali immigrants, as the data linked to above suggest? In early 2009, the Minnesota Department of Health released a study of autism among Somali immigrants. It is a substantial read. Here are a couple of key findings, which, as is often the case in studies of autism compared to parental perception of autism prevalence, are not as clear as the prevalent belief among the Somali community in Minnesota or as the antivaccine movement latched onto:

The administrative prevalence for three and four year old Somali children was significantly higher than for non-Somali children. This is consistent with the perceptions of the community that a larger number of Somali children were participating in ASD programs. Because of the study’s limitations, it is not proof that more Somali children have autism than other children; however, it does raise an important question about why Somali children are participating in this program more than other children.

The relative difference between Somali and non-Somali administrative prevalence decreased markedly over the three years covered by the study. It is unclear if this is an identification issue, a change in parental awareness for the need for developmental screening or some other issue.

Administrative prevalence rates for the Asian and Native American groups were found to be “strikingly low.” The reasons for these low rates are unknown, but they could be important to understanding whether the rate of ASD is higher among Somali children or underestimated among other children. In other words, the seemingly low prevalence rate among Asian and Native American children may artificially boost the comparative rate among Somali children, distorting a true understanding of all groups involved.

So, yes, administrative prevalence of autism was higher among Somali-Americans in Minnesota, but there were a lot of issues that made it difficult to use these data to determine for sure whether actual autism prevalence was higher, not the least of which was that as was noted in Left Brain, Right Brain, Department of Education data are not reliable for tracking autism. Jim Laidler made the same point in a publication in Pediatrics in 2005. Indeed, the most recent study of autism in the Somali-American community in Minneapolis was published in 2016 and found that Somali children were as likely to be identified with an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) as white children but that Somali children with ASD were significantly more likely to have an intellectual disability than children with ASD in all other racial and ethnic groups. Meanwhile, Steve Novella examined the cluster and proposed other potential causes for it, if even there was a cluster, such as vitamin D deficiency or a founder effect. Of course, as I pointed out above, it appears that children born to Somali immigrants are no more likely to be diagnosed with autism than white children; so there wasn't even a cluster there. Unfortunately, it took eight years to figure that out.

By long before then, the damage had been done and the seed of distrust in the MMR and other vaccines had been planted by antivaxers. Over the next several years, as you will see, antivaxers nurtured that seed until it blossomed in the form of measles outbreaks.

Enter Andrew Wakefield

It's not clear exactly when Andrew Wakefield first made contact with the Minnesota Somali community, but I do know that Age of Autism was on the case as early as August 2008 and that the founder of the antivaccine group Generation Rescue J.B. Handley published "An Open Letter to the Somali Parents of Minnesota" in which he told them it was the vaccines and that they can't trust the local health authorities. He even went so far as to urge them to declare a "state of emergency within your community and create a new vaccine schedule for your kids." Meanwhile, also as early as August 2008, David Kirby had been writing stories like 'Is Autism an “American Disease?” Somali Immigrants Reportedly Have High Rates.'

I do know for sure from media accounts and triumphant blog posts in Age of Autism that he met multiple times with the community and its leaders between 2010 and 2011 and that he appears to be still intermittently in contact. For instance, here is one contemporaneous account in local media from 2010. It was a time when he proposed as "study" of autism in Somali immigrants and promised to raise funds for it, something he appears never to have done. At the same time he sold the study this way:

Minnesota Somalis worried about autism rates among their children recently invited controversial British researcher Andrew Wakefield to Minneapolis to talk to their community.

At a Somali community meeting in Minneapolis, Wakefield asked his audience to participate in a study. He told about a hundred people gathered at a Somali-owned restaurant that they could help find the cause of autism.

"It is solvable, it has a cause, it had a beginning and it must have an end," Wakefield said. "We cannot accept the damage that is being done to all of these children. It is completely unacceptable and the suffering you're going through."

At the same talk, Wakefield claimed that there were no known cases of autism in Somalia, characterized in the story as an "anecdotal observation many Somalis confirm." It staggers the mind that Wakefield would make such a claim (OK, actually, it doesn't, given how big a liar Wakefield is), but it does not stagger the mind that Minnesota Somalis would find such a claim credible. Somalia is a poor country, and it does not stretch the imagination to speculate that most people living there are unfamiliar with autism. Nor does it bend credibility too much to observe that a Third World country is unlikely to have the same sort of screening and support programs for autism that we have in the US and other developed countries and that in such countries most cases of autism other than the most severe would go undiagnosed. Indeed, even the severe cases might well be diagnosed as mental retardation rather than autism.

Be that as it may, the cluster of autism in 2008 led to perceptions like this one:

She recalled a Somali mother who spoke at a public health meeting at the Brian Coyle Community Center some years ago. She had given birth to several healthy children in Africa, but her first child in the United States showed autism symptoms at an early age.

Wakefield visited Minneapolis again right in the middle of the 2011 measles outbreak to give a talk at a Somali restaurant. It was noted at the time that there were "a number of vocal pediatricians and doctors of Somali descent trying to speak out about this" but that distrust of health authorities was very high and local antivaccine groups like the Vaccine Safety Council of Minnesota were actively influencing Somalis. They still are. In 2016, for instance, the VSCM board member Patti Carroll published a warning to Somali parents that the Minnesota Department of Health "schools professionals to persuade Somali parents to give their children the MMR vaccine, despite clear opposition."

Gee, you say that as though it were a bad thing.

That's the problem, of course. Antivaxers are opportunistic in the extreme. If they see a population who are vulnerable to their disease-promoting message, they will pounce, and it's always about the vaccines. They saw a story of a possible autism cluster among the children of Somali immigrants in Minnesota. Where scientists see such a story and ask "Is the cluster real and not spurious?" and "If it's real, what might be causing it?" antivaxers see such a story and assume it absolutely, positively must be the vaccines. In this particular case, they took advantage of a newly arrived immigrant community's lack of knowledge about autism and vaccines, its tradition in which information is primarily transmitted orally, and the distrust some of its members had for the local health authorities. The results are still playing out in catastrophically low MMR uptake and measles outbreaks.

Over the weekend, it got even worse, as a coalition of antivaccine groups gathered together to tell the Somali immigrant population that the "the epidemic is autism, not measles":

As Minnesota confronts its second measles outbreak in seven years, public health officials are battling to contain the disease while also trying to educate parents in the face of an organized opposition.

As happened in 2011, anti-vaccine activists are reaching out to Minnesota’s Somali community, where both outbreaks have been centered, with messages that reinforce the discredited belief that vaccines cause autism.

On Sunday afternoon, a coalition of anti-vaccine organizations plans a meeting at the Brian Coyle Community Center on Minneapolis’ West Bank in an effort to bring their message to Somali families, saying “The epidemic is autism, not measles.”

Just what the Minnesota Somali immigrant community needs.

What can be done?

As every source I've read over the years about the Minnesota Somali community and vaccines has stated, suspicion and fear of the MMR vaccine are now very much entrenched and will be very difficult to reverse. Indeed, it's been pointed out:

Minnesota Department of Health staff found that fear of autism was often the reason for parents’ refusal to have their children vaccinated. Highly educated Somali Minnesotans are not exempt from this fear. As one Somali educator admitted, “My children did not get the MMR; my evidence is the Somali children I see who have autism.”

Parents who cited fear of autism as the reason for their vaccine hesitancy told health department staff that they received their information mostly from other Somali Minnesotans. Being told that MMR does not cause autism was not satisfactory for many parents because no one could tell them what does cause autism. Yet, when asked whom they would trust for health information, nearly all said they trusted their health care provider. And a significant number who refused vaccinations said they would reconsider their decision if they were given more information.

Parents of children diagnosed with ASD were articulate about their belief in an association between MMR and autism and sometimes also implicated receipt of multiple vaccines as the cause of their child’s autism. Some Somali parents have come to realize that autism and vaccines are unrelated, but they are in the minority.

Vaccine hesitant Somali parents thus resemble our own native-grown antivaxers and vaccine hesitant parents in many ways. Many are highly intelligent and educated. They get their misinformation about vaccines and autism from their peers more than from medical authorities. Also, it is the parents who have children diagnosed with ASD who are the most passionate and persuasive in arguing that vaccines are linked with autism, and, because of the low rate of measles (thanks to the MMR) many Somali parents view autism as a greater threat to their children than the measles and base their decisions about vaccines on that misperception. One difference is that, unlike many of our native antivaxers, Somali immigrants generally hold the medical profession in high esteem and are thus more open to being influenced by physicians and other clinicians. Actually, I should be a bit more clear. American antivaxers generally distrust the medical profession, while American parents who are vaccine-hesitant tend to hold the medical profession in higher esteem.

Be that as it may the Minnesota Department of Health has been trying to meet the challenge of reaching Somali parents through outreach programs in the schools and day care centers aimed at increasing awareness of Somali children's growing vulnerability to vaccine-preventable diseases. Bahta et al note:

Finding ways to leverage the respect Somalis have for doctors and other health care professionals is challenging. In studies examining how clinicians can provide effective care to Somali patients, building trust has been identified as important. Two things that contribute to trust that are repeatedly cited in the literature are the availability of a competent interpreter and not feeling rushed by the clinician. Clinic policies such as ensuring that a professional interpreter is available, adding time to appointments when interpreters are needed, and consistently scheduling families with the same clinician can support efforts to build trusting relationships with Somali patients.

At their heart, strategies like these are no different than techniques used with the vaccine-hesitant of any race or nationality, adapted to Somali parents by including an interpreter. There's one area where the Minnesota Somali community might be a bit different, though:

They also want clear direction from their physicians. Providing parents with options may confuse them. A statement such as, “We can give your child the vaccine today, or if you want, we can wait,” may be perceived by the parent as meaning that the clinician also has reservations about vaccines or thinks that either choice is acceptable. One Somali interpreter described an interaction this way: “When the mother told the doctor that she did not want her child to get the triple-letter vaccine, the doctor said, ‘OK.’” The interpreter was worried that the parent thought the doctor agreed that the MMR vaccine wasn’t needed or that he, too, was worried about its effects.

This is different from American parents, who tend to resent being told too firmly what to do and want to make their own decisions. Again, what this shows is the importance of flexibility in dealing with vaccine hesitant parents and how strategies and messaging, although generally sharing the same broad themes, have to be adapted to the specific population being targeted. It's also important to remember that Minnesota Somalis are not monolithic. Although anti-MMR views predominate and antivaccine views have become common, there have been (and still are) members of the community who are joining forces with Minnesota health officials to push back.

Unfortunately, progress is likely to be slow, as changing entrenched beliefs is difficult and requires a sustained, targeted effort. In the meantime, the children of the Minnesota Somali community will remain vulnerable to measles and potentially other vaccine-preventable diseases and are likely to serve as the nidus for further outbreaks until the MMR uptake rate can be raised back to what it was in 2004. Remember, it took the UK many years to lift its MMR uptake level back to somewhere near where it was before Wakefield, aided and abetted by the tabloid press, caused the MMR panic. There's no reason to expect that a similar recovery will take any less time in Minnesota.

Sadly, measles is the gift that keeps on giving, and nobody is better than giving it than Andrew Wakefield and his acolytes. The Somali immigrant community in Minnesota is now finding that out.

oracknows Sun, 04/30/2017 - 21:00

Tags

autism

Politics

What makes a physician become an antivaxer? (Part 2)

oracknows — Fri, 21 Apr 2017 08:25:34 +0000

What makes a physician become an antivaxer? (Part 2)

Yesterday, I discussed a topic that has vexed me ever since long before I started this blog, namely the topic of how physicians are seduced by pseudoscience and ultimately embrace it whole-heartedly. The kinds of pseudoscience I've seen physicians embracing are many, including climate science denialism and creationism, but the ones that most interest me are ones that physicians should know better than to embrace. I'm referring, of course, to pseudoscience related to the medical profession, such as various forms of medical quackery (which, alas, have found all too cozy a home in medicine to the point of even becoming part of a specialty called integrative medicine) and antivaccine beliefs. Yesterday's post addressed the question of antivaccine beliefs, but much of my discussion could have applied to many forms of pseudoscience that doctors all too frequently embrace.

The discussion after yesterday's post was more voluminous and involved than I had expected. I love it when that happens, and, especially when such discussions are not invaded by our resident troll sockpuppet Travis Schwochert impersonating old commenters. It got to the point where I realized that I had left out one very powerful motivating factor for physicians. Well, there are actually two that I didn't discuss that much. Money is one, but that one tends to apply only to physicians who have discovered that quackery can be lucrative. The second one is related, but not the same, as one that I discussed yesterday. Both flow from ego gratification.

You'll remember that yesterday I discussed the case of Dr. Douglas Mackenzie, a plastic surgeon who has become very antivacccine, so much so that he's now doing promotional work for the antivaccine propaganda movie VAXXED. I have no evidence that he makes any money off of antivaccine views, and from his interview I concluded that much of his motivation for "going antivax" flows from his self-image as a "maverick," as someone who can "think for himself" and "do his own research," and the sense of superiority that comes from viewing himself that way. In Dr. Mackenzie's world, he is a free thinker, someone who doesn't follow the rest of his sheeple colleagues, whom he contemptuously describes as having been "brainwashed" about vaccines. He brags about having read not just books by antivaccine "thought leaders" (if you can call it thinking) Andrew Wakefield or Suzanne Humphries but also having the "other side" in the form of books by Paul Offit. Of course, the very fact that he thought that Wakefield and Humphries trump Offit tells you all you need to know about his critical thinking skills (i.e., that they are very weak indeed), but there's another reason he was drawn to people like Wakefield and Humphries. They speak his language. They view themselves as being apart from the "herd," and therefore better than the herd, as well. Mackenzie saw that and it resonated with him. Against that shared arrogance, Dr. Offit's low-key defense of the scientific consensus never had a chance right from the very beginning. It doesn't matter whether Dr. Mackenzie makes any money off of antivaccine views,

But there's another reward of bucking the scientific consensus besides feeding one's egotistical view of oneself as being a better, freer thinker than one's colleagues and the rest of the scientific community, and that's adulation. Before I return to antivaccine physicians, let's take a look at a cancer quack, Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski. He's a trifecta of reasons for embracing pseudoscience in not only does he make a lot of money selling his antineoplastons, but he also clearly shares Dr. Mackenzie's self-image of being better, more innovative, and more of a free thinker than the rest of the medical profession. It's a character trait that he's clearly had since he was very young. Then there's the adulation. Burzynski's patients (at least the few who survive) adore him. They believe that he's curing cancer that can't be cured, and their worship of him is such that they immediately react to any perceived threat to him. They did it in the 1990s when the FDA was prosecuting Burzynski, and they recently did it again when the Texas Medical Board brought action against him to strip him of his medical license. In the process, Burzynski has rubbed elbows with admiring celebrities and politicians. One fan, Eric Merola, became so enamored of Burzynski that he made not just one but two propaganda films about him. Clearly, Burzynski loves the attention and thrives on it, viewing criticism and legal actions taken against him as "persecution" that geniuses suffer as a result of their genius.

Then there's Andrew Wakefield. In the small, loony world of the antivaccine movement, he is the equivalent of a rock star. (Better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven, I guess.) Parents (particularly mothers) who believe that vaccines caused their child's autism basically worship the ground he walks on. Whenever he attends a rally, an antivaccine meeting disguised as a medical meeting, or any antivaccine event, he is surrounded by sycophants, toadies, and lackeys, as well as adoring fans. Like Burzynski, Wakefield views himself as superior to the rest of the medical profession, as someone who doesn't "follow the herd" and listens to parental concerns that the medical profession is ignoring. Never mind that the medical profession isn't ignoring the concerns of parents who believe in the antivaccine pseudoscience that concludes that vaccines cause autism; it's just that the message it is telling parents is not one they want to hear. Responsible physicians have to base their treatment and utterances in science, and science has come to a conclusion that these parents reject utterly. Wakefield, in contrast, panders to these parents' views, and, because they view him as having suffered for his "apostasy" with respect to vaccines, they admire him. To show you how much antivaxers love Andy, I like to cite this article from over five years ago:

“To our community, Andrew Wakefield is Nelson Mandela and Jesus Christ rolled up into one,” says J. B. Handley, co-founder of Generation Rescue, a group that disputes vaccine safety. “He’s a symbol of how all of us feel.”

Since losing his medical license, Wakefield has depended on his followers for financing and for the emotional scaffolding that allows him to believe himself a truth-teller when the majority of his peers consider him a menace to medicine. The fact that his fans have stood by him through his denunciation may seem surprising, but they may find it easier to ignore his critics than to reject their faith in him. After all, his is a rare voice of certainty in the face of a disease that is, at its core, mysterious.

Note that Handley was being utterly unironic when he said that, nor was he exaggerating. Many antivaxers view Andrew Wakefield just that highly, and over the last 19 years since he first burst onto the international scene with his case series linking autism with the MMR vaccine (which is now known to be fraudulent) Wakefield's ego has grown in proportion to that worship.

Looking at cases like Wakefield and Burzynski (and several others not listed here), it can't be overemphasized how much of a factor ego is in motivating physicians to become antivaccine (or quacks). Physicians in particular are prone to the Dunning-Kruger effect, in which they have far more confidence in their knowledge and mastery of a topic than is justified, and many physicians like to view themselves as superintelligent and able to master virtually any topic on their own if they just put their mind to it; e.g., Dr. Mackenzie. Alternatively, they discover something and can't let it go when it becomes clear that it isn't the breakthrough that they thought it was. Either way, embracing pseudoscience feeds not only the physician's self-image as being open-minded and "apart from the herd," but it can also bolster the physician's self-image as a "healer" who takes his patient's concerns more seriously than other doctors or who can do things for their patients that other doctors can't. Add to that the fact that, in some cases, there's a lot of money to be made, and it's not surprising that physicians, particularly those with personality traits possessed by Wakefield and Burzynski (and many others) are attracted to quackery like moths to the flame.

oracknows Fri, 04/21/2017 - 04:25

Tags

cancer

Pseudoscience

andrew wakefield

antivaccine

Dunning-Kruger effect

Stanislaw Burzynski

vaccine

cancer

https://hsp.org/sites/default/files/2189-3133_b5f20_1.jpg

Arguably, due to a physicians extensive schooling and training, they are more susceptible to the Dunning-Kruger effect then most. Personally I've run into a significant percentage of people in my line of work with near the same experience, education, and training that think they know more then they do. I was likely guilty of the same hubris, but I have come to the belief that my knowledge is also only covering about 50% of the topic as is currently understood. I am out of date. How many physicians are willing to admit to others, much less themselves, that they are unable to keep up with the current body of knowledge, even in their own general specialty. Orac is a Breast Cancer surgeon and researcher. I'd be willing to bet that he would acknowledge gaps in his knowledge of his specialty. Wakefield, Carson, Burzynski, et al are unwilling to admit to not having all the answers, or that they are basing their conclusions off of faulty premises. Ego is a wonderful motivator.

This level of arrogance also seems to correlate with stepping outside your area of expertise. I don't know if it just takes this kind of arrogance to be willing to confidently reject expert consensus outside their area of expertise or if it's easier to be arrogant when you do not know enough to understand the nuances. But note the lack of doctors of infectious diseases, virologists, etc' among these doctors - with Dr. Obukhanych, Ph.D., the only immunologist, and she was young in her career, with little established credentials, and no clinical experience when she decided to reject her training and embrace pseudo-science.

Getting away with fraud for 12 years and hoodwinking the Lancet might count for something with Wakefield's ego.

Does Orac's use of pseudo-scientific language (i.e., ego) bring understanding?

I submit that pseudoscience, in many forms, is an important aspect of our history and culture.

As Orac has demonstrated, the language of pseudoscience can be a persuasive communication tool.

In the complicated world of medicine, it may be healthy to practice science and pseudoscience in an effort to "DO NO HARM".

As a someone who studied biology I think it's a shame these medics who want to be apart from the herd don't suffer the natural consequences of that, namely getting taken down by predators.

This level of arrogance also seems to correlate with stepping outside your area of expertise. I don’t know if it just takes this kind of arrogance to be willing to confidently reject expert consensus outside their area of expertise or if it’s easier to be arrogant when you do not know enough to understand the nuances.

As a Ph.D. physicist, I resemble that remark. Like most physicists, I tend to approach problems using the simplest model that works, and only add complexity when it is shown to be necessary. There is a reason we tell jokes about spherical cows: that's only a slight exaggeration of how many physicists operate.

However, a good physicist has to understand the limitations of that approach, especially when venturing into a different field. I find it helpful for gaining a layman's understanding of many topics, but I am also aware that there are lots of nuances I am not aware of until I get something wrong by ignoring them. I will admit that there are too many physicists who don't get this.

At least physicists are taught the notion that they might be wrong because of some nuance they have overlooked. Many doctors never get that training in the first place, and they graduate into a culture where doctors are considered authority figures (much more so than Ph.D. holders),

Engineers, too, have a strong susceptibility to the Dunning-Kruger effect, and for similar reasons as physicians.

Ego gratification was basically what I was trying to get across with my comment yesterday. Having a great deal of confidence is necessary if you want to make a discovery, but it leads you astray when you go outside your expertise. (See Nobel disease).

I've seen experience go both ways in science. Sometimes having lots of it can lead to overconfidence but it can also give you an appreciation for what you don't know. I think it depends upon your ego.

with Dr. Obukhanych, Ph.D., the only immunologist, and she was young in her career, with little established credentials, and no clinical experience

I'm not sure how Tetyana could ever have gained "clinical experience" – she's not an M.D. who specialized in immunology, just some random Ph.D.

One good example of the Dunning-Kruger effect is Marilyn vos Savant, the holder of highest recorded IQ according to the Guinness Book of Records.

She took a job writing a question and answer column, and while she had some great hits, she had some serious misses. Back in the day, a bunch of the worst were gathered up here -
http://www.wiskit.com/marilyn/

I would hate read her column* up until sometime around 2010, and noted that she had pretty much given up on factual Q&A and moved on to brain teasers and opinion questions. Dunno what she's done in the last few years - I don't get her column and frankly don't miss it.

vos Savant isn't a specialist in any particular field, so, in this case, anyway, being an expert isn't necessary to suffer from DK. It can strike generalists as well.

*I'd made a few minor contributions to documenting her wrongness in a couple forums, and was looking for more.

I don’t get her column and frankly don’t miss it.

Her site seems to be moribund (at least, nobody has bothered to change the copyright footer since 2014). but this wishy-washy defense of "GMO labeling" failed to impress me. I've heard the name, but it must have been quite some time ago.

re DK and vicinity

I've heard that a new book, Illusion of Knowledge ( or suchlike) discusses how those who know little believe in themselves ( concerns access to computers and lack of reflection as being indicative).
I haven't seen it but saw an interview with the authors.

Illusion of Knowledge ( or suchlike)

Is it The Knowledge Illusion? The subtitle raises a red flag for me, although it certainly can be hell to be psychologically alone.

At least physicists are taught the notion that they might be wrong because of some nuance they have overlooked.

Only a tiny decision to decide when that doesn't apply; that's why there are so many good physicists who are also biology cranks.

I think that strong human emotions play an even bigger role in antivaccine and woo circles than already sketched here. The problems with emotions as a driving force is that they're powerful, appeal to almost anyone (contrary to scientific arguments), and are largely immune (pun intended) to rationality and common sense. These doctors-gone-antivaccine may be so completely addicted to the warm bath of adulation of their fans and their own feeling of rogue power that they are no longer capable of objective thought and proper functioning, at least with respect to the subject at hand; in a way, they have a similar problem as doctors who become addicted to prescription medicines: they think they know what they're doing, but in reality they're way down the wrong path.
Then again, the antivaccine movement has little else but emotion to support its message; they sure as hell don't have facts or science on their side. Unfortunately, an appeal to emotion is as already said a powerful means of convincing and manipulating people. When parents of an autistic child believe that vaccinesdidit, and you say that you disagree with them, an often heard accusation is that you're a heartless person, without any empathy for those poor suffering people... Which of course is untrue, but somehow it is still difficult to get rid of this emotional smear, and convince people that you absolutely care about their plight, but just disagree about the cause.
And I'm afraid that rational education isn't enough to solve this very human problem.

Then there’s Andrew Wakefield. In the small, loony world of the antivaccine movement, he is the equivalent of a rock star. (Better to rule in hell than to serve in heaven, I guess.) Parents (particularly mothers) who believe that vaccines caused their child’s autism basically worship the ground he walks on. Whenever he attends a rally, an antivaccine meeting disguised as a medical meeting, or any antivaccine event, he is surrounded by sycophants, toadies, and lackeys, as well as adoring fans.

Yes. Andrew Wakefield is the Jimmy Page of the antivaccine movement. Very much so. Every rally that I've gone two I've seen at least three pairs of knickers thrown in his general direction.

This is basically a repeat from my comment yesterday, but anti-vaccine doctors, at least those who see patients at all, cater to a high-selected form of patients. None that I know of work in an ER or ICU where they ever might encounter a child with a vaccine-preventable illness. As such, they rarely have any corrective for their quackery.

If ORAC decided to "think for himself" with breast surgery, unless he was very good or very lucky, reality would soon correct him. In contrast, anti-vaccine doctors spend most of their time on stage and making movies patting themselves on the back for being "awake." The consequences of their woo are dealt with by anonymous docs who "follow the herd."

@Yvette

Unfortunately, there are bad apples in every profession. Some are much better at routing out the charlatans than others.

I find the medical profession, especially in some of the more "high-priced" areas, like plastic surgery, not the best when it comes to policing their own.....

Human behavior and 'mindsets' are complex as hell, and simple models – including 'modified Dunning-Kruger'* or even "ego gratification" – don't get you very far. They just refine the question a bit. E.g., why would physicians find themselves in a state where the drive for ego gratification leads to promoting rank anti-vax pseudoscience or cancer quackery? There are a number of ways to be 'brave maverick doctor'. Why these? OK, there are fewer ways to gain 'rock star' status. Why then, do these folks have a need so strong they'll descend into that particular hell, not just to go beyond being a valued skilled session musician in heaven, or even a mere 'rock star', but all the way to Elvis – not just a superstar, but a King.

Note that divergence from something Orac takes as a base assumption is implicit in my questions. I don't think "physicians are seduced by pseudoscience" at all. First, it's not 'seduction', coming from the outside in. It's pursuit of some perverted version of basic, 'normal' human need, proceeding from what is likely some form of 'lack' linked to something listed in the DSM. Second, the pseudo-science is just coming along for the ride. In and of itself, the particulars of it's wrongnesses have no seductive appeal, except perhaps as markers of the power displayed in getting around them.

I think the appeal, such as it is, is more generic: If you have a background education in something like medical science that claims a sort of universal, depersonalized, 'objective', hard-fact special knowledge, then that's what you have to challenge and overthrow to exult and distinguish yourself in terms of your own 'will' – or perhaps compensation for your sub-conscious desperate weaknesses. If that's the case, we would expect physicians to be more susceptible to the depths of this particular woo, and rather than the sort of DK that may infect engineers or physicists stepping away from their fields – the proximity of the woo to the woo-ists field of expertise would be key to the display of authority, of both exceptional knowledge/ability and indomitable will.

Eric Lund, I could tell you some stories about spherical cows on frictionless planes, or more pointedly, someone who said it was perfectly reasonable to model red blood cells as spheres (in a moving fluid!).
But at least the models physicists use make more sense than the engineering lab that was described as "model a bridge as a spring and go hit it with a hammer".

Johnny @9 Marilyn vos Savant's column still runs in Parade magazine, that thing that comes free with the Sunday paper, bundled in with the ads and coupons.
Talk about lowest common denominator.
I used to like her column, but I can't decide if I got smarter (and older) or if it got dumber.

@ Yvette:

In writing my comment above, I was actually thinking of an MD who had gone to a very good med school, and practiced as an ER doc at a big urban hosp[ital before turning to homeopathy full-time, and ultimately attemping (rather comically) to market an iPhone app that would cure Ebola with sound waves. The sort of "correctives" you describe – the human tragedies that routinely show up in ERs and ICUs may cut too close the bone for some docs (not necessarily as direct experience, but perhaps as 'resonance'), and be exactly the truthg they're running away from. That probably wouldn't apply to someone like Bob Sears, who's basically just following the vocation of his whole family – I doubt there's one pathology that covers the terrain. But I'm betting what we're looking at in general is closer to some form of 'mental health issue' than 'stupidity', 'ignorance' or the other usual skeptic epithets. Which is not to say I'm suggesting die-hard woo-ists meet the threshold criteria for some sort of personality disorder. My guess is just that if we reconceived these as spectrum conditions, we'd find woo-ists average out distinctly some degree in such directions over the general population.

@ JustaTech

You got smarter. Her column was always dumb.

My 0.02 FWIW...My sense for science was learned the hard way in undergrad (an oral exam in front of 3 professors was required for graduation in physics, all was fair game) and grad school (not passing my candidacy exam the first time) how hard actual research can be, especially when critically reviewed by one's superiors. This was before I became a physician. Even if you're an "expert" in an area, it's darned hard to be "the expert". But for many of these AV physicians, they think all they have to do to be "the expert" is read some articles and then put out a non-peer reviewed book or web site. I'm pretty sure most 5th grade science fair projects would stump Bob Sears or Jay Gordon with their complexity.

# 12 Narad

it certainly can be hell to be psychologically alone

Just from the various blurbs about the book, I think you are misinterpreting that title. It is The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone. It seems to be about the “group” nature of cognition and knowledge. It does not seem to have anything to do with “loneliness” or “social isolation”, etc. The book looks like it is relevant to a discussion of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

From the blurbs and a quick look at the authors' C.V.s they may know what they are talking about. They really are cognitive scientists! Not a plastic surgeon talking about vaccines or a cardiologist writing about gluten-free diets.

@Yvette #16:

The consequences of their woo are dealt with by anonymous docs who “follow the herd.”

Or by the children of the antivaxxers.
Yesterday I read that a teenager in Portugal died from measles. Her mother (the father wasn't mentioned) was an antivaxxer.

One other motivation that drives some predominantly antivax physicians is the desire to be seen as a virtuous compromiser.

Thus we have pediatricians like Bob Sears, Paul Young and Jay Gordon who stroke their egos by telling us they are not like those hardcore antivaxers or "extremist" pro-immunization advocates.

No, they're reasonable guys* who are only interested in the welfare of their patients, doncha know, and not beholden to the dogma of the CDC or antivax zealots.

I'm reminded of a classic political cartoon from 1864, when the compromiser/appeaser George McClellan ran for President of the U.S., portraying both Lincoln and Jeff Davis as extremists who wanted to tear the country apart, while McClellan was the virtuous man trying to hold the nation together. Not many bought this self-serving claptrap.

Nor should anyone believe the physicians who claim to have studied both sides, and exclaim how they are pro-vaccine (within limits, of course) even while giving support to typical antivax nonsense.

*Speaking of reasonable guys, Jay Gordon recently tweeted that "ALL" children aged 3 and over should get the MMR. Maybe that's progress from the days when parents had to talk Jay into giving their kids the shot, but it also overlooks that the first MMR shot is recommended for children aged 12-15 months, who are more vulnerable than older kids to serious disease complications (not to mention their younger siblings and immunologically comprised contacts of all ages). And it sends a nice antivax dog whistle to those who believe that giving the MMR at 12-15 months causes autism.

#25,
Euronews' article says the girl wasn't vaccinated against measles "due to allergic conditions on the advice of a doctor".

The CDC says "Anyone who has ever had a life-threatening allergic reaction to the antibiotic neomycin, or any other component of MMR vaccine, should not get the vaccine."

If the "allergic conditions" referenced by Euronews didn't fall into that category, it's hard to see how they justified not getting the shot.

The Portuguese outbreak has been linked by government officials to children unvaccinated by parental wishes:

http://outbreaknewstoday.com/measles-cases-rise-portugal-teen-death-rep…

See, you brainwashed pro-vaxers? Troels @ 27 brings the truth! The teenager in Portugal was just one of those unfortunate, inferior offscourings of evolution that were left vulnerable to measles by a decline in herd immunity. That makes it all right! Lighten up!

(In these Travis-infested days I guess I need </sarcasm> tags.)

#29,

Troels @ 27 brings the truth!

No, in order to bring truth, I would need to know what it is to begin with. All I know is according one news outlet the parents claims to have a valid reason for not vaccinating against measles.

(In these Travis-infested days I guess I need tags.)

Not Travis.

Not sure that you're right about Wakefield's "Dr", but I'd like to hear the argument.

As I understand it, in British medicine, "Dr" is a courtesy title for a medical practitioner. It's not a courtesy title for someone who has graduated medical school.

As I'm sure most people know, in Britain and various other countries taking it's lead, medicine is an undergraduate degree, not a doctoral degree. An American MD, on the other hand, will not only be a medical practitioner, but will actually have a doctoral level degree, on top of an undergraduate degree (usually in science).

So, given that Wakefield isn't (and never will be again) a medical practitioner, and has no doctorate, on what basis do you say he's entitled to the courtesy title?

I'm rather interested in that, not least since I acquired a doctoral degree, albeit honorary (which in any event are generally harder to earn, and are certainly more fun on the day).

All I know is according one news outlet the parents claims to have a valid reason for not vaccinating against measles.

More telling, the same report says that both their younger and older child are vaccinated. Given that measles is very infectious, and there are no reports that those other kids were infected, it sounds plausible that the teenager may well have had a valid medical reason to not be vaccinated.

@31 (Brian Deer)

Doctor Deer,

Ah, Orac hates this sort of stuff, but here's what the World's Greatest On-Line Compendium of All Knowlege says on the subject:

"In the United Kingdom . . . the title Dr is generally used both for those who hold doctoral degrees and for registered medical practitioners. History has dictated the use of the courtesy title Dr by physicians and general practitioners. However, surgeons do not use the title of Dr but, due to the origins of surgery with the barber surgeons, instead use Mr, Mrs, Ms, Miss, etc. This custom applies to surgeons of any grade who have passed the appropriate exams and is not the exclusive province of consultant-level surgeons. . . . Physicians, on the other hand, when they pass their "MRCP(UK)" examinations, or equivalent, do not drop Dr but retain it, even as consultants. The status and rank of consultant surgeons, addressed as "Mister", and consultant physicians, addressed as "Doctor", is equivalent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_(title)#Usage_by_medical_practitio…

But of course we've been through this before.

Dr. brian

Sorry Orac. Got to weigh in.

In the United States the word doctor is synonymous with physician, even though it actually has little to do with medicine (doctor is an academic title, not a professional one).

When Andrew Wakefield lost his medical license in the UK, he didn't stop being a physician. He's still one. He's just not licensed and can't actually practice medicine anymore. So for him to refer to himself as Doctor Wakefield simply reflects what he is: a trained physician. In the eyes of the public, that's enough. To many health care practitioners, that's enough (whether that's true for Orac I won't guess; I'm not a mind reader).

Whatever the reason, it doesn't ruffle my feathers to refer to Wakefield as "Doctor."

Honorary degrees are a bit different. They were supposed to recognize important contributions from people who didn't pursue an academic career path, but they've gotten to be fluff handed out to famous people to entice them to speak at commencement events.

But Brian, I'll happily call you doctor. You do good journalism. I'm a fan of your series on Septra as much as your work on Wakefield.

Just from the various blurbs about the book, I think you are misinterpreting that title. It is The Knowledge Illusion: Why We Never Think Alone. It seems to be about the “group” nature of cognition and knowledge. It does not seem to have anything to do with “loneliness” or “social isolation”, etc.

No, this is what I suspected. The disclaimer wasn't even needed, but I failed to attend to the subtitle.

In the United States the word doctor is synonymous with physician, even though it actually has little to do with medicine (doctor is an academic title, not a professional one).

Y'all are really making my head hurt.

In the United States the word doctor is synonymous with physician, even though it actually has little to do with medicine (doctor is an academic title, not a professional one).

A few years back there was a New Yorker cartoon with the caption, "Are you a real doctor, or merely a Ph.D.?"

In practice, dentists and veterinarians are also addressed as "Doctor". They go through analogous post-graduate training programs (at least in the US), so if an M.D. can be called "Doctor", I have no problem with these others being called "Doctor".

Conversely, I know at least one person who often travels internationally who has a Ph.D. but never admits to the airlines both that and his occupation. He is afraid that some flight attendant will see "Dr. [redacted], research physicist" on a flight manifest and incorrectly assume he's a physician. Which implies that the issue is hardly limited to the US.

However, there is an important difference between the M.D. and comparable degrees on the one hand, and Ph.D. and the equivalents on the other. To earn a Ph.D. you must perform a substantial piece of original research. The M.D., et al., have no such requirement. This is why many who want to go into medical research, including Orac, earn both degrees.

# 33 (brian)

That's what I thought. In this context, "Dr" is a courtesy title for a medical practitioner (your source adds 'registered'), which, on this authority, means that Wakefield isn't a doctor. I suppose I could ask the General Medical Council, but I'm not that bothered.

Wakefield is no longer "Dr Wakefield"

Thanks

@ Eric

"To earn a Ph.D. you must perform a substantial piece of original research." I have long been irritated by the use of "research" as a general descriptor of academic work. IMHO, the term should be "scholarship". I know they're used as synonyms now, and people refer to the kind of academic work I did as "research" all the time, but I think that hides an unfortunate bias, in both directions.

What I did was 'theory and criticism'. The task wasn't 'develop original knowledge' but 'develop original thought'. I always felt, first, sheepish toward lab/field/archive researchers that anyone used a term that rightly belongs to them for my 'think pieces' about the ideologies in Schwarzenegger action films or 80s music videos. At the same time, though, I felt more purely philosophical inquiries like mine were being inappropriately delegitimated. I mean, how is that 'think pieces' become discounted or not-counted for a degree titles "Doctor of Philosophy'. Especially when "substantial original research" can be valued, and rightly so, even if the authors pull no useful philosophy from their findings?

As to humanities Ph.D.s using the title "Doctor". My take was the any individual or academic institution that insisted on using the title was strictly second-rate. At 'good schools' you just assume all the professors have the highest credentials, and the non-Ph.D.s (MFAs for example) are so well qualified in what they do it would be silly to use some lower-status title. So no one is ever called 'Dr. Soenseau' just 'Prof. Soenseau', or by their first name. lest they be seen as doth protesting their mere degrees too much.

The one exception was one of my former flat-mates, who had "Dr." before her name on her checks because she'd just come out of a personal bankruptcy, and it helped her get the checks accepted at local stores.

If you haven't seen many already, some of the PhDs awarded in relation to the MMR issue in the UK are just scary in their thinness. Most often its doing various calculations on newspaper articles as the contribution to knowledge. Seemed to me that what was being marked was how the thesis was set out and referenced.

Although I disagree with Orac's position, this general exchange has been more than enough to convince me of the wisdom of shіtcanning the entire topic.

Most of my patients couldn't call me doctor even if they wanted to ;)

In the UK, anyone who has passed the medical degree qualification (MBChB, MBBS, BM or MBBCh) is entitled to call themselves or be called "doctor".
Those who pass the degree will be provisionally registered with the GMC, and only achieve full registration when they succesfully complete their pre-registration "internship" which is one year in duration.

Having registration (or being "licensed") allows a doctor to practice medicine. Without registration they cannot do this.

Wakefield is still a "doctor", but since he was stripped of his registration by the GMC he no longer has a license to practice.

Doctors who have retired, and have had their registration lapse, are still lallowed to call themselves "doctor".

Confusion also arises because "doctor" is not what is legally termed a "protected title" in the UK. Certain professions have what is called a "protected title" (eg "pharmacist", "chiropractor") and no-one is allowed to use those terms unless they are qualified in that profession. But not only medical doctors are "doctors" (dentitsts, veterinarians, PhDs) so the term does not have a protected status, which can lead to other quack types usurping the title.

The term "Doctor of Medicine" does however have protected status, and cannot be used by anyone else. Unfortunately Wakefield is still a "doctor of medicine".

"Come, come, we are not so far wrong, after all," said Holmes. "And now, Dr James Mortimer —

"Mister, sir, Mister — a humble M.R.C.S."

"And a man of precise mind, evidently."

"A dabbler in science, Mr Holmes, a picker up of shells on the shores of the great unknown ocean."

test

@ Narad :

I liked what I saw ( on television- I didn't read the book) because the researchers addressed how those with little knowledge believed that they knew much more than reality merited. They asked subjects to explain how things worked which was often revelatory of their dearth of knowledge. In addition, they found that access to computers might accelerate the effect and that ( self) reflective inhibited it.

OBVIOUSLY we at RI are painfully aware of the phenomenon.

@ Chris Hickie:

Take a peek at Kim's article today @ AoA.

My brother, who rarely uses his title (PhD) on letters, did so once in an effort to gain a little more access when asking questions about our grandmother's health on one occasion. He never actually *said* he was an MD, just called himself "Doctor" and used Cleveland Clinic letterhead and allowed the obvious confusion to happen. ;-) (He's a physicist. At the time, he was doing research on fMRI.)

@Calli Arcale: I went over to the scum hive and now I'm depressed. Paul Thomas, the so-called pediatrician, should have his license yanked since he's certainly not practicing medicine. He can go ahead and be a quack, just not make all science-based providers look bad.

My only happiness is knowing that I raised 2 healthy, fully UTD children who will make sure *their* children, if they should have any, will also be fully vaccinated, barring medical reasons not to be so.

Tomorrow, antivaxers march on Washington, and, boy, are they excited!

oracknows — Thu, 30 Mar 2017 05:00:39 +0000

Tomorrow, antivaxers march on Washington, and, boy, are they excited!

About five weeks ago, I took notice of an event that seems to be getting the antivaccine crankosphere a bit riled up and excited. I'm referring to the so-called "Revolution for Truth" march on Washington being organized by various antivaccine groups, who, emboldened by President Donald Trump's long, sordid history of expressing antivaccine views, his meeting with antivaccine agitator Andrew Wakefield in secret in August, and his meeting with antivaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. in January, really believe that now is their moment and that 2017 will be the antivaccine year. Thanks to, among others, Donald Trump, vaccine policy, which used to be a bastion of bipartisanship, is becoming dangerously politicized, with antivaccine conspiracy theories getting darker and darker. Given that this antivaccine march on Washington will take place tomorrow, I was curious to see what its proponents have been up to as the day nears.

On Sunday, this appeared on the Revolution for Truth Facebook page:

Not surprisingly, the first thing they want their demonstrators (and those who can't go) to do is to contact the White House and say:

Vaccine injuries are real and devastating. One in 68 children (1 in 42 boys) now has autism. Autism should be declared a national emergency and a higher priority. I support an independent vaccine commission.

This is, of course, typical antivaccine misinformation. Notice the implication that all of this autism is caused by vaccines, when the science is very clear that it is not. I also note that this "independent" vaccine commission that antivaxers want would not truly be "independent. When they say "independent," they mean a commission run by one of their own, like Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., which could call CDC and FDA witnesses to harass them with questions about vaccines and autism based in pseudoscience. The reason they're excited about an "independent vaccine commission" is because, after his meeting with then President-Elect Trump, RFK Jr, being RFK Jr., couldn't help but blab that the then Trump had asked him to chair just such a commission. Hilariously, the transition team quickly slapped him down, saying that no such offer had been made. Unfortunately, damage was done. It was bad enough that Trump would have met with such a die-hard antivaccine crank as RFK Jr. about vaccines and autism, no matter what the reason, and the possibility that Trump might have offered RFK Jr. the chair of an antivaccine commission with the imprimatur of the President on it was an excellent way to undermine confidence in vaccines.

Next up, Revolution for Truth wants antivaxers to contact their Senators and Congressional Representatives to demand that they subpoena CDC scientist William Thompson, a.k.a. the "CDC whistleblower" (at least since 2014, anyway). Thompson, of course, is a rather bitter, clueless man who appears to have had a falling out with his co-authors on one of the seminal papers looking for a correlation between MMR and autism—it didn't find one—because he believed that the way the report was written up was not sufficiently transparent about how it corrected for confounders in a subgroup where the study found an apparently elevated risk of autism associated with MMR vaccination. The story is too long to go into in much detail, but suffice to say that the association was almost certainly spurious, as it went away with more controls. Thompson apparently nursed a grudge for nearly a decade and, for whatever reason, decided to start unloading on and confiding in Brian Hooker, a biochemical engineer turned antivaxer and incompetent epidemiologist, providing him with the original data to mangle with a "reanalysis" so epically incompetent that a brand new journal actually retracted the paper.

Unfortunately for poor, clueless Dr. Thompson, Hooker recorded their conversations without his knowledge. Even more unfortunately for Thompson, somehow Andrew Wakefield got wind of the existence of those recordings, obtained them from Hooker, and then made a video featuring cherry picked quotes by Thompson venting to Hooker. Basically, the whole thing is, when objectively examined, a big nothingburger. However, because it confirms in antivaxers' fragile eggshell minds the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement, namely that there's evidence that vaccines cause autism that is being "covered up" by The Man, the "CDC whistleblower" conspiracy theory had legs. (Not surprisingly, Thompson's silence since lawyering up two and a half years ago only contributes to the conspiracy theory, with some antivaxers believing that The Man has gotten to Thompson.) While it was fascinating to watch close-up the birth of a new conspiracy theory, dealing with it has become a major headache for pro-science advocates because antivaxers have basically gone wild on social media over it and used it as a rallying point. Meanwhile, Andrew Wakefield and Del Bigtree have made an antivaccine propaganda movie, VAXXED, that has become a rallying point. Not surprisingly, a large part of the movie is about the "CDC whistleblower."

Since the last time I took note of this attempt to party like it's 2008, which was the last time there was an "major" antivaccine march on Washington; i.e., the "Green Our Vaccines" march, led by Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey. Only this time around, the cast of characters is different. Scheduled to speak at "Revolution for Truth" are: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Barbara Loe Fisher, Minister Tony Muhammad, Del Bigtree, Brian Hooker, PhD, Paul Thomas, MD, Judy Mikovits, PhD, Toni Bark, MD, Marcella Piper-Terry, Kent Heckenlively, Diane Hennacy Powell, MD, Sheila Lewis Ealey, Jennifer Margulis, PhD, Zen Honeycutt, Robert Moxley, Tami Canal, Sherrie Saunders, Jim Turner, and Alexis Baden-Meyer. We've met some of them before, but others we have not. For instance, I had never heard of Alexis Baden-Meyer before, but apparently her primary gig is anti-GMO, if her TruthOut page is any indication. That's not surprising, as anti-GMO and antivaccine go together like pizza and beer. Of course, in this case the beer and pizza are both crappy. Maybe I should say they go together like cat poop and a litter box. Robert Moxley, on the other hand, appears to be a criminal defense attorney in Wyoming (!) who also does civil litigation regarding—you guessed it!—"vaccine injury." Sherrie Saunders was a medic in the Army who has now gone antivaccine over her having given anthrax vaccine to soldiers and now thinks that the Gulf War syndrome is—surprise! surprise!—an adverse reaction to the anthrax vaccine due to "animal protein" in the vaccine. Not surprisingly, she's been interviewed by the VAXXED crew.

Not surprisingly, excitable fellow that he is, Kent Heckenlively is all fired up to go to the rally. Oddly enough, he's already provided his intended remarks, which to me would mean that his speech would be the perfect time for a bathroom or coffee break. He's also provided it in all caps, which is even more appropriate. I thought about typing out the excerpt I'm going to provide, because all caps bother me, but then I decided just to copy and paste because (1) all caps is very appropriate for anything Heckenlively writes; (2) I'm lazy; and (3) I was up late last night doing emergency surgery and don't have a lot of time before I have to leave for work. Get a taste of what attendees will be hearing:

IT WAS A BIT OF A SURPRISE TO FIND THAT THE SAME VILLAINS WHO HAD BEEN RESISTING AN HONEST INVESTIGATION INTO CHRONIC FATIGUE SYNDROME CALLED FOR BY DR. MIKOVITS, WERE THE ONES I HAD KNOWN FOR YEARS WERE RESISTING AN HONEST INVESTIGATION INTO AUTISM CALLED FOR BY DR. ANDY WAKEFIELD.

THAT’S WHY I WROTE THE BOOK, INOCULATED: HOW SCIENCE LOST ITS SOUL IN AUTISM, TO GIVE A BEHIND THE SCENES ACCOUNT OF NOT JUST WHISTLE-BLOWER, DR. WILLIAM THOMPSON’S CLAIM OF CORRUPTION AT THE CDC REGARDING VACCINES AND AUTISM, BUT TO GIVE A WIDER VIEW OF THE AMAZING CAST OF AVENGERS WHO ARE FIGHTING THIS ENORMOUS EVIL. I WANTED TO FOCUS ON DR. BRIAN HOOKER, WHO BEFRIENDED THE WHISTLE-BLOWER, AND IS A LIVING EXAMPLE OF HIS CHRISTIAN FAITH IN HOW HE LOVED THE SINNER WHO WAS DR. WILLIAM THOMPSON, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME HE HATED THE SIN. I WANTED TO HAVE A GOOD DEAL OF SPACE DEVOTED TO DR. ANDY WAKEFIELD, WHO HAS SUFFERED SO GRATLY, BUT TO WHOM WE ALL OWE SO MUCH.

A GREAT DEBT IS OWED TO ROBERT KENNEDY, JR., WHO COULD HAVE HAD A QUIET, PEACEFUL LIFE, TRYING TO GET MERCURY OUT OF FISH, BUT INSTEAD CHOSE TO TRY AND GET MERCURY OUT OF OUR KIDS, AND CALLED DOWN THE WRATH OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES ON HIS HEAD. AND I WANTED TO WELCOME NEW RECRUITS TO THE FOLD, LIKE MINISTER TONY MUHAMMAD FROM THE NATION OF ISLAM, A TRUE WARRIOR AND LION OF THE LORD.

YOU SEE, IT IS NOT SCIENCE WHICH OPPOSES US. IT IS A FEW EVIL AND TWISTED SCIENTISTS WHO HAVE FORGOTTEN THAT SCIENCE IS SUPPOSED TO MAKE THE LIFE OF HUMANITY BETTER, NOT LINE THE POCKETS OF THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES.

HONEST SCIENCE, SCIENCE WHICH IS IN ACCORD WITH THE PRINICPLES OF HUMANITY, WANTS TO ALLEVIATE SUFFERING. THAT IS THE KIND OF FIRECE DEVOTION I FOUND IN DR. JUDY MIKOVITS. IT IS THE SAME KIND OF DEVOTION WHICH DRIVES DR. ANDY WAKEFIELD. I KNOW THERE ARE OTHER SCIENTISTS OUT THERE WHO CAN YET REDISCOVER THE BETTER ANGELS OF THEIR NATURE AND JOIN OUR CAUSE.

AND SO MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS, I BELIEVE THAT SCIENCE CAN GIVE US THE ANSWERS AS TO HOW TO RESCUE OUR LOST CHILDREN. I THINK OF MY OWN DAUGHTER, JACQUELINE, EIGHTEEN YEARS OLD, WITH WHOM I HAVE NEVER HAD A CONVERSATION. I RAISE MY VOICE AGAINST SOME OF THE GREATEST POWERS IN THE LAND BECAUSE IN DOING SO I HOPE MY EFFORTS WILL ONE DAY HELP HER FIND HER VOICE. IF THAT MAKES ME AN OUTLAW, IF IT MAKES FRIENDS AND FAMILY MEMBERS TURN AWAY FROM ME, IF IT MAKES ME A NON-PERSON IN THE EYES OF THE MEDIA, IF IT MAKES ME A DEPLORABLE, SO BE IT. I WILL WEAR THAT NAME AS A BADGE OF HONOR.

THIS IS A GREAT CAUSE IN WHICH WE FIGHT, PERHAPS THE GREATEST OF OUR TIME. WE FIGHT FOR NOTHING LESS THAN THE SURVIVAL OF HUMANITY.

The "greatest" fight of our time? A fight for "nothing less than the survival of humanity"? It's just "evil and twisted" scientists who oppose us? (What's next? Dr. Evil cackling and brandishing a syringe?) I'll give Heckenlively credit. He sure does know how to exaggerate beyond all reality. I suppose that's to be expected from someone who likes to fancy himself as the Aragorn facing down the Dark Lord Sauron's hordes, even though his forces are hopelessly outnumbered, in the fantasy novel and movie The Lord of the Rings. It also fits with the overall tone of the march, which conflates "freedom" with the the ability to leave children unprotected against deadly diseases just because the marchers believe against all evidence that vaccines cause autism.

Meanwhile, Marco Cáceres, declaring the march as one of "few causes more fundamental," is quick to lower expectations:

The Mar. 31 rally will not involve the big numbers that have been seen at more recent rallies on Capitol Hill but it would be a mistake to misinterpret that fact as truly reflective of the size of the ever increasing numbers of Americans who are becoming enlightened about environmental risks to their health. It is worth noting that a significant number of people who would otherwise be at the event will be at home caring for children and other relatives who have been sickened or injured by the toxins in our environment, foods, and pharmaceutical products.

Anyone who remembers the "Green Our Vaccine" rally knows that it attracted, at most, a few hundred people. The "Revolution for Truth" rally might attract a bit more, given that Donald Trump is in office, but it won't be particularly big, either. That's because, even in the age of Donald Trump, the antivaccine movement remains a pathetic group of cranks. Unfortunately, the amount of mischief and harm it causes belies its size.

And then there's this, from an email on the Revolution for Truth organizing list:

Its going to be raining on Friday 3/31/2017!

As a result of the storm that is expected in Washington D.C. on Friday afternoon, we had to select a new venue for our Rally. Please plan accordingly for possible inclement weather in the morning. We will still meet at Lafayette Park at 9am to march to the Press Club starting at 9:30am.

After the protest at the Press Club, please plan to be at the JW Marriott in plenty of time for the 1:00pm start time to hear the incredible leaders who are joining forces to defend Health Freedom in America!

The current weather forecast appears to show a 90+% chance of rain, along with a thunderstorm. One hates to fall victim to the trap of anthropomorphizing the weather and ascribing causation to correlation, but it's nonetheless tempting to think that Mother Nature is trying to tell these cranks something. On the other hand, I have to be careful. Saying something like this only feeds their twisted sense of self-importance.

oracknows Thu, 03/30/2017 - 01:00

Tags

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

vaccines

Vaxxed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathetic_fallacy?wprov=sfsi1

Politics

I just read the rest of Heckenlively's rant, in which he seems to compare himself to Nelson Mandela. It's comedy gold.

I remain impressed by the eagerness with which the antivaxxers welcome Judy Mikovits to their collective bosom, in that she only took up the cause when she needed a new grift (after losing her previous XMRV scam for faking results too transparently).

I'm thinking of the protest against Microsoft, several years ago. As you know, Bill and Melinda Gates are huge supporters of vaccination, so antivaxxers decided to picket Microsoft.
Eighteen people showed up.
Not eighteen thousand, not eighteen hundred, eighteen.

Interestingly enough, I emailed Marco Cáceres because of some problems I saw with his piece on herd immunity. Needless to say, he has not responded and my comment on his blog is still "awaiting moderation". I guess he is too busy organising?

Well, rain also wrecked a planned "witches' hex" demonstration against Trump, so it seems Mother Nature is a capricious sort.

Their Facebook event page has several hundreds marked as "going", so I would also expect the turnout will not match expectations.

They appear to have rented the National Press Club again, as anyone can, and a few anti vaccine activists, including Dr. Toni Bark and Jennifer Margulis, appear scheduled to talk there before hand about the risks of vaccines. I wonder if we silll hear anything new.

Oh, and here is a response by a former military woman to Ms. Saunders' claims. Unsurprisingly, that video, too, is not reliable.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/vaxfencesitter.org/2016/10/29/vaxxed-tall-…

The current weather forecast appears to show a 90+% chance of rain, along with a thunderstorm. One hates to fall victim to the trap of anthropomorphizing the weather and ascribing causation to correlation, but it’s nonetheless tempting to think that Mother Nature is trying to tell these cranks something.

Sometimes called called the ' Pathetic Fallacy', I find it particularly satisfying on this occasion.

Badly Shaved MonkeY!!!

I blame my iPhone and my thick thumb

HONEST

You keep using that word, Mr. Heckenlively. I don't think it means what you think it means.

In particular, "honest science" does not mean "science that agrees with my preconceived notions," as Mr. Heckenlively seems to think. Quite the opposite: honest scientists go to great lengths to make sure they are not fooling themselves. It's much easier to fool yourself than to fool other people.

I suppose we should be grateful that Kent Heckenlively's speech/rant comes off as so unhinged and self-serving (what with references to "villains" and "evil", and promoting his book). That sort of thing plays well with hardcore antivaxers, but not so much with the news media and sane elements in Congress.* Kent himself recognizes this, but doesn't care. "IF IT MAKES ME A NON-PERSON IN THE EYES OF THE MEDIA, IF IT MAKES ME A DEPLORABLE, SO BE IT."

Sorry Kent, impressing the Donald won't be quite enough to reverse vaccine policies.

*who might also be a tad uneasy about lining up behind the Nation of Islam.

Sherrie Saunders was a medic in the Army who has now gone antivaccine over her having given anthrax vaccine to soldiers and now thinks that the Gulf War syndrome is—surprise! surprise!—an adverse reaction to the anthrax vaccine due to “animal protein” in the vaccine.

You gotta love all these competing hypotheses regarding what illnesses are caused by vaccines. Here I thought Gulf War Syndrome was caused by aluminium (per Christopher Shaw).

@3 Julian
Great. Now I feel dirty for being forced to tangentially agree with something the loons have come up with. MS should be boycotted for a number of reasons. Their reason isn't one of them, but MS and Bill Gates should pay for the evil it has inflicted on the world, and how far back they had set computing.

With any luck, this thunder storm will hit their audio system and short it out. If a loon babbles in the mall and no-one can hear it, was there really wasted oxygen?

Does anyone know who is actually behind this? I noted weeks ago that the Revolution4TRUTH website didn't have an "About Us" page and only listed a few, lame anti-vaccine clubs as supporters. Even on their "Donations" page you can't find out who you are donating to. They may be sending a check to Charlie Manson in his cell for all they know.
Yes, I'm aware that all these anti-vaccine clubs are all run by the same small group of grifters who create new "Organizations", with membership = 4, whenever the need arises.
But, who is actually the person behind this? Who thought it up? Who is running it? Who is the head honcho(s)? Who gets the "donations"?
Anybody know?

I'll also note that missing from their pathetic list of speakers is one Andrew Wakefield.
It seems that it has finally dawned on them that Wakefraud is box office poison outside their cloistered little anti-vax bubble. He's very good at rousing the party faithful and picking their pockets but in the outside world he is considered the Bernie Madoff of science and medical fraud. Well... there was probably an important UFO conspiracy convention this weekend that he and Polly had to attend.

This does seem to be more geared to the True Believers™ since most of the speakers are so obscure that they will be known only to those who dwell in the anti-vaccine cult's info-bubble.

Wakefield is in Ireland, I think, I'm a planned but apparently not very successful effort to export Vaxxed there.

But of course, these plans could have beenade differently if they really wanted him in the rally.

He also wasn't at Kennedy's and De Niro's press conference, now that you mention it.

Travis Schwochert must be up early (for him) this morning, impersonating a Royal Rife kook!

Fucklesworth = Travis J. Schwochert back as uberkook leon maliniak

Besides an incredible array of well-done studies showing NO link between vaccines and autism, the 1 in 68 is autism spectrum disorders, not "classical" autism. For instance, Asperger's was added in 1994 to DSM IV and, obviously increased the numbers, though DSM V has changed the categories. Change the included categories, change the criteria, etc. and the numbers will change.

Age of Autism is now announcing a seven-part video series "Truth About Vaccines" to start April 12 (http://www.ageofautism.com/2017/03/the-greatest-health-debate-of-the-21… ). You should get lots of mileage from it.

As for GMOs. I have NO problem with GMOs in general. I am aware of the history of how corn came about, my dog, etc. But these involved splicing and dicing a clumsy group of genes from like/similar species. All that GMOs do is to pick the specific genes sought, so, for instance, they could create German Shepherds without hip displasias, that is, only using the desired genes. However, using xenogenes that would NEVER in a million years have entered into some species is more questionable. I refer to Bacillus thuringiensis toxin used in certain agricultural products. The so-called safety tests for these were short term, mainly on rats. As you know, DES used by mothers caused cervical cancers 20 years later in their daughters. And there are some studies indicating that BT may not be as safe as claimed. However, once in environment, it is there for a long time. I believe in the precautionary principle, that is, before releasing something into the environment that reasonable studies of safety are done. According to my reading, this is not the case with BT. In addition, insects are already showing resistance to it, so it will remain in the environment and insects will mutate around it. I am NOT asking for absolute proof of anything; but short term studies of GMOs with xenogene are unsatisfactory.

The real leon maliniak ( found here) was actually good for a chuckle or three, unlike the tedious Travis J. Schwochert.

I'll give Travis this: he has made numerous attempts at relatively original argument, unlike the exceedingly tedious grinning idiot.

If William Thompson has gone silent then maybe they should subpoena him and make him talk under the oath.

@Anonymous Pseudonym, I agree with you re: Microsoft. I bought my current laptop at the start of 2015. I feel that I should have installed Linux Ubuntu on it the moment I got it.

I suppose we should be grateful that Kent Heckenlively’s speech/rant comes off as so unhinged and self-serving (what with references to “villains” and “evil”, and promoting his book).

Not to mention the ALL CAPS. Internet tradition holds that, unless you are on such an old keyboard that you can't use lower case characters, that constitutes shouting. And I'm not sure there are any such keyboards still in use in the US--even the National Weather Service no longer issues bulletins in ALL CAPS, and they were one of the last holdouts for this very reason.

They may be sending a check to Charlie Manson in his cell for all they know.

The Paypal donations go to the "Vaccine-Injury Awareness League," as do those from v-ial.org, which claims 501(c)(3) status. That coughs up EIN 47-3018845, in Culver City, California. Looks to be Michelle Maher Ford.

I haven't found any Forms 990, but I'm still on my first pot of coffee.

Mother Nature is trying to tell these cranks something.

Maybe it will rain so much, they'll have to postpone their march for 24 hours, Mom Nat thus pushing it to the day on which it belongs.

even the National Weather Service no longer issues bulletins in ALL CAPS

Even the RTTY broadcasts?

Ah, Jake Crosby, MPH, who held an "Autistics for Wakefield" sign during an earlier anti-vaxx demonstration, has finally revealed the real problem that he blames on vaccines: http://www.autisminvestigated.com/nobody-wants-fuck-us-gadfly/

Oh, here's a 990.

#12 Dorit - Thanks. It's too bad they seem to be marginalizing Wakefraud as I was taking great pleasure in seeing the anti-vaccine cult completely co-opted and taken over as nothing more than an advertising arm for Wakefraud's video - Vaxxed.
It was hilarious to see all the drones mindlessly posting messages that were essentially ads for Wakefraud & Co's product at the expense of all the other anti-vaccine clubs. I imagine those club's incomes dropped while Wakefield & Co. are busy relentlessly picking the pockets of the faithful - "Please buy 10 tickets even if you don't plan on attending just to "line Andy's pockets" "stick it to The Man."
Hopefully the media recognizes this for what it is and ignores it.
.
.
#19 Narad - Thank you, too. Interesting. I look forward to anything you can find out about these scammers. Who the hell is Michelle Maher Ford? Why would anyone send money to a stranger who could be the crazy cat lady down the street?
It seems the way to make it through life is to attach yourself to an alt group and then create a 501(c)(3) org. with you and a few friends as officers and then beg for money on teh internets.
I'm surprised loons like Judy Mikovits haven't formed their own orgs to pick the pockets of the faithful.
Grifters gotta' grift.

Well, they do have Del Bigtree speaking, so there will be representation for the Vaxxed team. I think they now split up to do things.

True that. The VAXXED crew is represented.

I suppose there's something ironic about being an antivaccine insurance broker, particularly given that Obananacare is the thin edge of the wedge for forced vaccination.

Silly me, I forgot to check Pattimmy's joint, which is apparently no longer a one-"man" operation. Get this:

One of the important activities social activists involved in the anti-vaccine movement have achieved is the outright elimination of racial strife.

I like the Doors reference.

Whether or not Thompson gave Hooker data, Hooker's now retracted reanalysis says under the methods section:
Cohort data were obtained directly as a “restricted access data set” from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) via a Data Use Agreement. Data were deidentified by the CDC in accordance with Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) prior to receipt by the study authors.
I always point this out to anti-vaxxers who claim the CDC destroyed the data purported to show a link between the MMR vaccine and autism.

They may be sending a check to Charlie Manson in his cell for all they know.

That would be preferable. After all, he killed fewer people.

A GREAT DEBT IS OWED TO ROBERT KENNEDY, JR., WHO COULD HAVE HAD A QUIET, PEACEFUL LIFE, TRYING TO GET MERCURY OUT OF FISH

Given his obvious level of scientific competence, I expect he'd also be trying to extract sunlight from cucumbers.

Surprised no one has noticed the appeal to authority in the Revolution for Truth. There is the obvious "tea party" reference by citing the man who is famous for "I cannot tell a lie" when he cut down a tree that did not exisit in the colonies, , George Washington was pro variolation. He was criticized for assuring that the regular army was innoculated from small pox during the blockade of Boston.

Another observation. Why is it that Pseudoscience finds it so easy to organize a march, while science seems to have difficulties with that https://www.statnews.com/2017/03/22/science-march/. There are advantages to ignoring validity, verification, considering other views.

If William Thompson has gone silent then maybe they should subpoena him and make him talk under the oath.

Who are "they," what authority do they have to issue subpoenas, and where are "they" going to have Thompson testify?

Heckenlively is absolutely right: this is a fight for the survival of humanity. Now more the ever, considering the development of vaccines designed to alter human DNA, along with the increasingly escalating vaccine schedule.

Seems like there is a constant a pro-vax/anti-vax round-robin, designed to control the vaccine opposition. E.g., focusing on autism as the main concern, when it's actually just the tip of the iceberg. Dr. Thompson is a limited hangout. Even if a congressional hearing is eventually forced by public pressure, it'll just be a whitewash.

The "safer vaccine" idea operates to control the opposition. It diverts attention from the fundamentally flawed and fraudulent foundation of the entire vaccine paradigm--which is not about keeping people healthy at all. Not that the typical doctor realizes that--they have a lifetime of indoctrination in vaccine psyence, just like everyone else. But at some point, willful blindness surely becomes impossible. Maybe that's one reason doctors have such a high suicide rate.

"Given his obvious level of scientific competence, I expect he’d also be trying to extract sunlight from cucumbers."

It's not safe to work with, much less eat cucumbers (it's the GMOs):

https://thelapine.ca/monsanto-cucumbers-cause-genital-baldness-immediat…

They may be sending a check to Charlie Manson in his cell for all they know.

That would be preferable. After all, he killed fewer people.

<pedantry>That would be none, at least that are known; he stayed home for the murders.</pedantry>

Being South African, Mr Heckenlively’s comparison of himself to Madeba (ie. Nelson Mandela) is complete and utter gardge. These anti-vaxxer's inflated opinions of themselves is beyond all realms of reality. Another Nelson Mandela my FOOT!

OOPs this should read:-

Being a South African myself, Mr Heckenlively’s comparison of himself to Madeba (ie. Nelson Mandela) is complete and utter gardge. These anti-vaxxer’s inflated opinions of themselves is beyond all realms of reality. Another Nelson Mandela my FOOT!

NWO Troll: "Heckenlively is absolutely right: this is a fight for the survival of humanity."

More ironic hilarity from the fool that thinks that children should continue to suffer up to two weeks dealing with itchy open wounds because she can't be bothered to get a shingles vaccine. I am pretty positive she is older than 24 years old, and actually had chicken pox, so is a candidate for shingles. So like a ghoul she encourages parents to let their kids actually get sick.

My youngest got the actual disease when she was six months old in 1994. The vaccine was introduced in the USA in 1995.

...the fundamentally flawed and fraudulent foundation of the entire vaccine paradigm–

We await with bated breath stories of your idyllic days home from school with smallpox, diphtheria, tetanus, and rabies, which were no big deal and left you with a stronger immune system....

NWO @39: " the development of vaccines designed to alter human DNA"

What vaccine is that? I am not familiar with a vaccine to alter human DNA. Can you please be more specific?

I once read a book about a B&B with a hole to hell int he basement. The hole talked to itself, and all its dialog was presented in BLOCK CAPS.

I'm not saying that Mr Heckenlively is a portal to the infernal pit, but there is a certain similarity.

NWO Reporter (#39) writes,

Heckenlively is absolutely right: this is a fight for the survival of humanity.

MJD says,

I'm cozy with a vaccine if it states, "not manufactured with natural rubber latex".

Small steps NWO Reporter, small steps...

Kent's imagination of who he might be knows no bounds. He has previously imagined himself as a a fictional character from a 1950s book series. Imagining himself as Nelson Mandela is probably no different.

I wonder if publishing in the BolenReport is a new low for Kent.

Ian @48: See, this is why I was confused by NWO's statement. Are they talking about a DNA-based vaccine (where the DNA is the thing you're injecting) or genetic engineering using a viral vector?

So, nope, haven't got any papers like that at all. I think it's been done experimentally, for genetic engineering, but that's way outside my area of expertise. (When you say nuclear DNA do you mean of any given cell, or of the germ line?)

Currently there are no DNA vaccines licensed in the western world for humans. The most promising first cab off the rank for a Zika virus is likely to be an inactivated virus.

There is a DNA vaccine licensed for use in animals. The way it works is that genes for specific viral external proteins are placed on a plasmid that is then injected into muscle. The plasmid genes are expressed within the cell and the proteins produced are transported to the muscle cell membrane where they induce the antibody response. The DNA in the plasmid is not incorporated into the host nuclear DNA.

There are quite a few advantages of this approach to vaccination. There is less material required per vaccination, the antigen presentation is slower to develop and last for longer, decreasing the need for boosters. DNA is much easier to transport and look after than protein-based vaccines.

You guys are overthinking it. When a mindless idiot like NWO-troll blathers about "altering your DNA". DNA is just a buzzword gleaned from newspapers. They don't know DNA from DRM. All they (think they) know is that vaccines are injected "directly into your bloodstream", that this pollutes your precious bodily fluids, that your blood is the same as your "bloodline", and that "polluting" it will harm future generations.

The fact that literally every detail of this is laughably untrue matters not to them. Purity of Essence™ is everything.

I agree with The Rev'. Their complaints are far more likely to be about precious bodily fluids. This foreign DNA bit comes up frequently and any time I've seen it, it has always been about odd bits of DNA from culture media. They seem unaware of the fact that actual chunks of bovine and porcine flesh get implanted into humans, or even that whole blood or WBC products contain oodles of DNA from someone else.

There's been lots of work on DNA vaccines, but unfortunately success as been nearly zero. One issue (not, as I dubiously understand it, the reason why they haven't been successful) is that a special blaster is required to get the DNA actually into vaccinee cells.

A friend is the director of communications at the World Mercury Project. https://worldmercuryproject.org/our-team/

I'm thinking about starting the "World Natural-Latex Project".

@ Orac's minions,

Would this be a copycat organization or are there multiple problems with vaccine components and packaging?

A pity the weather is driving them indoors. I've not been to the Smithsonian(s) in a year or so, and I'd swing by and heckle them if they were outside.

We really need the rain, anyway.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/03/30/…

The fact that literally every detail of this is laughably untrue matters not to them. Purity of Essence™ is everything.

Sadly for Tim "The Sanctity of Human Blood" O'Shea, the stuff's a mess.

^ In somewhat related news, Babs Fisher's "staff" got excited about a similar bill in Missouri. Representative Morris seems to have mixed ideas about blood purity.

I need to find a technical report to help elucidate the details.

Fuck off, Travis.

A friend is the director of communications at the World Mercury Project. https://worldmercuryproject.org/our-team/

I’m thinking about starting the “World Natural-Latex Project”.

I think you would be better served by finding some new friends.

If Heckenlively wants to compare himself to Nelson Mandela, he should spend the next 27 years in prison. Not a bad idea in any case.

your blood is the same as your “bloodline”, and that “polluting” it will harm future generations.

The word "Aryan" is always there in the sub-text.

Your article mentions Sherrie Saunders and her anti-vax notoriety.

She has other hobbies, like chemtrails and anti-child welfare interests.

I became associated with her because of her support of the parents of Baby Holm which continues to develop in Alabama, where she is.

She appears to be closely associated with the people behind the Medical Kidnap organization.

I have been lured into following and reporting on the Baby Holm case, in opposition to Sherrie and her Medical Kidnap people.

I have a FaceBook group for that at:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/1425578747477117/

It should be acknowledged that Tim (The Sanctity of Human Blood) O'Shea's book is now in its 4th edition:

https://www.amazon.com/Vaccination-Not-Immunization-4th-Fourth/dp/19294…

Not that the previous editions necessarily sold out, but he's probably keeping it updated with the very latest craziness.

Dr. Margulis is the daughter of Lynn Margulis, a once reputable biologist, who turned into a nutcase in her declining years (HIV/AIDS denier among other issues). The acorn didn't fall far from the tree.

RLBaty, I'm curious -- what is the Baby Holm case? A quick google search only turned up sites of . . . shall we say, dubious impartiality. (Mostly the Medical Kidnap group.) I can't follow the Facebook link at work.

@ Calli Arcale

You asked what the "Baby Holm" case is about.

A couple of nature loving transients (not poor people, just yuppie types who thought they would travel around), thought it would be cute to have a baby in Cheaha State Park, in Cleburne County, AL.

They tried, but couldn't quite pull it off and wound up at the hospital where the State took custody of the baby and they've been trying to make a cause out of it since October.

Lots of different angles to the story, and it's the sovereign citizen angle that attracted me as explained in this article I posted:

http://kehvrlb.com/kents-brady-byrum-meddling-in-baby-holm-case

Of course, the case isn't what the sovcit promoters and the Medical Kidnap people make it out to be, which is one reason why I set up the FaceBook group previously referenced. We have a lot of good people in that group; many from Cleburne County, and I think we've done a pretty good job of exposing the False Holm Narrative for what it is; among other things.

@Calli Arcale: apparently, the parents are "free spirits" and also sovereign citizen types, who live in a tent and wander the country. She labored for 2 days before going to the hospital. They refused to fill out birth certificate/SSN info for the baby. I don't know (though, from experience in VA and NJ) Alabama, but generally a mother with no prenatal care is going to have drug testing done, and the baby will be held if it's positive.
Apparently there are other concerns about housing and things. (What I could figure out from various sites - I can't get onto FB at work either)

(What I could figure out from various sites – I can’t get onto FB at work either)

There was even a federal case. The Dropbox links aren't working on my current setup, but I'll take a look after I get back from an appointment.

Chris@44

I think everybody over the age of 18 should be given the option of getting a shingles vaccine,if they have had chicken pox.This business of suggesting the vaccine just to people over 60 is complete and utter BS.Most of us here know chicken pox is not a benign disease.I had chicken pox at age seven.I had heart complications,nearly died,and spent over a week in the hospital.I had shingles twice before I as forty.

This might be of interest to some of you:

RFK Jr. A disgrace to science

If you were one of the few children who have chickenpox complications, doesn't that suggest you might also be less likely than a typical child to benefit from the vaccine, given your inability to mount a normal, healthy immune response? The vaccine does have a fairly high failure rate.

There has never been any real dispute that the vast majority of children who contract chickenpox do not experience any complications. That was one major point of debate before the vaccine was licensed--whether the risks of chickenpox outweigh the risks inherent in vaccination. The most powerful voices in that decision would undoubtedly be vaccine manufacturers and others with conflicts of interests.

There is a big question about whether the chickenpox vaccine will do anything whatsoever to prevent shingles. The vaccine contains a live weakened strain of the chickenpox virus that causes an infection that produces no symptoms. That means the virus could re-emerge later in life to cause shingles.

But why worry? Sure, the rate of shingles has increased since the vaccine came out. But the only rational conclusion is that we need more and more and more vaccines for everyone!

I agree, Roger. Especially if the person had chicken pox as an infant, because they are more likely to get shingles at a younger age.

By the way, age sixty is the minimum age it would typically get paid by health insurance. Our family doctor suggests it to his patients to get it at age fifty. So both my spouse and myself got it a few years ago. We not quite sixty (almost though!).

@ Calli Arcale

Many anti-vaxxers and others are also promoting the False Holm Narrative because one of the things the Baby Holm parents did did at hospital (i.e., no Vit K, no vaccines, no birth certificate, no name, no SSN; they just wanted to get their baby and disappear back into the woods).

Fuck you all - shame on you for trying to sweep our vaccine injured children (we're the lucky ones - as many if not more are dead as opposed to chronically ill and disabled) under the rug. You don't have the intelligence to question why questioning vaccine safety gets shut down so hard and fast? Have you read the list of demands? You wouldn't demand that for your own kids? Your disgusting awful people. Fuck you all.

*you're

The rally certainly seems to be a big success... in a purely homeopathic sense of the word "big".:
Very early Friday:
https://www.statnews.com/2017/03/31/vaccine-skeptic-protest/

Just look at those crowds!!!11!!!!! There must be dozens!!!
... and they all look *ahem* well fed - their immune systems must be amazing!!!

It looks like the weather is cooperating nicely as well.
D.C. hasn't seen crowds this big since Wendy's put their double cheeseburgers on sale last month.

oh - i get it - you only approve vax fanatic propaganda comments. cute.

Commenters who've never posted a comment here go to moderation, and I have a day job!

A friend is the director of communications at the World Mercury Project.

The World Mercury Project is very clear - Autism is mercury poisoning, and mercury is the cause of Autism. You claim that Autism is caused by latex in the vaccine packaging.

Is Rita Shreffler wrong? Are you wrong? Are you both right?

"Dozens" - too funny.

@Layla -

Thank you for the offer, but, no. I learned a long time ago not to put my d!ck in crazy.

However, Jake over at AI sounds as if he would be willing to take you up on your offer. It seems your crazy matches his crazy.

we’re the lucky ones – as many if not more are dead as opposed to chronically ill and disabled

Stupidity is NOT A VACCINE INJURY, Layla.

Those who could use a chuckle (or even a horse laugh) might enjoy the blowback from an article on BuzzFeed which deals with antiscience forces on the Internet. The writer, Stephanie Lee, had the utter gall to attack "one of the most visionary humanitarian scientists on planet Earth", yea, a veritable Schweitzer, Linus Pauling and Samuel Hahnemann rolled up into one. One guess who this falsely maligned genius is.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/stephaniemlee/inside-the-internets-war-on-scie…

I will not link directly to the eruption of slime on the website run by this humanitarian scientist. However, it's evident that he is hiring writers who are rejects from the North Korean News Agency, fired for going ludicrously over the top in their praise of the Great Leader.

“Dozens” – too funny.

I liked this note in the Stat report:

One advocate held a sign saying “Polio was a false flag”.

Paralysis crisis actors! Aviation fuel can't melt iron lungs!

My own grasp on "consensus reality" is never that great (and WHO LET THOSE BATS INTO THE ROOM?!), but I can't even with these moronic Troothers who choose to live in delusion.
I can't even with these

NWO Troll: "Sure, the rate of shingles has increased since the vaccine came out."

Oh, pull on your big girl pants and just get the shingles vaccine. Only a needle phobic ghoul who hates kids thinks that children should get sick just so old folks like you can avoid shingles.

Mike Adams, a Texas software engineer turned media mogul

No mention of the Y2K scams and the spamming software on which he built his career? I am disappoint.

And another report:
http://www.newsweek.com/vaccine-skeptic-protest-577526
.
"Several dozen people gathered outside the National Press Club this morning,..."
Looks like they lost some stragglers on the way to their protest at the National Press Club.
.
What are they protesting? It doesn't seem very clear but that's never stopped an anti-vaccine cultist before.
... something about the media and 'Pay attention to us! Pay attention to us, you big, eeevyil, pHARMA bought media meanies!'
.
"Insisting that the United States has the sickest children in the entire world, she called for truth and transparency."
This should come as a surprise to all US citizens who have never encountered delusional anti-vaccine conspirinoids. Little did they know the US has the "sickest chill-run in the entire wherl!"
I can hear the jaws dropping open even now...

The ABC and CBS local stations didn't cover it in their evening news, and Washington Post doesn't have anything on their web site (yet). We'll see what the morning brings.

Regarding the reporter who posted that story for StatNews, Sherrie Saunders had this posted to her FaceBook page:

(Begin quote.)

" Wanna have some fun?!?

Only one reporter showed up.

She listened to stories,
listened to the speakers,
spoke with the Vaxxed peeps,
RFK Jr, etc.

She smiled and was courteous.

All while tweeting nasty remarks
and calling the speakers liars and
their facts "fake news."

Her Twitter handle is @rebeccadrobbins
Her phone number is 714-478-4224
You're welcome :)"

#Informers

(End quote.)

In new vaccine news, the CBC reports (without much detail) that the "second phase of testing", of a Zika vaccine is beginning.

@doug,

Astute readers know that the beginning of the NIAID Zika virus investigational DNA vaccine dose-ranging study signals the beginning of another battle in the fight for the survival of humanity as we confront the "increasingly escalating vaccine schedule" rather than an effort to prevent serious neurodevelopmental consequences of Zika virus disease. Will the global elite stop at nothing?

Still sticking with that Zika-microcephaly hoax, eh? I suppose...if you buy the idea that weak correlations prove causation. And that a virus that has been well known since the 1940s and has never been more serious than a common cold (if people even realize they have it) would all of a sudden turn into a terrible threat. I suppose it has never so much as crossed your mind that Zika might be cover for damage caused by something else. I mean, "the experts" assure us it's Zika, right? What is there to question? :D

"if you buy the idea that weak correlations prove causation"

heh.

Well, it's true that phrase is twisted a lot, to imply that strong correlations could not be indicative of causation, when in fact it is the first step in the investigation of causation. But that is with strong correlations, not weak ones--since strong correlation always exists when there is causation.

I suppose it has never so much as crossed your mind that Zika might be cover for damage caused by something else.

I suppose that alternative explanations might appeal to some who are willfully and profoundly ignorant of flaviviruses in general and the neotropism of this virus in particular.

Just the opposite, actually. And it's worth gaining some knowledge about how viruses are isolated and identified. As well as familiarity with the microbiome. All healthy bodies contain trillions of microorganisms including viruses, some of which are considered hazardous, and yet they are living in harmony and not causing illness in healthy people.

Chris Preston: I wonder if publishing in the BolenReport is a new low for Kent.

I don't think the man can hit 'low' anymore- he's already so far down he gives snakes altitude sickness. And his Lord of the Rings references always amuse me- he never seemed to realize that Aragorn wasn't the main character, nor did Aragorn score either of the decisive victories.

NWOReporter: There has never been any real dispute that the vast majority of children who contract chickenpox do not experience any complications.

Being completely utterly miserable and trying to scratch your skin off isn't generally seen as a complication, but it's definitely not sunshine and rainbows. And the fun thing about chicken pox is that it, like most of the herpes family (which I'm sure you're familiar with) stays with you for life. Would you like me to tell you about that wonderful week I had with half my face frozen? Oh, and like the others said, have fun with rabies. I see you've already got the foaming at the mouth thing down.

It's funny all the things that are controversial now. Feeding the hungry, Sesame Street, having eagles around, even clean air and water apparently all make the baby Jesus cry and are BAD THINGS. I don't think I'll ever be a good Christian; I'm not mean or mendacious enough.

The long term adverse effects of the vaccine are unknown--including it's potential to cause cancer. And there is no indication the attenuated virus doesn't stay with you for life as well. And failure rates of up to 44% have been seen with the vaccine.

But it's no surprise there is a peculiar abundance of horror stories in these comments about infection with common childhood diseases. Telling such tales is a primary strategy in emotional warfare. :)

Has the stupid troll with the idiot shit-eating grin presented so much as a tiny fraction of an original idea in the entire time she's been dumping here?

just to be clear, my comment that should appear after PGP's when it is released from moderation does not refer to PGP

NWO Troll, yeah... we know you mostly fear the varicella vaccine because you are a needle phobic ghoul who fears shingles and loves the thought of kids getting sick to protect your old withering body. So you make up a bunch of stuff, just because you love argument by blatant assertion... and the suffering of small children.

Here is an idea... actually provide citations for your assertions. How about some PubMed indexed studies that the affects of the varicella vaccine are worse than getting chicken pox. One caveat, the authors must be qualified and reputable, so none by Gary Goldman (whose PhD in computer science is probably not valid).

Nah. It's just that there's no indication whatsoever the chickenpox vaccine will prevent shingles--in fact, based on the numbers, it appears to be just the opposite. I just see the chickenpox vaccine as a sick, dangerous joke on humanity, as do 99.999% of people who suffered through a few days of itching just fine, and wound up with stronger immune systems because of it. 99% of the the other .001% appear to be commenting on this blog. :D

I call bullshit, Orac, I didn't see anything about this in the news today. Typical pro-vaccine false flag post, in my opinion.

And that a virus that has been well known since the 1940s and has never been more serious than a common cold (if people even realize they have it) would all of a sudden turn into a terrible threat.

This dude thinks he know more than thousands of doctors and scientists, but is apparently unaware of mutations.
Fail.

LOL. I knew someone would bring up that assumption. And of course it is an assumption. But it fits the agenda, so run with it! :D

Oops, forgot that NWOR is female.
Correction: This nitwit thinks she knows more than thousands of doctors and scientists, but is apparently unaware of mutations.
Fail.

@ MI Dawn: all pregnant women get a drug screen as part of routine prenatal care, not for legal reasons. The goal is to screen and educate the mothers.

However, some states have draconian laws regarding drug use in pregnancy and Alabama (where the Holm case is playing out) is one of them. If some suspicion during the labor came up at the hospital (admitting to drug use even pot would do it) then a simple meconium test would show if the mother smoked pot while pregnant. That's enough to take the baby in Alabama, and could have resulted in criminal charges for her.

I read the biased sovcit reports on this case. The increasingly complex allegations against the state by the Holms are reaching conspiracy nut critical mass, and it's clear the medical kidnap people simply don't understand the law or how hospitals work when it comes to things like discharge instructions. There's more to this story than meets the eye and I suspect a lot of the Holms' claims are BS designed to detract from the fact they broke laws they don't want to be held accountable for.

Having said that, prosecuting mothers who smoke pot during pregnancy is just stupid and counter productive, and if these people want to be hippies and live in the woods they're more than welcome to as long as they mind their own business.

LOL. I knew someone would bring up that assumption.

Uh huh. Sure you did.

Yep. That's from Misdirection 101. :D

Yep. That’s from Misdirection 101.

I hate to break this to you, Ginny, but you're a dullard. Even your stock routine evinces a lack of original thought anywhere. It's all lazy assertions and deflection.

Now, do tell everybody about gravitational waves.

When I suggested that NWO Reporter's nonsensical post was due to profound ignorance, NWO Reporter responded, "Just the opposite, actually. And it’s worth gaining some knowledge about how viruses are isolated and identified. As well as familiarity with the microbiome."

NWO Reporter, could you please expand on that comment? Do you think that none of us here "have some knowledge of how viruses are isolated and identified" or have any "familiarity with the microbiome?" FWIW, since I'm confident that I published in virology before you were born and I worked for years on interactions in the microbiome, I think you're full of shit.

Now, could you please explain why the neurotropism of the Zika virus is explained by vaccination?

This nitwit thinks she knows more ...

This time 'round she's just horking back up what she ate from Alex Jones's litter box.

NWO Reporter, could you please expand on that comment? Do you think that none of us have more "knowledge of how viruses are isolated and identified" or "familiarity with the microbiome" than a psychology major?

Now, could you please explain why the neurotropism of the Zika virus is explained by vaccination? Really, Ginny, could you please explain how many of your psychology classes addressed flavivirus pathology and developmental biology to indicate that you are not full of shit? Thanks.

NWOweaksauce: Telling such tales is a primary strategy in emotional warfare.

'Scuse you. You want national policy to be altered based on nothing more than your 'fweelings' and then you accuse other people who are sticking to facts of 'emotional warfare'? I think you should stick to your job as a movie projector. Get off the net please, you're making women everywhere look bad. Cool it with the emojis too, this ain't facebook.
(Also, you're a flat-earther, soo maybe you should go back to kindergarten until you can recognize what a fact is?)

"People who are sticking to facts...." Good one! And throwing in the bit about flat earth, too. That psy-op is useful all over the place, isn't it? :D

NWO Troll: " I just see the chickenpox vaccine as a sick, dangerous joke on humanity, as do 99.999% of people who suffered through a few days of itching just fine, and wound up with stronger immune systems because of it. 99% of the the other .001% appear to be commenting on this blog."

How does a "stronger immune system" make you more susceptible to shingles? Which is something that you apparently fear more than chicken pox. Which probably you were too sick as a kid to even remember.

Oh, honey... the magic probability ball says you are going to get shingles. Your old withered being that totally forgot how sick you were because you were so very sick... is going to force kids to suffer with chicken pox, instead of skipping it with a vaccine.

But as needle phobic ghoul you are too freaked out to get a shingles vaccine... because you love seeing kids get sick.

Own it, NWO Ghoul. You fear shingles, you hate needles, and you hate children. Therefore you want them to suffer from a painful preventable disease because you are a coward.

Straight from the Department of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt:

The long term adverse effects of the vaccine are unknown–including its potential to cause cancer.

Ah, yes, the good 'ole "long-term effects" gambit. And you know what? Yup, vaccines do have long-term effects, most notably immunity from disease.
But can you name even one vaccine from the past hundred years or so that turned out to be carcinogenic? Or even one vaccine with proven detrimental long-term effects in any significant way? In other words, is your suggestion that vaccines may be associated with long-term risks, and even cancer, based in factual history? Nope, I don' t think so.

You might just as well suggest that we should be wary of every new flavor of, for instance, weetabix, as the long-term effect of this particular combination of ingredients is unknown–including its potential to cause cancer.

In fact, since vaccines and their ingredients are far better researched than any common foodstuff, the potential to do harm is also far greater in food than in vaccines (and indeed, health incidents with food crop up quite regularly, quite contrary to incidents involving vaccines).

You really should change your nickname to FUD Reporter or something similar.

Travis at 112, you are a bore. Now be a good boy and toddle off.

Either Orac has done a brilliant job of satire, or Travis has a major case of orchitis and is impersonating our host.

While I have no doubt Orac could write a brilliant satire, I'm going with the latter.

Bad move, Travis. Fuck off.

@ NWO Reporter:

You write about Zika virus: "that a virus that has been well known since the 1940s and has never been more serious than a common cold> First, I guess you are ignorant that viruses mutate. Second, an association doesn't exist until one notices it and given the numerous problems newborns experience in Third World nations, it wasn't really noticed until it spread to developed countries.. And actually the research involves more than just correlations. For instance: "ZIKV infection was particularly evident in hematopoietic cells with microglia, the brain-resident macrophage population being one of the main targets. Infection induces high levels of proinflammatory immune mediators such as interleukin 6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), interleukin 1β (IL-1β), and monocyte chemotactic protein 1 (MCP-1)." [Lum et al (2017 Apr). Zika Virus Infects Human Fetal Brain Microglia and Induces Inflammation. Clinical Infect Dis; 64(7): 914-920]; "Using the Bradford Hill Viewpoints as an evaluation framework for causation is highly suggestive that the association between Zika virus and microcephaly is causal." Awadh et all (2017 Feb 22). Does Zika Virus Cause Microcephaly - Applying the Bradford Hill Viewpoints; PLoS Curr.

I could list a number of additional papers; but I doubt it will change your mind.

“Microcephaly may result from any insult that disturbs early brain growth and can be seen in association with hundreds of genetic syndromes…Annually, approximately 25,000 infants in the United States will be diagnosed with microcephaly…” -- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19752457

But no--it''s Zika! Dear God, when are we going to get that vaccine?! Round up the pregnant women. fast! :D

@ Orac:

You write: "Chris! Take it easy. NWO is making some great points. Don’t be so harsh. I’ve decided to be more anti-vaccine lately after finally reading all of the great information at vaccinepapers.org. Aluminum is actually really toxic, but I drank the kool-aid and just believed what Paul Offit et al said.
My next article will be about aluminum toxicity. I am going to spearhead a campaign to supplant aluminum hydroxide adjuvant with calcium phosphate adjuvant. Stay tuned!"

You do understand that aluminum is one of the most ubiquitous substances on the planet and the infants get much more from their mother's milk or formula and elsewhere than from vaccines? Vaccine.papers only lists cherry-picked negative papers. Has someone hijacked your name as I can't believe you wrote the above?

Yes, there's someone who thinks it's clever to post using other poster's names. One Travis Schwochert. http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2017/02/the-fendlesworth-m…

He has been told this before, the point re:aluminum, but doesn't really have new materials.

You do understand the difference between injecting a substance into the body and ingesting it, right Mr. PhD, MPH? I'd venture a guess that undigested proteins are far more ubiquitous than aluminum, and yet they are known to be quite hazardous if they escape our digestive tract. Go figure.

Well, the evil pharma-driven mass media appears to be ignoring the several dozen antivaxers (a.k.a. Mass March Revolution for Truth) that showed up in D.C. yesterday.

I couldn't find any stories on either ABC news or CBS news online. ABC did have one on people volunteering for a Zika vaccine trial, plus the White House being illuminated in blue lights for autism awareness on Sunday:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/white-house-colored-blue-sunday-…

Obviously Autism Speaks has sponsored this event to please its Pharma Masters, and draw attention away from Kent H. and R.F.K. Jr.

The conspiracy runs deep and wide...

Of course aluminum is toxic. Ever tried chewing on a piece of aluminum foil? Yowch!

Comments by the real Orac have a grey background box.

I'm guessing Orac is travelling or perhaps just relaxing for a bit. As he has pointed out recently, he does have a day job - quite unlike Travis J. Schwochert, the fake Orac.

I tell ya. He must be desperate. He used an e-mail address that I haven't used in a year.

In areas in which Zika has been indigenous for decades (or longer), young women get infected long before they bear children, thus when they became pregnant, the chances of birth defects faded into background noise.

In areas in which Zika has spread, women are getting infected at exactly the wrong time (when they are pregnant or become pregnant), thus why is this a growing problem.

Again, this is all immunology 101-type material, but I would expect that anti-vax trolls wouldn't understand basic science if it bit them.

Pure conjecture--with an agenda. In case you missed this: "Microcephaly may result from any insult that disturbs early brain growth and can be seen in association with hundreds of genetic syndromes…Annually, approximately 25,000 infants in the United States will be diagnosed with microcephaly…” — https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19752457

I'd like to know what other factors--for example, the heavy pesticide use in Brazil; malnutrition in some populations in Brazil--could be behind an increase in microcephaly. But let's focus on Zika. Because after all, there is never going to be a vaccines for malnutrition, or pesticide use, or any other environmental contaminant.

The "march" didn't even make the local news around here.....

Oh, joy. I missed the "lecture" about aluminum from the unemployed window washer, who referenced a website by a guy who sells vaping supplies.

And it is hilarious that the varicella vaccine has no aluminum adjuvants. And it has never contained thimerosal. Just more clueless excuses by grown adults who hate kids and fear shingles. The window washer, vape seller and silly woman who still believes in decades old conspiracy theories just want to see kids suffer from a painful itchy disease because they can't be bothered to get a shingles vaccine.

"unemployed window washer"

If an unemployed window washer doesn't wash windows is an unemployed window washer a window washer? I could just as well be called an unemployed window washer since I'm not employed to wash windows. Travis is something else, and it ain't something so benign as an unemployed window washer.

Yet another example of an anti-vaxer who can't be bothered to keep up on current research into Zika.

Epidemiological studies of areas of Africa where Zika was first discovered showed that females are infected well before child-bearing age & that the population has somewhat "adapted" and developed a certain level of immunity to the virus.

As the virus has spread to new areas, it enters completely non-immune populations & infects women when they are pregnant and become pregnant.

Again, this is all immunology and epidemiology 101 & is borne out with all of the research done over the past few years. Tens of thousands of cases of Zika have been identified in Puerto Rico & a number of microcephaly cases have been linked directly back to the virus.

And you talk like have "more" cases of microcephaly is a good thing? You really are just stupid, aren't you?

And NWOR - where are all the "awoken" people, when anti-vaxers can't even get 100 people to show up to their "March on Washington?"

@Lawrence

When I suggested that fools like the former psychology major who suggested that Zika virus-associated microcephaly is a "hoax" are willfully and profoundly ignorant of flaviviruses in general and the neotropism of Zika virus in particular, she responded, "Just the opposite, actually." There you have it: training in areas that are unrelated to medicine and virology makes you an instant expert in medicine and virology. I would be interested in NWO Reporter's demonstration that she is "just the opposite" of profoundly ignorant of Zika virus disease and the clear evidence for Zika's tropism for placenta and fetal brain:

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/23/3/16-1499_article

BTW, although it's clear that the "immunology 101-type material" that NWO Reporter doesn't understand explains some of the historical differences in the epidemiology of ZIka virus disease, there may be another factor that affects the current Zika epidemic: the related Dengue virus. It's long been known that (1) as with Zika, the great majority of Dengue infections are clinically inapparent; (2) infection with another of the four Dengue serotypes after recovery from an initial infection greatly increases the risk of severe disease; (3) Dengue is spread by the same house-loving Aedes mosquitoes that spread Zika virus; and (4) Dengue virus disease is epidemic in Brazil. Now it seems that, as with Dengue, prior infection with a related flavivirus (e.g., Dengue virus) may exacerbate Zika virus disease.

@ NWO Reader:

You write: "You do understand the difference between injecting a substance into the body and ingesting it, right Mr. PhD, MPH? I’d venture a guess that undigested proteins are far more ubiquitous than aluminum, and yet they are known to be quite hazardous if they escape our digestive tract. Go figure."

I gave two articles and could give lots more. Yes, I know the difference between intramuscular and digestive; but I also know how macrophages, etc. quite abundant in the subcutaneous, deal with foreign substances and have read numerous articles on aluminum and how the body deals with it. And it isn't just aluminum from food and liquid; but from breathing and tiny scratches since it is in the air and soil.

You also write: "Pure conjecture–with an agenda. In case you missed this: “Microcephaly may result from any insult that disturbs early brain growth and can be seen in association with hundreds of genetic syndromes…Annually, approximately 25,000 infants in the United States will be diagnosed with microcephaly…” — https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19752457"

Yep, just as fever and many other bodily states can be caused by numerous causes ; but the studies on Zika not only show an increase in microencephaly when Zika increases in area; but, as I mentioned there exist numerous studies, including finding residuals of Zika in brain tissue. If there is a spike in some type of symptom/disorder at the same time as there is a spike in lab verified microbe and then additional studies, including brain tissues, find the microbe, either one accepts the high probability that the microbe is involved or rejects science.

I guess I was right that someone has hijacked Orac's name. Too bad there isn't a law against this as, in a way, it is, in my opinion, a form of defamation of character/libel or fraud. Maybe he can put some sort of block on fakes. The fact that someone would do something like this just proves they are unethical, dishonest, and have nothing intelligent to add to the discussion.

But let’s focus on Zika.

OK. According to https://www.cdc.gov/zika/geo/pregnancy-outcomes.html

Outcomes of Pregnancies with Laboratory Evidence of Possible Zika Virus Infection in the United States

Completed pregnancies with or without birth defects 1,228

Liveborn infants with birth defects 54

Pregnancy losses with birth defects 7

Each year, there are about 4 Million births per year

4M/1228 = 3257 and change

3257*54= 175,878

3257*7= 22,799

That's a lot of birth defects and dead babies. But, yeah, Zika's nothing, right? Not to a vaccine phobic child hater like NWOR, it aint.

Sure, Zika isn't going to spread across the entire United States, but if you are in, or travel to, a state that does have Zika, or have sex with someone who does, while the odds of a complicated pregnancy are low, they aren't that low.

The Zika story brings to mind not just virus frauds from recent years designed to instill panic for profit, such as H1N1 and SARS, but also the history of the investigation of Beriberi, a disease that caused considerable suffering for centuries.

Those were more innocent times. Pasteur was our new hero, and since Beriberi obviously seemed to be contagious, its cause was assumed to be a micro-organism. Many decades were spent trying to associate this disease, which is caused by a thiamine deficiency, with a microorganism.

History repeats itself, but it's intentional--driven by corruption in high places, and carried out by high IQ clueless with research funding in mind. Complicating matters is a world filled with environmental contaminants, and population control objectives, from which attention must be diverted at all costs. http://www.baruch.cuny.edu/library/alumni/online_exhibits/digital/2001/…

@ NWO Reporter:

1. H1N1 led to higher numbers of deaths in children than usual flus over recent years though the total number of deaths was less than expected. I guess deaths of children doesn't count with you?
2. SARS had a high mortality rate; but because it was only contagious after symptomatic and has a "long" incubation time compared to flu which is contagious prior to being symptomatic with shorter incubation time. This allowed, with considerable luck and lots of work, public health to trace and contain the outbreak. Had it functioned as flu, given little successful treatment, we would have had a world-wide catastrophe. Since no one knew before hand the incubation period and when contagious, it would have been as stupid as you appear to be to wait and see rather than mobilizing resources and dealing with it.

Sure, one can point to episodes in history. Leukemia was originally thought caused by some sort of infection, then realized a form of cancer. This was 150 years ago and beriberi was 100 years ago. How stupid, really stupid to refer to events that happened in distant past without taking any notice of subsequent developments.

Maybe you would like to stop all chemotherapy for cancer as the first attempts did not save lives and put patients through terrible ordeals above and beyond the cancer. Or, perhaps, you would like to stop heart transplants since the first were also catastrophes.

Nothing has changed since that "distant past." Just like with Zika, researchers identify a tiny amount of the virus via a PCR test in a small portion of microcephalic babies, and commence focusing on it as a causative agent to the exclusion of all other causes. There's no money in identifying an environmental contaminant or nutritional deficiency as a causative agent.

@Dr Joel -- I notice she carefully avoided mentioning Ebola.

Ebola is in the same class. Millions of people carry the Ebola virus with no ill effects.

The only think that keeps NitWitOrdure's head from being completely empty is the fact she has sh!t for brains.

@NWRO - really, millions?

Citation, please.

"A research team determined that 25 percent of individuals in a Sierra Leone village were infected with the Ebola virus but had no symptoms..." This was in a village of 900 people where there were 34 reported cases of Ebola--one of the 'hardest hit' areas. "Richardson and his colleagues decided to go back to the village to try to determine whether the Ebola infection could be minimally symptomatic, as previous studies have suggested."

So, estimating the numbers from this article...there were 28k reported cases of Ebola in Africa, so I guess a fairer estimate would be about 185k asymptomatic cases, not millions. But who knows...to my knowledge, no such research has been done in areas where there were no reported cases. :) https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2016/11/study-finds-people-with-…

Millions of people carry the Ebola virus with no ill effects.

Citation needed.

Nit Wit, you have all the answers, while we poor scientists and health care professionals are too dumb and corrupt to recognize your genius.
Nice ego trip you're on there. I can understand why you'd be hooked on that pathetic delusion. Without it, you would have nothing.

NWO Reporter:

In the March 2017 study that I cited above, Zika virus replicative and genomic RNA was detected by RT-PCR in brain tissues of all 8 infants with fatal microcephaly, and in situ hybridization demonstrated Zika virus in neural cells, neurons, and degenerating glial cells in the cerebral cortex (but not in other tissues) in 7 of 8. In 4 of 5 nonfatal cases of suspected Zika-associated microcephaly the placenta was PCR-positive for Zika virus. In 24 PCR-positive suspected cases of maternal Zika infections with adverse pregnancy/birth outcomes, 23 of 24 had maternal symptom onset during the first trimester, whereas all 8 PCR-positive pregnancies with apparently healthy infants had symptom onset in the third trimester.

These results demonstrate Zika virus neurotropism and reinforce previous in vitro and animal studies that demonstrated that Zika virus infects human neural stem and progenitor cells and causes severe pathologic changes in the brain but not in other visceral organs when infection occurs early in pregnancy. But of course you knew all that, because you are "just the opposite" of profoundly uninformed.

You have to admit that that's a pretty elaborate hoax. Will the global elite stop at nothing?

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/23/3/16-1499_article

You aren't suggesting that the mere presence of minute amounts of Zika detected in a PCR test are proof of causation of microcephaly, are you? Because a lot of researchers disagree with you about that.

"Zika virus has spread throughout Brazil, but extremely high rates of microcephaly have been reported only in the country's northeast. Although evidence suggests that Zika can cause microcephaly, the clustering pattern hints that other environmental, socio-economic or biological factors could be at play.

"'We suspect that something more than Zika virus is causing the high intensity and severity of cases,' says Fatima Marinho, director of information and health analysis at Brazil’s ministry of health.

"'I think they may be on to something,' says Linda Birnbaum, director of the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Zika was discovered in 1947 and hadn’t been implicated in birth defects until now; and current strains of the virus don’t show any significant mutations that might have increased its virulence. 'So why now?' she asks."

http://www.nature.com/news/brazil-asks-whether-zika-acts-alone-to-cause…

Seems a lot of healthy babies would also test positive for Zika on a PCR test. But never mind--full speed ahead with the pesticide clouds, vaccines and abortions! And best to stop getting pregnant for now, until we sort this all out. Because we care.

It's true: The global psychopathic parasites (aka 'elite') will stop at nothing. Fear mongering and misdirection are two of their specialties.

Here's more:

"The study identifies 1,850 women that are being tracked, whose date of infection with Zika is known, and is known relative to the start of the pregnancy. Of these, 532, 702, and 616 were infected in the first, second and third trimesters respectively. 16%, 29% and 93% (85, 204, and 583) of the pregnancies have concluded.* No cases of microcephaly were observed.

"This gives a consistent interpretation that there is no direct link between Zika and microcephaly except for random co-occurrence.

"An alternative cause of microcephaly in Brazil could be the pesticide pyriproxyfen, which is cross-reactive with retinoic acid, which causes microcephaly, and is being used in drinking water."

http://necsi.edu/research/social/pandemics/statusreport

@ NWO Reporter:

You write: "There’s no money in identifying an environmental contaminant or nutritional deficiency as a causative agent." How absolutely absurd. First, there is a ton of money being spent on research into environmental contaminants and besides already knowing quite a bit about nutritional deficiencies there is ongoing research. Second, you miss the elephant in the room, namely, that vaccines aren't all that profitable. They represent about 2% of world-wide pharmaceutical revenues, about the same as one of the best selling statins.

You write: "Millions of people carry the Ebola virus with no ill effects." First, even if that were true, given the high number of deaths experienced recently in West Africa, anyone with a brain would still consider it a serious disease, except you, of course; but there are several well-done studies that found a seroprevalence of around 3%; but follow-up found nothing after a couple of weeks, though a few cases may have carried it longer.

Bower et al (2017 Jan 31). Analysis: A systematic review and
meta-analysis of seroprevalence surveys of ebolavirus infection. Scientific Data.

"This new highly specific and sensitive assay showed asymptomatic infection with Ebola virus was
uncommon despite high exposure. The low prevalence suggests asymptomatic infection contributes little to herd
immunity in Ebola, and even if infectious, would account for few transmissions." [Glynn et ak (2017 Feb 17). Asymptomatic infection and unrecognised Ebola virus disease in Ebola-affected households in Sierra Leone: a cross-sectional study using a new non-invasive assay for antibodies to Ebola virus. Lancet Infectious Disease]

By the way, given your absurd use of beriberi, do you even believe that microbes cause disease? If not, perhaps, we should stop filtering water and using chlorine. Maybe the 1993 outbreak of cryptospordiosis in Milwaukee was simply caused by malnutrition in all 420,000 who suffered terrible diarrhea for months. Or maybe the history of cholera is a lie as well?

One of the problems with the internet is anonymity. Though an old man I'd love to debate someone like you in public in front of a large neutral audience. Would be quite entertaining to see you make a fool of yourself.

Though in my 70s, I still devote 1 1/2 to 2 hours per day reading articles on infectious diseases, current and historical. And I'm proud of my PhD and MPH. I worked quite hard to get them. I wonder what you can claim to be proud of, if anything?

I can think of many people much more qualified than me who would undoubtedly be eager to debate you on these issues. And I would love to see it. :)

So, you admit that you made a baseless assumption?

I guess that's progress.

No problem--although as I said, there is no way to know if it was correct or not. Now, why don't you go ahead and acknowledge that, for every person who tests positive for Ebola and gets sick, at least 6 more test positive for Ebola and do not get sick at all. :)

So, estimating the numbers from this article…there were 28k reported cases of Ebola in Africa, so I guess a fairer estimate would be about 185k asymptomatic cases, not millions.

That's backwards, isn't it? If it's true that 25% of the cases are asymptomatic, and there were 28k reported cases, the total cases would be 37K, and 9k asymptomatic.

Of course, I said 'if'.

See this later study -

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(17)30110…

In The Lancet Infectious Diseases, Judith Glynn and colleagues present a carefully conducted, well-controlled serosurvey to take a fresh look at the possibility of subclinical EVD exposure and infection. During the recent large EVD outbreak (over 28000 cases) in western Africa, Sierra Leonean household contacts of people with proven EVD were screened for IgG anti-Ebola virus antibodies using a newly developed, non-invasive oral fluid capture assay with high specificity and sensitivity. Seroprevalence among household contacts who did not experience clinical signs indicative of EVD was only 2.6%. This value suggests that asymptomatic Ebola virus infections occur rarely, even when individuals have direct contact to individuals infected with Ebola virus. This result is in line with the observation that individuals infected with Ebola virus typically experience grave and frequently lethal disease, and cast further doubt on results of previous serosurveys. Although a single study such as that of Glynn and colleagues does not suffice to come to wide-sweeping conclusions about the possibility and frequency of subclinical individuals infected with Ebola virus infections, their results certainly indicate that such infections are not a typical or widespread phenomenon.

No. In a town of 900, 225 were infected with Ebola, but only 34 got sick.

As for your Lancet study...so, a single study utilizing a brand new type of test casts doubt on the results of numerous previous studies showing asymptomatic Ebola infection is common? Nah, I don't think so.

Yes, admitting baseless assumptions and ignorance about the real issues...this is, in fact, progress.

Perhaps you should take some time and actually travel with the professionals who risk their lives on a daily basis, traveling to the worst places on earth & tracking down these infectious diseases.

I would have recommended a colleague of mine, but he died in the field, treating those who were infected with Ebola.

You and your ilk really piss me off, because you never take the opportunity to actually understand the implications of your own ignorance.

You didn't actually bother to read the whole study, did you?

So, she also admits that she rejects new information which contradicts her beliefs....again, the first step in solving a problem is admitting she has one.

Heh. Teh NWOR didn't exactly do much "research" regarding ol' g724.

@ NWO Reporter:

You write: "As for your Lancet study…so, a single study utilizing a brand new type of test casts doubt on the results of numerous previous studies showing asymptomatic Ebola infection is common? Nah, I don’t think so."

In comment #150 I also listed:

Bower et al (2017 Jan 31). Analysis: A systematic review and
meta-analysis of seroprevalence surveys of ebolavirus infection. Scientific Data.

In case the words are beyond your understanding, it was a review of 51 studies with the analysis done on 8 that met their minimal criteria for validity, and I also mentioned I could list many more.

And you write: "Now, why don’t you go ahead and acknowledge that, for every person who tests positive for Ebola and gets sick, at least 6 more test positive for Ebola and do not get sick at all."

Even if that were true (it's not), it would be frightening as those 6 could potentially pass on the infection to others and, given the number of horrific deaths from the disease, it would eventually turn into a pandemic of catastrophic proportions. How would you prevent asymptomatic carriers from spreading the disease? If you stopped traffic from West Africa, they could simply travel indirectly. Of course, you could cut US off from rest of world; but that wouldn't work as it would be virtually impossible to stop everyone who is asymptomatic from entering US, e.g. small boats, etc. And the global economic system would collapse.

And "I can think of many people much more qualified than me who would undoubtedly be eager to debate you on these issues. And I would love to see it."

If it were a debate only on Ebola I would need a couple weeks to prepare; but on vaccines and infectious diseases in general, bring it on.

In a Startrek episode Captain Kirk, while beaming down, is caught in some cosmic storm and ends up in a parallel universe. I wish I could beam you to a parallel universe where everything is exactly the same except no vaccine has ever been developed. Smallpox alone would kill up to 50% of children, polio would cripple 15,000 or more, the number of kids hospitalized for currently vaccine-preventable diseases would be several hundred thousand every year with several thousand developing permanent disabilities, e.g. blindness, deafness, seizure disorders, mental retardation.

Yep, it would be a great world to live in. And since you don't seem to even believe that microbe cause disease, the parallel universe wouldn't purify water, so we could add typhoid, cholera, and many other diseases to the list.

Ebola is in the same class. Millions of people carry the Ebola virus with no ill effects.

It's cute that you don't even know what the word "carry" means in this context.

As for your Lancet study…so, a single study utilizing a brand new type of test casts doubt on the results of numerous previous studies showing asymptomatic Ebola infection is common?

Numerous? You cited a press release about one, and the release didn't even bother to directly identify the (open access, as is the one you're bitching about) paper. Jesus Christ, 12 of 185 is 6.5%, you dimwit.

The "brand new type of test" brain dropping is just dismayingly stupid. WTF do you think the assay was validated against? How do you think it works? What's the difference from the ELISAs? What is this "type"?

You aren’t suggesting that the mere presence of minute amounts of Zika detected in a PCR test are proof of causation of microcephaly, are you?

What's the over–under on the Kary Mullis quote's appearing?

You aren’t suggesting that the mere presence of minute amounts of Zika detected in a PCR test are proof of causation of microcephaly, are you? Because a lot of researchers disagree with you about that.

You're really fond of trivially false exaggerations, aren't you? And you're reduced to a nearly year-old item from the Nature pop-sci department?

Here’s more

I'm duly impressed that you'd invoke an old item* that includes a link to this on the very same page:

"The Zika virus, a mosquito-borne disease previously considered mild, has been implicated in an increasing number of microcephaly cases in infants whose mothers were infected during pregnancy. The urgency of addressing its pandemic spread through the Tropics has become acute."

Well played. It's not even necessary to bring up the rest of Bar-Yam's shtick.

* Dear G-d, they even "strongly recommend[ed] that the use of pyriproxyfen in Brazil be suspended."

In the press release cited by NWOR https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2016/11/study-finds-people-with-… I find these numbers -

The village, with about 900 residents...

There were 34 reported cases of Ebola in the village...

The researchers then recruited 187 men, women and children from Sukudu who had likely been exposed to Ebola...

Of these, 14 were found to be carrying antibodies to Ebola...

In combining the initial reports of 34 infections with the 14 newly identified cases, the researchers calculated the prevalence of minimally symptomatic infection in the village to have been 25 percent.

NWOR claims that 225 in the village were exposed, and 34 were sick.

If you add the likely exposed to the number of reported cases, you get 221 (close enough, I guess).

I say no. I say that 48 (34+14) were exposed, and 34 were sick.

One of us is clearly wrong. I await the verdict of the minions.

You call yourselves minions? Now that's funny. :D

Well, really we're all just 'bots, but 'minion' makes people believe we're alive. Except Travis. He's a sock.

If you add the likely exposed to the number of reported cases, you get 221 (close enough, I guess).

"Of 193 individuals from Sukudu who were quarantined for sharing a public latrine or living quarters with a confirmed case, only 4 declined to participate. Ten individuals were initially excluded because of fever at the time of initial contact; none of these met the case definition for EVD. On reassessment one week later, all but one had defervesced and were able to provide blood samples. Two participants had failed venipuncture attempts for blood draw. We thus sampled a total of 187 individuals for anti-GP in 24 of 25 previously quarantined houses as defined above (the members of 1 quarantined household could not be located)."

I say no. I say that 48 (34+14) were exposed, and 34 were sick.

"n addition to the 16 confirmed EBOV infections with a fatal outcome, the 12 probable deaths from EVD, and 6 confirmed EBOV infections who survived (34 total cases), our serosurvey identified an additional 14 individuals who were anti-GP ELISA IgG-positive. Two of these individuals reported fever during the quarantine period, and 12 were classified as minimally symptomatic, contributing 25% (binomial exact 95% CI, 14% to 40%) to the total caseload. After including the 2 undocumented symptomatic cases with the 34 reported by the DERC, we calculated a 78% symptomatic case fatality ratio (binomial exact 95% CI, 61% to 90%)."

I would suggest that the most pathetic part of teh NWOR's "effort" is not even reading the freaking press release past the (sub-) hed.

Are you sure you're a minion? You seem more like a malfunctioning 'bot, possibly cobbled together from irregular parts obtained on clearance in the 'bot aftermarket.

NWO Reporter wrote

You aren’t suggesting that the mere presence of minute amounts of Zika detected in a PCR test are proof of causation of microcephaly, are you?

Well, no. A competent reader would have noted that I mentioned in vitro and animal studies that demonstrated that Zika virus infects human neural stem and progenitor cells and causes severe pathologic changes in the brain but not in other visceral organs when infection occurs early in pregnancy. Please try to keep up.

You might be interested in a February 2017 paper that shows that the evidence for causal association of Zika virus with microcephaly meets the Bradford Hill criteria:

http://currents.plos.org/outbreaks/article/zika-virus-and-microcephaly-…

Are you sure you’re a minion?

Did I describe myself as one? Do you have anything substantive to say regarding what you're putatively replying to? Your egregious math fail? Anything?

You seem more like a malfunctioning ‘bot, possibly cobbled together from irregular parts obtained on clearance in the ‘bot aftermarket.

Oh, Johnnycakes, you don't even know. I don't think any of the retirees from the Service Center could be bothered to sift your text for one, though, given the overarching, bland failure of your prose, not to mention the sad Xtranormal Nawmal output.

Don't give up hope, Broke Bot. There are techs who can work wonders, even with your extent of malfunction. :)

This is not a new idea

Fuck off, Travis.

Yeah, for a moment I thought that passionlessDrone had reappeared after three years, but it didn't take long to realize that it wasn't him.

Awwww, I was hoping pD was back to tell us what new self-awarded degrees he'd earned.

I must confess that I watched the "propaganda documentary" Vaxxed. I do not know enough about the subject matter to form an informed view. Since there are many people here who are knowledgeable on the topic, I would like to verify two claims from Vaxxed.
1.Has the MMR vaccine Trivarix been withdrawn from Canada in 1987 due to concerns that it causes meningitis ? Was the same MMR vaccine introduced in UK under the name Pluserix, but subsequently withdrawn due to the same concerns ?
2.Has Merc stopped a production of single vaccines, denying parents an option to choose M+M+R option instead of a single MMR jab ?

Has the MMR vaccine Trivarix been withdrawn from Canada in 1987 due to concerns that it causes meningitis ? Was the same MMR vaccine introduced in UK under the name Pluserix, but subsequently withdrawn due to the same concerns ?

The Pluserix vaccine contained the Urabe strain of mumps. The Urabe mumps strain results in a small frequency of aseptic meningitis (but much lower than for wild strain mumps infection). Therefore, vaccines containing the Urabe mumps strain have been withdrawn and replaced by the slightly less effective Jeryl-Lynn strain of mumps.

So yes Pluserix and TriVarix were withdrawn, but only because they contained the Urabe mumps strain. This vaccine was never used in the US.

Has Merc stopped a production of single vaccines, denying parents an option to choose M+M+R option instead of a single MMR jab ?

In 2009 on the advice of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Practitioners, Merck discontinued the single shot vaccines. All three groups advised that their position was that MMR was a better choice as it meant fewer shots for children and greater likelihood children would remain up to date on their vaccinations.

Just goes to show that you can't trust those professional pediatric societies. All they want is what is best for children, rather than pandering to the wishes of anti-vaccine parents.

As an aside, I'm surprised no one noticed that "Awesome Mom" (whose posts are now deleted) is also Travis. That reminds me. I need to go back and delete the false passionlessDrone comment by him too.

I suspected as much, but I was in the middle of breakfast.....he really has nothing better to do, does he?

@ Peter:

You asked the following questions:

I would like to verify two claims from Vaxxed.
1.Has the MMR vaccine Trivarix been withdrawn from Canada in 1987 due to concerns that it causes meningitis ? Was the same MMR vaccine introduced in UK under the name Pluserix, but subsequently withdrawn due to the same concerns ? TRIVIRIX WHICH INCLUDED A STRAIN OF MUMPS CALLED URABE WAS FOUND TO HAVE A SMALL NUMBER OF CASES OF ASEPTIC MENINGITIS, NOT BACTERIAL MENINGITIS. ASEPTIC MENINGITIS, ALSO CALLED VIRAL MENINGITIS, IS A BENIGN CONDITION. IN MANY CASES ASYMPTOMATIC; BUT A FEW KIDS WERE HOSPITALIZED FOR 1 - 2 DAYS. THE ONLY TREATMENT GIVEN WAS REHYDRATION. ON LONG-TERM FOLLOW-UP THERE WERE NO RESIDUAL EFFECTS. MANY CHILDREN EXPERIENCE ASEPTIC MENINGITIS CAUSED BY A NUMBER OF VIRAL CONDITIONS. ANTIVACCINATIONISTS HOPE PEOPLE WILL CONFUSE ASEPTIC MENINGITIS WITH BACTERIAL MENINGITIS WHICH IS RARE; BUT A HORRIBLE DISEASE. SINCE CANADA ALREADY HAD AN APPROVED VACCINE WITH ANOTHER STRAIN OF MUMPS CALLED JERYL LYNN, TO AVOID EVEN THE BENIGN RARE ASEPTIC MENINGITIS THEY SWITCHED BACK, NOT IN 1987; BUT 1988-89, STARTING WITH A RECALL OF THE VACCINE BY THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO. PLEASE NOTE THAT IF THEY HAD NOT HAD THE OTHER VERSION OF AN MMR VACCINE THAT EVEN THE RARE BENIGN CONDITION CAUSED BY THE TRIVIRIX WAS STILL WORTH THE MUCH MORE FREQUENT AND SEVERE RISKS FROM THE ACTUAL DISEASES. THE UK HAD APPROVED IN 1972 A VACCINE WITH THE JERYL LYNN; BUT SINCE THEY HAD NOT IMPLEMENTED A VACCINE PROGRAM, THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT READY TO PRODUCE IT. THE UK, BASED ON NUMEROUS RESEARCH REPORTS THAT FOUND NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JERYL LYNN AND URABE HAD APPROVED PLUSERIX WHICH CONTAINED THE URABE FOR THEIR VACCINATION PROGRAM WHICH WAS TO BEGIN LATE 1988. WHEN THEY HEARD ABOUT THE CASES OF ASEPTIC MENINGITIS IN CANADA, THEY INVESTIGATED, FOUND THAT THE CANADIANS REPORTED THAT THE FEW CASES WERE BENIGN, SO THEY DECIDED TO SWITCH OVER TO JERYL LYNN VACCINES AS SOON AS POSSIBLE; BUT, GIVEN THAT EVEN THE URABE PROTECTED AGAINST FAR WORSE CONDITIONS CAUSED BY THE NATURAL DISEASE, THEY DID THE INTELLIGENT THING AND DECIDED TO USE URABE UNTIL THEY COULD GET SUFFICIENT QUANTITIES OF THE JERYL LYNN. THERE IS AN OLD SAYING: "DON'T SACRIFICE THE GOOD FOR THE PERFECT." ANTIVACCINATIONISTS PLAY UP THE SMALL RISK OF THE BENIGN CONDITION ASEPTIC MENINGITIS AND IGNORE THE RISKS FROM THE NATURAL DISEASE.
[SEE MY ARTICLE: Wrong About Vaccine Safety: A Review of Andrew Wakefield’s “Callous Disregard”, 2013, PP. 12-13 AT: https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOVACJ/TOVACJ-6-9.pdf

JUST TO BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR, ANTIVACCINATIONISTS ASSUME MOST PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ASEPTIC/VIRAL MENINGITIS AND BACTERIAL MENINGITIS AND THUS WILL IGNORE THAT THE SMALL RISK FROM ASEPTIC MENINGITIS, A BENIGN CONDITION, WAS STILL FAR FAR BETTER THAN THE RISKS FROM THE ACTUAL DISEASE. AND THE WHO CONTINUED TO USE MMR WITH URABE UNTIL 2015.
2.Has Merc stopped a production of single vaccines, denying parents an option to choose M+M+R option instead of a single MMR jab ? LAST TIME I LOOKED, ONE COULD GET SINGLE MEASLES VACCINE IN UK; BUT ONLY FROM DOCTORS OFFICE WHO IMPORT IT THEMSELVES. THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE DOES NOT PROVIDE IT. SO, IF SOMEONE REALLY WANTS THE SINGLE VACCINE, THEY CAN PAY FOR IT. IT'S NOT THAT EXPENSIVE. I'M TOO LAZY TO LOOK UP WHO THE MANUFACTURER IS. THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS STUDIES THAT HAVE FOUND NO INCREASED RISKS FROM THE TRIVALENT MMR VACCINE. IN FACT, SEVERAL WELL-DONE STUDIES HAVE FOUND THAT THE MMR VACCINE COMPARED TO UNIVALENT MEASLES VACCINE HAVE ALMOST EXACTLY THE SAME SMALL RISK OF ADVERSE EVENTS AND THAT IT IS THE MEASLES COMPONENT RESPONSIBLE FOR ALMOST ALL OF THEM. IN OTHER WORDS, WHETHER ONE GIVES JUST A MEASLES SHOT OR MMR, NO DIFFERENCE. HOWEVER, IT MEANS TAKING KID TO DOCTOR SEVERAL TIMES AND SUBJECTING TO SEVERAL SHOTS, BOTH UNPLEASANT FOR THE CHILD AND RISK THAT WILL MISS A SHOT AND BE VULNERABLE TO THE NATURAL DISEASES.

@ Orac:

I don't think you should delete comments using your name or others. Instead, I think in bold capitalized letters you should simply point out that they are examples of the dishonest lengths that people who can't logically and scientifically make their arguments go to to muddy the waters. Point out that taking someone else's name is unethical, dishonest, and reflects on the integrity of those doing it. You should be able somehow to put such comments directly in the respective comments.

@Peter #179

Did Wakefield happen to mention that the risk of meningitis from the Urabe mumps vaccine strain in the withdrawn versions of the MMR vaccine was about one thousand-fold less than the risk of meningitis from mumps?

British Medical Journal 1958;2:27-30.
Lancet 1993;341:979-82.
American Journal of Epidemiology 2003;157:157-165.
American Journal of Epidemiology 2007;165;704-9.

A couple of news items caught my eye today. First, Brazil is stepping up a campaign to vaccinate against yellow fever, now that disease spread has killed thousands of howler monkeys and at least 220 people:

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/notices/alert/yellow-fever-brazil

Meantime, antivaxers have declared that the outbreak is solely due to bad sanitation, and are raising money to send sponge-bath kits to affected monkeys (OK, I made up that last part but it has the ring of antivax Truth).

In other news, here's a highly credulous article about the "benefits" of cannibalism - i.e. placentaphagy:

http://www.dispatch.com/news/20170402/health-growing-number-of-moms-con…

Are there hard-core moms who eat the entire placenta raw after giving birth, the way animals do it in nature? That'd seem to be the way to go; none of this artificial dried-capsule stuff.

@ Brian:

Not only did Wakefield NOT mention the much higher risk of aseptic meningitis from the natural disease; but he called the vaccine, "a dangerous vaccine." I reserve "dangerous" for something that causes a serious acute condition and/or a chronic disability. Gee, maybe Wakefield has a problem with the English language? Read my article for more on Wakefield.

@ Brian:

I have built up an extensive library of articles on infectious diseases, well over 10,000 under various different folders. I try to find most articles discussed in comments. However, it helps if the person posting the article give a good reference, e.g author, title, year (month if available), journal, volume, issue, and pages. I checked out the four you listed, not easy to find, turns out I already had them. Please in future give better reference. I really don't like having to waste time. On the other hand, all excellent references.

First, Brazil is stepping up a campaign to vaccinate against yellow fever, now that disease spread has killed thousands of howler monkeys and at least 220 people

The point here, BTW. is to prevent the outbreak's becoming urbanized.

Re placentas:

My women's health preceptor and I discussed this very issue last week. She doesn't see any benefit in it and neither do it. I find it hard to believe hormones would survive digestion; that's why insulin cannot be taken orally. The vitamins and iron you can get in your normal diet. I don't see anything beyond the placebo effect.

There's a lot of woo in the natural childbirth movement, and it seems to be more prevalent in the affluent patients who can afford it.

The obstetrician who owns the practice encourages Vit K and HepB vaccination, as well as TDaP but a lot of his patients refuse it.

@Joel re single dose vaccines: I can see a benefit for single dose vaccines, but not enough of one to keep producing them. My job required a pertussis booster a few years ago. I'm allergic to tetanus, and hesitated about getting the TDaP. My doctor said trying to find a single dose pertussis would be too expensive and time consuming for my employer. He put me on prednisone and Benadryl and I did fine.

That kind of situation probably isn't that common. I can think of no other reason to do a single dose form of MMR or TDaP.

@ #179 (Peter)

It's sometimes difficult to tell with Wakefield whether he's always lying or whether, in some cases, he is simply so ignorant and incompetent that he has a more benign reason for misleading.

In the case of Pluserix, he tries to make out (and with you has evidently succeeded) that there is something suspicious about identical products being marketed under different names.

In fact, this happens a lot, for a variety of reasons. I haven't checked, but one reason may have been that Trivarix was considered too similar-sounding to Trivax (a brand of DTP vaccine), or there may have been trademark issues. In any event, Plusarix would have been branded and in production before the similar product was withdrawn in Canada.

The reason the UK went ahead with Plusarix is that the Canadian (and Japanese) data weren't strong at the time, the product had already been ordered, and there was no ready alternative supply. Merck, which produced the Jeryl Lynn strain, wasn't capable of covering the order (and wasn't for some years), and there was additionally an established practice of trying to source vaccines from a variety of suppliers. Also, Merck's MMR II made kids cry more often.

The Urabe isssue is quite a complex one, no evidence of wrongdoing has ever been produced by anybody, and eventually the Urabe strain products were withdrawn as a result of research by government-employed or government-funded researchers.

It goes without saying that those researchers were not penalised, struck off, exposed for research fraud etc. And yet, contrary to Wakefield, their work led to two brands of MMR being withdrawn from the market.

@188
Ah, Joel, I was merely trying to indicate to Peter that I wasn't blowing smoke--I doubted that he would actually read any references that I cited. FWIW, as you know, it's easy to find articles listed in even the abbreviated format that I used with PubMed's Advanced Search Builder by, for example, specifying the journal, the year of publication, and a keyword such as mumps: the search string ("British Medical Journal"[Journal]) AND "1958"[Date - Publication] mumps) could have taken Peter to a full free text version of the first article that I cited if he was genuinely interested. Sorry to require the extra step of you, but I thought under the circumstances I should avoid (at least the appearance of) pedantry.

... antivaxers have declared that the outbreak is solely due to bad sanitation ...

Stuff like that makes me want to break out assorted weapons.

The antivax idiots proclaim all can be fixed with sanitation. While it is undeniably true that poor sanitation is a serious problem, the fools seem to be content to allow poor people to die from disease while they languish in hopes of pristine poopatoria with warm running water in which to wash their hands while they sing iHappy Birthday (forget about the children who died, having seen only a birthday or two, due to vaccine preventable diseases) for timing.

What they really need is sidewalks they can stay on. Whatever happened to that twit?

@ Panacea:

You are absolutely right that a monovalent vaccine should be available for the RARE person who has a clear reaction to the antigens from another microbe in a multivalent vaccine; otherwise, as I wrote above, giving monovalent vaccines to kids confers NO benefit, causes additional pain from several sticks and the risk of getting behind in protection from vaccine-preventable diseases.

@ Doug:

As you write, sanitation has its limits. First, clean water and clean food, great; but especially airborne microbes can't be avoided by just hand washing, etc. Second, it turns out that polio broke the mold by becoming epidemic and more often serious because of sanitation. Prior to sanitation, infants were exposed to polio while still protected by their mother's antibodies. Even then cases of acute flaccid paralysis did occur, more than one would be happy with; but with sanitation, children became exposed to the virus after mother's antibodies gone and result, a lot more cases of acute flaccid paralysis.

One of the major problems with antivaccinationists is their need to see the world in black and white. In this case, sanitation vs no sanitation; but health involves a host of factors, one size doesn't fit all.

Some also claim that polio virus was basically harmless until DDT or arsenic used as pesticides; but the data, including timing and location just don't add up unless one cherry picks.

Basically, the world has become ever more complicated with people overwhelmed and looking for simplistic answers. At the same time, studies have found that around 80% of Americans do NOT understand science nor critical thinking. There are some great books that deals with this:

Christopher Toumey. Conjuring Science: Scientific Symbols and Cultural Meanings in American Life.

also: Michael Shermer. Why People Believe Weird Things.

If you get these, read them, and find them worthwhile, next time you see me posting on a blog, let me know, and I'd be happy to recommend additional books. Besides my training in epidemiology and biostatistics, I have degrees in Social Psychology and read a lot about Causal Inference, Decision Theory, and How People Perceive.

Don’t give up hope, Broke Bot. There are techs who can work wonders, even with your extent of malfunction.

Yah. You weren't really intended to get that reference, although you might have been able to figure it out if you weren't, y'know, a dullard.

Yet another demonstration of your wholesale inability to respond to anything in a substantive fashion was, of course, predictable.

Arsenic has been shown to cause hind limb paralysis in the laboratory: British Medical Journal

Fuck off, Travis.

@197 (Rachel french)

Polio wasn't contagious like a virus should (sic).

Well, I don't know just how contagious a virus "should" be, but polio's basic reproduction number (R0) of 5-7 is similar to that of smallpox and rubella and greater than that of HIV, SARS and influenza, so that seems contagious enough to me. The evidence points towards the fact that you get your misinformation from wacky anti-vaccine web sites.

I think Travis is back...

"Rachel fremch"

organophosphates have been shown to cause leg paralysis

nothing wacky about organophosphate and arsenical paralysis

What a startling revelation! Organophosphates can cause paralysis? Who knew?

Look up the structure of Sarin.

If you can’t tell the difference between the symptoms caused by nerve gas versus polio . . . I have no words I’m willing to express on a public forum.

I'm sorry, I dIdn't see I typo'd "french" until after hitting Submit

You you seriously think that not one case of arsenical paralysis was diagnosed as ‘polio’?
On Arsenical Paralysis

Followed by a link to a 1893 description of acute arsenical poisoning, which was immediately recognised as such and never diagnosed as 'polio'? Is there any particular reason for this?

The straw is all yours, "Rachel french."

Can you tell me what the fluorine in Sarin does, and why Sarin causes paralysis?

(Hint: I'm like a lawyer. I'm not asking you a question to which I do not know the answer.)

Seen one acetylcholinesterase blocker, seen 'em all.

It looks like Orac has wielded his ban hammer yet again on Travis Schwochert from Endeavor, Wisconsin.

herr doktor bimler, I'm willing to bet real money (or perhaps tasty beverages) that "Rachel french does not know what "acetyl" nor "choline" nor the suffix "-ase" mean.

And in the time it took to type my comment, a new sock has arisen.

Actually, HF is likely the leaving group.

Fail.

Tip: don't quibble terms with specialists in the field. Oh, wait, that's what you do for fun: you pretend you know more than you do.

"flip" who isn't:

I didn't offer to buy you a drink. The offer was for herr doktor bimler.

So, oh, knowlegable one, to what does the suffix "ace" from bimler's comment #204 by current number refer?

Hint: it's not the number one starter on a baseball team, nor a fighter pilot.

Fingers typed "ace" when I wanted "-ase." Ooops.

Sorry, I can't help you Chemmomo.... Orac's ban hammer has struck again.

Orac’s ban hammer has struck again.

Which is a good thing, although it does make me look like I'm talking to myself.

Oh, fear not. Travis is trying a bunch of other e-mail addresses tonight to impersonate people, some well known commenters. Thus far, he has failed, but stay frosty, my friends.

This guy's more annoying than Mabus. Well, to those of us who are just readers and not on the receiving end of death threats....

Dachel ( AoA) posts a Newsweek article about the protest which had dozens of attendees with umbrellas.

re RJK jr's lifestyles ( he could just relax or suchlike)

I recently read that he and his wife, actress Cheryl Hines, were selling their home in (IIRC) Beverly Hills for 6 million USD.

Mikey ( Natural News yesterday) predicts vaccine manufacturers creating a "massive false flag" outbreak of VPDs to scare parents into vaccinating.

He also predicts world financial collapse.

In other news...

it appears that Gary Null is *still* off the air on WBAI.
( which probably means that his vitamin sales figures will drop)

"Mikey ( Natural News yesterday) predicts vaccine manufacturers creating a “massive false flag” outbreak of VPDs to scare parents into vaccinating."

"He also predicts world financial collapse."

Well now I'm really scared - since Adams' predictions habitually are right on the money:

http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/blog/101/a-look-back-at-natural-…

On the subject of other blogs -

Jake has a post up about a "casting call for a program that’s been a BBC Series and is now coming to the USA called “Employable Me.” The program is about the great difficulty people with mental health and brain “differences” have in finding work."

Jake has offered his services as a cast member, despite, so far as I know, having never worked a day in his life, and indeed no evidence of ever having looked for a job. I don't doubt Jake, like Travis, will have trouble finding a job, but for both the reason is the same - their own words that they put out into the public domain. Mental health and brain “differences” don't enter into the discussion.

@ Travis or whatever name he is currently posting as:

You write: “Arsenic has been shown to cause hind limb paralysis in the laboratory: British Medical Journal and, perhaps also you or someone else, Chemmomo(?) writing:

“nothing wacky about organophosphate and arsenical paralysis”.

You probably don’t know what differential diagnosis is; but just as an example:

Polio develops rapidly, within a couple of days, and the damage is to the neurons in the anterior horn of the vertebrae and can result in total paralysis to the muscles served by the damaged nerves
Arsenic develops gradually, causes peripheral neuropathy and the lesion is in the sensory-motor axonopathy. If high-level of arsenic exposure, the onset of neuropathy may occur after 7 to 14 days.

Additional symptomatology separates the two. I couldn’t find the BMJ article; but doubt it would change anything.

In addition, the claims made by, among others, Age of Autism have numerous problems. First, not too long ago it was reported that rice from Texas had high levels of arsenic, so why aren’t there large numbers of cases of paralysis, given it was fed to lots of infants? Second, the Age of Autism based their claim on a report from an agricultural experimental station in Hawaii that arsenic would be good as a pesticide for the sugar cane industry. The report was from 1915 and Age of Autism would like to believe that it was responsible for the large number of cases of paralytic polio in New York and surrounding areas in 1916. There was a large outbreak of paralytic polio cases in New York in 1907, before arsenic was even considered as a pesticide. I have NOT been able to find any report as to exactly when arsenic began actually being used in Hawaii with sugar cane and it makes NO sense that if it had been used it would only have been sold in New York and surroundings, so why was there not large outbreaks at the same time in other areas of the US?

So tiresome that antivaccinationists find an article on arsenic and paralysis and jump to whatever conclusion fits their fantasy world.

So tiresome that antivaccinationists find an article on arsenic and paralysis and jump to whatever conclusion fits their fantasy world.

Rather pathetic that so many people choose authoritarianism over logic. Ralph Scobey's 1952 article The Poison Cause of Poliomyelitis And Obstructions To Its Investigation is well-referenced and lays the case out nicely. This was originally published in the Archive Of Pediatrics and has a PubMed ID number of 14924801 (for Chris and Julian, who can't accept anything without a PubMed ID number).

Yeah, sure Travis. Expect there is a vast difference between a well researched study and an opinion piece. Which is why there is no abstract in the PubMed index page.

Though it is interesting when you look at all of Scobey's PubMed indexed writings. You see it is a bunch of wild guesses:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=SCOBEY%20RR%5BAuthor%5D&cauth…

Go away Travis.

@ Black-cat:

I have and have read Scobey's absurd article. Can't you come up with anything better than an obscure paper from over 70 years ago? The articles that were referenced are mainly irrelevant. This was before a lot of science had determined the differential diagnosis of polio vs other causes. There are many different forms of paralysis and without a differential diagnosis, one conflates them. In addition, numerous of his referenced articles clearly state that it could be a virus ingested with fruit, etc; but then he says no toxicological tests were run on the fruit eaten. One can use this approach on just about anything, that is, postulate something else. This is a waste of my time. Believe what you want. Do you really think that if he was on to something that, even if most disagreed, there would NOT be well-done up-to-date studies including spinal taps, post-mortems to find where the damaged nerves were, etc.?

I personally have well over 300 articles just on polio and almost a dozen books. How much have you read on polio? And I grew up prior to the vaccine. The number of cases of acute flaccid paralysis plummeted following introduction of the vaccine. If the cause was arsenic, DDT, lead, or something else, how do you explain the almost complete elimination of cases within a few years? The vaccine certainly didn't eliminate arsenic, etc. in the environment. In fact, as I wrote in an earlier comment, they have found high levels of arsenic in baby foods, etc. So, once again, why not an epidemic of acute flaccid paralysis? It is a reportable condition and the CDC lists far less than 200 cases per year. Given our population has doubled and the number of cases prior to the vaccine were, on average, 15,000, I think any rational person would attribute the change to the vaccine; but, then again, antivaccinationists aren't rational.

Joel, by skimming that silly old opinion piece, it told me that Dr. Scobey was pretty much denying the roll of viral infections. And not just for polio.

@ Chris:

Yes, Scobey was denying it; but at the same time listing a number of studies that believed it was a viral infection and, as I said, Scobey then postulated toxins not investigated. But it doesn't matter because the number of cases of acute flaccid paralysis plummeted following the vaccine while lead from lead gas actually increased, DDT spraying continued at high levels until 1972, long after polio cases disappeared, and, as I wrote, arsenic is still a major problem. And, of course, that says it all about Scobey's denial of viral infections being responsible for diseases as measles and others also plummeted after the advent of a vaccine and the toxins continued.

I note that there are no more editorial letters from Scobey after 1954. He seems to have gone silent once the first vaccines were proven to be effective.

It is just another case of cherry picking by anti-vaccine folks.

@ Brian #185

The risk of contracting mumps meningitis following natural mumps is recorded in the literature as 1 case per 400 cases and, at the outset, the risk of contracting the same following administration of a urabe containing vaccine, was recorded as 1 case per 100,000 doses. In contrasting those two sets of figures, it is clear that the vaccine is far, far less risky and much, much more favourable.

However, the various sets of laboratory confirmed data following the use of Urabe containing vaccines from the countries who used it, differ significantly, with a resultant impact on the comparative risk of contracting mumps meningitis between the natural infection and that which is vaccine induced.

The Canadian Diseases Weekly Report of 15th December 1990 records the rate of meningitis detected as 1 case per 62,000 doses, not near the originally estimate of 1 case in 100,000 but still favouring the vaccine.

Colville and Pugh in the UK published their findings in The Lancet (Vol 340, Sept,26th 1992 ) with a virilogically confirmed rate of 1 case per 3,800 doses. Again, very different to the original 1 in 100,000 doses stated at the outset, but still favouring the vaccine.

In the January 8th 1994 edition of The Lancet " Japan's troubles with measles-mumps-rubella vaccine", Japan reports on a rate of 1 case per 1044 vaccinations.
The transcript from a court case in Japan records one prefecture with a risk of 1 case in 184, making the risk in this particular circumstance, to be greater from the vaccine than naturally ocurring mumps infection.

It is clear that the risk in relation to urabe vaccines differed significantly from country to country and also between the different brands of vaccine used. With so many sets of lab confirmed data recording different risks, it is not possible to state unequivocally how the risk between Urabe vaccine induced infection and naturally ocurring infection, stacks up. up.

@ Wendy Stephen:

First, if you read my article on Wakefield's book, Wrong About Vaccine Safety: A Review of Andrew Wakefield’s “Callous
Disregard” at: https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOVACJ/TOVACJ-6-9.pdf , the Japanese case was based on a vaccine whose manufacturer may not have followed protocol. In other words, it wasn't properly manufactured. One can make a case against anything and everything if one ignores this. And court decisions don't always reflect the best science (see Marcia Angell's book "Science on Trial". In addition, the Japanese stopped using MMR vaccine and suffered years of deaths in children, disabilities, and hospitalizations far in excess of any problems with the Urabe vaccine. Second, you have claimed that you are NOT anti vaccine; but over and over again focus on what occurred in the past. If you are pro-vaccine, the least you could do is say: "Yes, there may have been problems in the past; but the current MMR containing the Jeryl Lynn strain of mumps is an excellent vaccine and I would recommend it." As long as all you do is drag up the past, your claim you are not antivaccination lacks credibility. And aseptic meningitis is a benign condition. Benign doesn't mean without discomfort; but short-lived. Yes, you could probably dig up a case or two that became serious; but I could find cases of the common cold that became serious. And, both the risk of aseptic meningitis and the "seriousness" is higher from the natural mumps. And you ignore the many other sequelae from the natural disease not found from the vaccines. But keep it up, you are tiresome. I think you are obsessed with the Urabe?

However, as I wrote in another comment on another blog, I agreed with you that, given the review of your daughter's case where the review board said the vaccine likely caused her unilateral hearing loss, that they should have compensated her. I agree with you that they should not have a cut-off point of 60% disability. I agree for two reasons:

1. I believe as a society/community that we should do our best to help each and every person; but especially children
2. It is good public policy when vaccines are mandated to show that the government, despite the safety of vaccines, will help when rare adverse events occur.

As such, if you want, I can try to help. I have a number of contacts in the UK. I could ask them to contact their respective MPs and, perhaps, local newspapers. If you are interested, I need the actual complete decision on your daughter, Katie's case. I will attach to e-mails to my contacts and also attach the newspaper articles. So, if interested, you can send as attachment to me c/o Every Child By Two. You know their e-mail address.

@ Wendy Stephen:

First, I would appreciate it when you give a reference to an article if you give a more complete reference. I had to search through the Lancet to find it, only to realize I already had it.

Second, exactly as I said, the article states: "However, the study revealed surprising findings. OMRC was found to have used unauthorized production techniques in the manufacture of its mumps vaccine. . . . This case encourage those opposing the vaccination program to apply pressure on MHW. Measles-mumps-rubella vaccinations rates . . . continued to decline." Etc. and as I wrote in my paper: Following withdrawal of the MMR vaccine, “the Ministry
for Health, Labour, and Welfare of Japan estimated the
number of mumps cases in Japan to be 2.26 million in 2001;
only 226 cases were reported in the USA in the same year”
[95]. In addition, The incidence of measles in Japan increased following withdrawal of the combined MMR vaccine in 1993 and continues to be a public health problem. In 1980, before
the combined MMR was available, over 13,000 cases of
measles were reported. This number decreased to below
3300 in 1990 shortly after introduction of the combined
MMR vaccine in 1989. In 2002, more than 30,000 cases
of measles were reported in Japan compared with <100
cases in the US. The death rate associated with measles
has ranged from 15 to 90 deaths annually. The true mortality
rate of measles disease in Japan is believed to be
higher due to inaccurate reporting of cause of death,
which is often listed as multi-organ failure or pneumonia
instead of measles [96].

So, a fraudulently manufactured vaccine and despite its problems, the result of kids not getting the MMR, despite the article pointing out that another version of mumps was made available by a reputable company, deaths and serious disabilities.

I own a car with airbags, thank goodness not the Takata. I know that some people have been harmed in minor traffic accidents by good airbags; but I also know that they save far more lives and reduce injuries, so I understand the difference between the Takata airbags and others and am not going to disconnect mine. You keep obsessing on the Urabe, drag up fraudulently manufactured case in Japan, and, I've never seen a comment by you where you say: "the current MMR vaccine with the Jeryl Lynn strain of mumps is an excellent vaccine and I recommend it."

JustaTech@47:

I once read a book about a B&B with a hole to hell int he basement. The hole talked to itself, and all its dialog was presented in BLOCK CAPS.

Tanya Huff's Summon the Keeper, perhaps?

Jenora @231: Yup, that's the book! And doesn't Heckenlively remind you of that furnace?

Joel @230: To further your analogy with airbags: I recently got a notification that my car may have a Takata airbag in the front passenger seat. I was told to NOT let anyone sit in that seat until I could get the airbag replaced, which the car company did for free.
So a problem was identified and the manufacturer fixed the problem at their own expense to keep me the consumer safe.

@ JustaTech:

You write: "So a problem was identified and the manufacturer fixed the problem at their own expense to keep me the consumer safe."

Actually the manufacturer withheld reports for quite some time while more people died and were seriously injured. It was only after our government prosecuted them and fined them that they acted. However, the point I was making is to not conflate poorly manufactured products with those manufactured properly.

Joel: Yes, you're correct. And as far as I know the cost for the replacement was absorbed by the *car* manufacturer, not the airbag manufacturer.
But you're right: a correctly made airbag can be dangerous to some people in some situations, which is why kids are supposed to sit in the back, but save far more lives than they risk.
Incorrectly made airbags are dangerous to everyone and protect no one.

I once read a book about a B&B with a hole to hell int he basement. The hole talked to itself, and all its dialog was presented in BLOCK CAPS.

Tanya Huff’s Summon the Keeper, perhaps?

Hey, I had a dream like that (minus the caps; deep voice instead) when I was around seven years old,* which well predates the book. Archetyke?

* I'm prety sure I hadn't seen Equinox on TV yet, in any event.

The antivaccine conspiracy theory narrative: You want it darker?

oracknows — Thu, 16 Mar 2017 02:00:09 +0000

The antivaccine conspiracy theory narrative: You want it darker?

Some of you might have been wondering just WTF has been going on here on the old blog, given the relative paucity of posts over the last week and the "reruns" from the distant past that I've been posting. I address this question because I realize that not everyone reads the comments and it's quite possible some of you might have missed it, but here in Michigan we had an enormous windstorm last Wednesday that knocked out power to 800,000+ people. Unfortunately, Orac was one of them. True, we did get the power back over the weekend, but then, in a cruel twist of fate, we lot power again on Tuesday, which is why there was no post yesterday. Even better, the power came back Wednesday morning as I was getting ready to head to Seattle to attend the yearly Society of Surgical Oncology meeting, only to die after about an hour. So that's three—count 'em—three times we've lost power in the last week, during a time period when we've had the coldest weather in March I can remember in a long time. I tell ya, I just can't win this week.

Now that that's out of the way, I can't help but make the observation that stuff happened while I was (mostly) offline. One thing that caught my eye is that Steve Novella discovered the wonder of delusion that is Kent Heckenlively. You remember Kent, don't you? I first encountered him when he was a member of the merry band of pseudoscience-worshiping antivaccine warriors over at the antivaccine crank blog Age of Autism. What attracted my attention was how what he did to his daughter to try to "cure" her of her autism opened my eyes wider to the lengths to which antivaccine parents will go and how far into quackery they will delve in order to "save" their child. In Heckenlively's case, he hit is daughter's grandparents up for $15,000 to take her to a dubious stem cell clinic in Costa Rica for "stem cell" injections directly into her cerebrospinal fluid. Not surprisingly, it didn't work.

Let's just put it this way. Heckenlively is so far off the ranch that even that apparently even that wretched hive of antivaccine scum and quackery that is AoA is insufficiently conspiratorial. I can only conclude that because I don't recall the last time I saw him post anything at AoA and, more importantly, he how appears to have found a home with Patrick "Tim" Bolen, a.k.a. Hulda Clark's pit bull, at least back when Hulda Clark was still alive. Clark, if you remember, proclaimed that all cancer and AIDS were caused by a liver fluke and could be cured using her "zapper," which always reminded me of a Scientology E-meter. In any case, I looked it up, and Heckenlively hasn't appeared in AoA since last July, while since June he's been tearing up The Bolen Report. This is not a step up. When next we see Heckenlively switch jobs, I fear we'll see him heading to the next logical place, Mike Adams' Natural News. Really, it's where he belongs. But I digress.

In any case, Steve used a post by Heckenlively published earlier this week entitled A Vaccine-Free World?… to note that the antivaccine narrative just gets darker. And he's right (as usual). The antivaccine narrative has been steadily getting darker and darker in the 12 years that I've been actively paying attention and writing about it. However, seeing Steve's post, I couldn't help but channel Leonard Cohen's last album before he died, which was entitled You Want It Darker. Remember, this is an album made by a man who knew he was going to die soon.

Yes, antivaccine activists do want it darker. Also remember that in any story (and that's what conspiracy theories are, in essence) there is a victim, a hero, and a villain. Guess who plays these roles in Heckenlively's fantasies? You'll see in a moment. In the meantime, join him on his magical mystery tour of his dark fantasy:

Remove all vaccines from usage for a period of five years, study them in laboratories and in animal models, then create a system to slowly introduce one vaccine at a time and monitor for long-term effects before even thinking of introducing a second vaccine. Oh, and while that’s being done, immediately REPEAL AND DON’T REPLACE the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act which currently gives pharmaceutical companies COMPLETE IMMUNITY FOR HARM DONE BY THEIR PRODUCTS.

Steve didn't really dwell much on this part of Heckenlively's screed, but I want to. What it demonstrates is just how fully deluded he is. He has utterly and literally no clue just how massively unethical such a plan would be. The reasons are numerous and range from the incredibly simple to grasp to more complicated. Basically, it is unethical to perform an experiment in which children are intentionally left unprotected from common dieseases that can be prevented by vaccines. Worse, Heckenlively's plan would take not just years, but likely decades, during which diseases like measles, mumps, diptheria, and pertussis would predictably come roaring back. After all, that's what happened in the UK when Andrew Wakefield's campaign to discredit the MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) vaccine, aided and abetted by the complicit tabloid press, resulted in plunging vaccine rates. Measles, once eliminated, came roaring back. The same thing happened in Europe. Thus far in the US we've managed to avoid a resurgence as enormous, but there are worrisome signs that that could change, such as the Disneyland measles outbreak and declining vaccine uptake due to increasing numbers of personal belief exemptions to school vaccine mandates in Texas. Add to that other outbreaks, such as in my very own state, and it's hard not to conclude that herd immunity is hanging by a thread in too many places where critical masses of the vaccine-averse and antivaccine reside. There are, of course, many other problems besides ethics with Heckenlively's idea, not the least of which is how utterly expensive and impractical it would be.

Of course, such an experiment might—I repeat, might—be justified if there were massive and overwhelming evidence that the current vaccine schedule was causing horrible harm to huge numbers of children. The evidence, however, would have to be so obvious and irrefutable that not even Paul Offit or I could deny it. Even then, under such a circumstance, we would still want to figure out a strategy to determine what is causing harm that wouldn't inevitably result in wholesale outbreaks of infectious disease. Of course, if you're Kent Heckenlively, you believe the situation is just that apocalyptic and the evidence that irrefutable. That's where he and much of the antivaccine movement diverge with reality. They express sentiments like this:

We know that vaccines are causing MASSIVE DAMAGE to the health of our young and contributing to the massive epidemics of chronic diseases among those of working age and the dementias of the elderly. Don’t believe me? Just read the vaccine safety inserts. I hear Alex Jones and InfoWars are going to be doing their own series of special reports on THE VACCINE SIDE EFFECTS LISTED ON THE INSERTS. (That’s just the things the pharmaceutical companies admit!) I’m looking forward to that. Worried that it’s “Fake News?” That’s easy to remedy. If you have any questions, just go to your local pharmacy and ask for the inserts yourself.

Ah, yes, the appeal to the package insert. We should figure out a name for this logical fallacy, if someone hasn't already. Oh, yes, the ancient reptilian Skeptical Raptor already has, argumentum ad package insert. Oh, wait, that was me. (We'll just have to share the credit.) In any case, as Steve, and the Raptor (and I) have pointed out, package inserts are legal documents, not scientific documents. They are designed to cover the asses of the pharmaceutical companies, not to dispassionately list adverse events definitely linked to the vaccine or drug. Pretty much every bad thing that happened to any participant in the clinical trials leading to the licensing of a vaccine or drug is listed, whether that bad thing had anything to do with the vaccine or drug or not. Heckenlively, who loudly proclaims his JD (even though he doesn't practice law), should know that, but instead he says things like " In the legal system, such admissions are considered “clues.” Um, no. such "admissions" are there for one purpose and one purpose only, to protect the pharmaceutical company.

Of course, in Heckenlively's world, the nonexistent horror he describes is not due to negligence. Well, that's not entirely true. There is negligence there, or at least there was to begin with. However, after that, the reason this "suffering" continues is because "They" want it to. Remember what I said about every story needing a victim, a hero, and a villain? Well, the victims in Heckenlively's world are the children. Clearly, the villain is...well, it's not always clear exactly who is the villain, but it is always some combination of pharmaceutical companies, the government (usually the CDC, but often the FDA as well), state medical authorities, politicians who support school vaccine mandates (because, in Heckenlively's view, they are in the pockets of big pharma, natch), and the medical profession, all of whom deny based on science his evidence- and science-free beliefs that vaccines are horrifically harmful. Guess whom, that leaves as the hero? You guessed it:

But I thought when people like me raised our voices and claimed vaccines were harming the human species, that somebody in a position of authority in government or science would do some proper investigation. However, as I researched my book, INOCULATED: How Science Lost its Soul I had to confront some dark truths about the corruption of the American body politic. No matter how cynical I was about whether people in our government cared about children with autism, and the wholesale destruction of our species by vaccines, I wasn’t cynical enough. We tried to work with our health authorities. They turned a deaf ear.

So the battle lines are drawn. I did, however, forget one other villain, namely the press. After all, the press has increasingly (and correctly) treating antivaccine activists like Heckenlively as the fringe loons they are. So they must be paid off. I just saw a particularly telling article on that score, although it was not by Heckenlively. Rather, it was by Anne Dachel, published over at AoA, and entitled, Dachel Wake Up: Julia Belluz Is CDC's Company Gal!, which basically accuses an excellent journalist who's done some great stories on health and medicine as being in the pockets of pharma, along with the CDC. Because in Heckenlively's world, no one could ever be pro-vaccine unless it was because he or she was in the pocket of big pharma.

One key aspect of these dark conspiracy theories is the "hidden knowledge" narrative. Yes, the CDC, FDA, big pharma, and medical-industrial complex might have bamboozled the sheeple, but there are people who know, man. They've WOKEN UP (to borrow Heckenlively's all-caps):

I don’t care how much the mainstream media, funded by the waning pharmaceutical dollars continues to whip up hysteria, it won’t work. We all see the casualties in our schools, in our homes, and on our streets. A brutal reckoning is coming for those who have allowed this harm to children to take place.

Now do you see where all the comparisons with Nazis, the Holocaust, and death camps come from? People like Heckenlively truly believe that vaccines are so evil and those who promote them even more so. But Heckenlively imagines himself to be so much better than that. Elsewhere he as written about I’m Not Asking You to Smoke Crystal Meth . . . I Just Want You to Watch a Documentary." (Having seen the movie, I'll take the crystal meth, please. It couldn't be any worse.) The movie to which he is referring, of course, is VAXXED, Andrew Wakefield's antivaccine propaganda film disguised as a documentary. Hilariously, his friends were...less than receptive.

I have been astounded by the response of some long-time friends who when I say, “Hey, there’s this documentary about a whistle-blower at the CDC and the cover-up of the link between vaccines and autism, do you want to come and see it?” They act like I’m denying the existence of God. No, scratch that. If I asked them to come to a movie about an atheist, I’d get a better response. In very poignant emails back to me they have said that they will not even put at risk their “fugitive and cloistered virtue” (to steal from the poet, John Milton) by exposing themselves to the possibility that the government is lying to them.

Or maybe they recognize a ridiculous conspiracy theory when they see one. Kent has some smart friends. I wonder why they're friends with Ken, given that he must harangue them frequently about his antivaccine beliefs. Of course, the most important part of the conspiracy theory is hope and how it allows people like Heckenlively to view themselves as heroic crusaders against evil. For example, I've cited how Heckenlively shares one characteristic with me. (Embarrassing, but true.) He really, really loves J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, so much so that he actually wrote this back when he was still a regular at AoA:

When I watch I imagine myself as Aragorn, taking the Dimholt Road under the mountain, clutching the sword, Anduril, Flame of the West, offering a deal to the souls of the dishonored dead if they would join me in battle. I picture myself as Aragon, astride my horse in front of the Black Gate, telling my troops, I see in your eyes the same fear that would take the heart of me. A day may come when the courage of men fails, when we forsake our friends and break all bonds of fellowship, but it is not this day. An hour of wolves and shattered shields, when the age of men comes crashing down, but it is not this day! This day we fight! Then I jump off my horse, and with the setting sun behind me, a reckless, almost manic glint in my eye and a crooked grin, I am first to charge into the enemy army.

This is, of course, one of my favorite scenes from both The Lord of the Rings books and the movies. In it, the last heir of Isildur, Aragorn, had brought his forces to the Black Gate of Mordor to challenge the Dark Lord Sauron to battle, not with any hope of victory, but as a diversion to distract the Eye of Sauron long enough to allow the hobbits Frodo and Sam to cross Mordor and reach Mount Doom, there to destroy the One Ring, the source of Sauron’s evil power, by throwing it into the molten lava in the Crack of Doom. Aragorn, Gandalf, and his companions fully expected to die in the effort, and it looked as though they would do just that after hordes of orcs issued forth from the Black Gate and the battle was joined. They were saved because Sam and Frodo did reach Mount Doom and the ring was destroyed, thus destroying Sauron’s power and causing his armies to flee, before the hordes of Sauron’s orc’s could destroy Aragorn and his vastly outnumbered force. The point, of course, is that Heckenlively views himself (or fantasizes himself) as a heroic figure from the world of epic fantasy like Aragorn. Walter Mitty-like, Heckenlively fantasizes that it’s him leading a doomed mission to the very Black Gate of Mordor, knowing he’s unlikely to come out of it alive, in order to give others the chance to defeat the great evil against which he strives.

And, have no doubt, victory is the only outcome that Heckenlively envisions:

Here’s how the Vaccine-Autism war ends. We win. They lose. The memory of what they have done will cling to their children for generations to come, like the children of Nazi war criminals who were horrified by the crimes of their parents. And what about us? We were the resistance. We were the freedom-fighters. We fought to protect the future. And we will tell our stories.

He even fantasizes about pro-vaccine activists as French nobility dragged to the guillotine to have their heads lopped off during the French Revolution and hopes for some "reasonable" (i.e., compliant") provaccine advocates, whom he contrasts to the French aristocracy before the Revolution:

The white majority in South Africa knew they were losing to Nelson Mandela’s call for justice and they took actions which averted a catastrophe. Even though the British ended up fighting a war with us, there were voices in England who thought that the whole affair was utter madness. Eventually, their views prevailed. Hell, even some Nazis could see where Hitler was leading them after D-Day and tried to change things by blowing him up.

He's even offered pro-vaxxers a way out in a post entitled, I Will Accept Your Surrender:

I've made this offer several times in the past. I'm making it again. I am willing to accept the surrender of those who have perverted science, harmed a generation of children, and even as of this late date are willing to harm more children so as to not to upset the balance of their lives. It must be truly troubling for those who continue to fuel the epidemic of autism and other chronic diseases that even though you still maintain the trust of those in the media, the scientific community, and most of the people in politics, an amazing 39% of the population in a recent Fox News poll believe parents need to have the right to decide how and whether their children can be vaccinated. You see, I've interviewed enough scientists that I understand the world in which you operate. Although you tremble in fear when you confront the dark questions at the heart of why so many children and adults suffer with chronic diseases, you feel quite comfortable making others cower as has been done to you. It must really annoy you when you fulminate against us as if we were some extremist group, that somehow you can't get the rest of the population to fully buy it.

I politely decline to surrender. Writing about this, I realize that perhaps Steve dwelt a bit too much on the darkness in the antivaccine conspiracy theory. Yes, I've referred to the central conspiracy theory of the antivaccine movement as the idea that, somewhere in the CDC, big pharma, and the medical profession, "They" know that vaccines cause autism and all sorts of harm to children. That's why the whole "CDC whistleblower" conspiracy theory was so powerful. It tapped deep into the fantasies of antivaxers; he claims that data potentially showing a link between vaccines and autism were covered up by the CDC. However, darkness alone isn't enough. Who would continue to believe in a conspiracy theory where there is nothing but darkness and overwhelming forces arrayed against you that you have no hope of ever defeating? No, it's the hope of ultimate vindication, of victory, that sustains the antivaccine conspiracy narrative. It's the fantasy of fighting a heroic battle against all odds. It's the fantasy of one day actually winning that epic battle. It's the fantasy of being able to administer their version of "justice" to their enemies, in which evildoers admit their evil can atone and join the resistance and those who are defeated are punished for their "crimes" after the resistance wins. This is both a light and dark vision. It's a vision of light in that (to antivaxers), it's justice. Those responsible for the "crimes" imagined by antivaxers will be forced to admit their crimes and pay for them. It's a dark vision in that this "justice" not infrequently involves retribution. It's not for nothing that Heckenlively perseverates over Nazis and chose the Reign of Terror after the French Revolution as an example of retribution.

It's a very powerful narrative that taps deep into something buried at the heart of human nature. It's also pretty much immune to reason. It's a conspiracy theory that's potent even in "normal" times. However, we are not living in normal times. Donald Trump, who has a long and sordid history of antivaccine statements, is the President, and that gives people like Heckenlively even more hope that they are winning:

Let’s talk about what’s really causing the Vaxxers to lose their f******* minds. Donald Trump won the American election. He doesn’t trust the pharmaceutical companies and he is going to put into positions of power those people who don’t trust them, either. The free ride is over. Hell, he even nominated Robert Kennedy, Jr., member of a legendary Democratic dynasty and well-known environmental lawyer, to head a Commission on Vaccine Safety and Scientific Integrity.

I guess Trump's distrust of the pharmaceutical industry is why he promised to loosen FDA regulations and then appointed an honest-to-goodness pharma shill as the FDA Commissioner, causing pharma to breathe a sigh of relief and proclaim, "Thank God it's Gottlieb!" (Antivaxers were never too strong on consistency.) Also, it's not at all clear that RFK, Jr. was appointed to anything; all we have is his word for it, and you know what that's worth. (Not much.)

I fear what will happen when antivaxers like Heckenlively finally realize that Trump is very likely not going to do what they want him to, other than perhaps around the edges. It could be scary. After all, another part of many conspiracy narratives is betrayal by someone viewed as an ally.

oracknows Wed, 03/15/2017 - 22:00

Tags