Vaccination is the New Flouridation

May 15, 2008

Wow, what a crazy, angry article! Go to the website to read the comments.

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/healthwellness/85345/

By Marcotte, Pandagon

Posted on May 14, 2008, Printed on May 15, 2008

http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://pandagon.blogsome.com/85345/

The anti-vaccination argument is based on conspiracies and Luddism, not

science.

The number of anti-vaccination cranks out there on the interwebs seems to be

multiplying. It seems you can’t make reference to any kind of vaccination lately

without people, sometimes pretending to be liberals (sometimes actually

misguided liberals) wailing and moaning about how terrible vaccinations are.

It’s the new fluoridation. I’m somewhat surprised that no one wailed and moaned

that I mentioned on Pandagon a tetanus vaccination I got the other day, but rest

assured, while my arm has been kind of sore, I haven’t yet developed autism.

I have very little patience for cranks as a general rule (which is why working

for this site is so fun, because it’s about pushing back against anti-choice

cranks), but I reserve a special contempt and loathing for anti-vaccination

cranks. They remind me of nothing so much as women who make their living as

professional anti-feminists in terms of denial and idiocy levels. Anti-feminist

professional women create a special kind of loathing, because they don’t

acknowledge that their very ability to be out there earning a paycheck

lambasting feminism would not be possible without feminism giving them the right

to be women in the public sphere. Anti-vaccination cranks have a similar

parasitic relationship to the existence of vaccines. If it weren’t for

vaccination, our country would have far more immediate infectious disease health

concerns to worry about that the largely imaginary health drawbacks of the

vaccination wouldn’t have a chance to ruffle any feathers.

Anti-vaccination cranks make me see red, in no small part because there’s no

excuse for the levels of ignorance they demonstrate about the real value of

vaccines. It would be more understandable if the invention of the polio

vaccination, for instance, was so far in the past that there were no survivors

of the disease hanging around being reminders of how terrible it really is. But

there are plenty of people who had the disease that are around, suffering the

lifelong effects of even the minor cases that would have allowed you to reach

middle age after suffering that disease in your youth. I for one am incredibly

grateful to have never known anyone with small pox, tetanus or even the fucking

mumps my whole life.

Like all good cranks, anti-vaccination assholes move the goal posts

constantly. The big hobbyhorse of anti-vaccination cranks is autism rates (even

though the connection between autism and vaccinations has been thoroughly

debunked), but of course, the invention of the HPV vaccine hasn’t passed notice,

though you get that when you’re like 12 years old, so even if you believe

childhood vaccinations have something to do with autism (which you shouldn’t),

then you should realize that 12 is way too late to “develop” autism. But it’s

this lightening rod because it’s new and it’s sex-related and thus the cranks

can hang their hat on it, and get all excited about building a coalition between

the usual anti-vaccination cranks and the sexphobes, getting more power.

And of course, the invocations of “Big Pharma” do not an argument make. It’s

childish to think that something is an unvarnished, irredeemable evil just

because someone made money doing it. Big Pharma does a lot of wrong things, but

mainly because they charge too much for products that are actually good. If they

were charging too much for products that were just crap, then they’d be no more

a political problem than people who make designer handbags. The abstinence-only

assholes resort to screaming “Big Pharma” to discourage women from taking the

birth control pill, which shows what kind of crankery you’re getting into with

that tactic.

Like all good cranks, evidence that conflicts with their theories is simply

ignored. The idea behind the autism-vaccination link was that the mercury used

in some vaccinations caused autism. Well, they don’t use mercury in childhood

vaccinations anymore and haven’t for awhile, but autism rates remain high. Maybe

the vaccinations are causing autism out of tradition, then? There’s a theory

that kosher laws against the eating of pork were initially developed for health

reasons, but were kept out of tradition after the health reasons disappeared. Is

that how vaccines do it?

Promoting the idea that there’s these non-existence connections between

vaccinations and autism and other ill health effects is vicious and cruel to

parents whose children are suffering from the diseases that are claimed to be

caused by vaccinations. I can’t imagine how much a parent with an autistic child

would suffer from guilt if she actually believed this bullcrap, because after

all, it was she who got the child vaccinated. All needless—they may not know

what causes autism, but I’m going to bet that if they ever do find out, it’s

probably going to be genetic and not something that parents could have known or

prevented.

Maybe what bothers me the most is that the opposition to vaccinations tends to

play into this knee-jerk Luddite mentality. Not that I don’t think new

technologies shouldn’t be carefully examined to see if they do more good than

harm, and that things that prove to be problems like cars should be seriously

reconsidered. But a lot of people don’t want to do the hard work of taking each

new technology and its issues and problems on for itself, and instead just want

this general “new is bad/old ways were better” rule that they can apply

indiscriminately. The traditionalism fallacy infects people on the right and the

left both, though often in different ways. For instance, when conservatives

decry the “unnatural”, they’re referring to sodomy or women getting paychecks,

and when liberals do it, they’re probably talking about medications. Of course,

some conservatives are beginning to see the benefits of embracing the knee-jerk

hostility to modern medicine, at least when it

applies to women, because of the contraception thing.* Anti-vaccination

crankery doesn’t make much sense outside of this knee-jerk hostility to

innovation and science.

The irony here is that scientists really aren’t trying to conquer the

imperfect body at all. Vaccination technology actually makes more sense if you

realize it came from a place of great respect for the the complexity of life,

and the careful study of defenses that had evolved in the body. Which is why I

love vaccinations. They work with the pre-existing environment. The real wow

factor is that the body responds so well and so predictably to the vaccination.

In one sense, it’s a bit alarming that I extended my arm the other day to be

shot up with a syringe-full of dead bacteria that would, if alive, kill me

pretty damn dead, but it was no big deal at all, because I trusted my body’s

immune system to kick into action and do its job. So who’s the one that’s really

trusting nature to do what it does best?

*None of this is to say that I’m opposed to the midwifery movement or

anything. When they argue for it on pragmatic terms—it’s less expensive and less

invasive, for instance—I’m all ears. Because that’s the point of this whole

rant. If you got the evidence, you got an argument. But when people start waxing

about how it’s more natural and that’s how they did it in the old days, I think

“menstrual huts” and wonder why people seem to think that undernourished,

illiterate people who didn’t get out much from the past were somehow magically

smarter than we are now.

View this story online at:

http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://pandagon.blogsome.com/85345/

May 15, 2008

> Wow, what a crazy, angry article! Go to the website to read the

comments.

>

Some very good comments !! I'm surprised many stayed civil - I would

have been ugly. Very ugly. I could barely get past the first few

sentences - who enjoys being called a crank? Hey, lady, I spent months

researching vaccines - how much time have you put into it?

Not worth responding to, IMHO, but I'm glad so many did. Good info

there.

Magda

May 17, 2008

WOW...that is nuts! Okay...she is nuts! That is so maddening I don't

even know what to say except I think we all need to go to that site

and bombard her with our FACTS! This woman wants facts, then

she should get them. Wow!

>

> Wow, what a crazy, angry article! Go to the website to read the

comments.

>

> http://www.alternet.org/blogs/healthwellness/85345/

>

> Vaccination is the New Flouridation

> By Marcotte, Pandagon

> Posted on May 14, 2008, Printed on May 15, 2008

>

http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://pandagon.blogsome.com/85345/

> The anti-vaccination argument is based on conspiracies and

Luddism, not science.

>

> The number of anti-vaccination cranks out there on the interwebs

seems to be multiplying. It seems you can't make reference to any

kind of vaccination lately without people, sometimes pretending to be

liberals (sometimes actually misguided liberals) wailing and moaning

about how terrible vaccinations are. It's the new fluoridation. I'm

somewhat surprised that no one wailed and moaned that I mentioned on

Pandagon a tetanus vaccination I got the other day, but rest assured,

while my arm has been kind of sore, I haven't yet developed autism.

>

> I have very little patience for cranks as a general rule (which

is why working for this site is so fun, because it's about pushing

back against anti-choice cranks), but I reserve a special contempt

and loathing for anti-vaccination cranks. They remind me of nothing

so much as women who make their living as professional anti-feminists

in terms of denial and idiocy levels. Anti-feminist professional

women create a special kind of loathing, because they don't

acknowledge that their very ability to be out there earning a

paycheck lambasting feminism would not be possible without feminism

giving them the right to be women in the public sphere. Anti-

vaccination cranks have a similar parasitic relationship to the

existence of vaccines. If it weren't for vaccination, our country

would have far more immediate infectious disease health concerns to

worry about that the largely imaginary health drawbacks of the

vaccination wouldn't have a chance to ruffle any feathers.

>

> Anti-vaccination cranks make me see red, in no small part because

there's no excuse for the levels of ignorance they demonstrate about

the real value of vaccines. It would be more understandable if the

invention of the polio vaccination, for instance, was so far in the

past that there were no survivors of the disease hanging around being

reminders of how terrible it really is. But there are plenty of

people who had the disease that are around, suffering the lifelong

effects of even the minor cases that would have allowed you to reach

middle age after suffering that disease in your youth. I for one am

incredibly grateful to have never known anyone with small pox,

tetanus or even the fucking mumps my whole life.

>

> Like all good cranks, anti-vaccination assholes move the goal

posts constantly. The big hobbyhorse of anti-vaccination cranks is

autism rates (even though the connection between autism and

vaccinations has been thoroughly debunked), but of course, the

invention of the HPV vaccine hasn't passed notice, though you get

that when you're like 12 years old, so even if you believe childhood

vaccinations have something to do with autism (which you shouldn't),

then you should realize that 12 is way too late to " develop " autism.

But it's this lightening rod because it's new and it's sex-related

and thus the cranks can hang their hat on it, and get all excited

about building a coalition between the usual anti-vaccination cranks

and the sexphobes, getting more power.

>

> And of course, the invocations of " Big Pharma " do not an argument

make. It's childish to think that something is an unvarnished,

irredeemable evil just because someone made money doing it. Big

Pharma does a lot of wrong things, but mainly because they charge too

much for products that are actually good. If they were charging too

much for products that were just crap, then they'd be no more a

political problem than people who make designer handbags. The

abstinence-only assholes resort to screaming " Big Pharma " to

discourage women from taking the birth control pill, which shows what

kind of crankery you're getting into with that tactic.

>

> Like all good cranks, evidence that conflicts with their theories

is simply ignored. The idea behind the autism-vaccination link was

that the mercury used in some vaccinations caused autism. Well, they

don't use mercury in childhood vaccinations anymore and haven't for

awhile, but autism rates remain high. Maybe the vaccinations are

causing autism out of tradition, then? There's a theory that kosher

laws against the eating of pork were initially developed for health

reasons, but were kept out of tradition after the health reasons

disappeared. Is that how vaccines do it?

>

> Promoting the idea that there's these non-existence connections

between vaccinations and autism and other ill health effects is

vicious and cruel to parents whose children are suffering from the

diseases that are claimed to be caused by vaccinations. I can't

imagine how much a parent with an autistic child would suffer from

guilt if she actually believed this bullcrap, because after all, it

was she who got the child vaccinated. All needless—they may not know

what causes autism, but I'm going to bet that if they ever do find

out, it's probably going to be genetic and not something that parents

could have known or prevented.

>

> Maybe what bothers me the most is that the opposition to

vaccinations tends to play into this knee-jerk Luddite mentality. Not

that I don't think new technologies shouldn't be carefully examined

to see if they do more good than harm, and that things that prove to

be problems like cars should be seriously reconsidered. But a lot of

people don't want to do the hard work of taking each new technology

and its issues and problems on for itself, and instead just want this

general " new is bad/old ways were better " rule that they can apply

indiscriminately. The traditionalism fallacy infects people on the

right and the left both, though often in different ways. For

instance, when conservatives decry the " unnatural " , they're referring

to sodomy or women getting paychecks, and when liberals do it,

they're probably talking about medications. Of course, some

conservatives are beginning to see the benefits of embracing the knee-

jerk hostility to modern medicine, at least when it

> applies to women, because of the contraception thing.* Anti-

vaccination crankery doesn't make much sense outside of this knee-

jerk hostility to innovation and science.

>

> The irony here is that scientists really aren't trying to conquer

the imperfect body at all. Vaccination technology actually makes more

sense if you realize it came from a place of great respect for the

the complexity of life, and the careful study of defenses that had

evolved in the body. Which is why I love vaccinations. They work with

the pre-existing environment. The real wow factor is that the body

responds so well and so predictably to the vaccination. In one sense,

it's a bit alarming that I extended my arm the other day to be shot

up with a syringe-full of dead bacteria that would, if alive, kill me

pretty damn dead, but it was no big deal at all, because I trusted my

body's immune system to kick into action and do its job. So who's the

one that's really trusting nature to do what it does best?

>

> *None of this is to say that I'm opposed to the midwifery

movement or anything. When they argue for it on pragmatic terms—it's

less expensive and less invasive, for instance—I'm all ears. Because

that's the point of this whole rant. If you got the evidence, you got

an argument. But when people start waxing about how it's more natural

and that's how they did it in the old days, I think " menstrual huts "

and wonder why people seem to think that undernourished, illiterate

people who didn't get out much from the past were somehow magically

smarter than we are now.

>

> View this story online at:

http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://pandagon.blogsome.com/85345/

>

May 17, 2008

That person's ignorance is exceeded only by his/her ignorance. She/he has been

totally brainwashed. One day she/he will eat those words. With her faith and

stupidity she/he should vaccinate her self every day until she is in a state of

total health.

It is morons like this that are responsible for the damage done by vaccines.

They are the ones who promote the ignorance and deception that the general

public believes about blood poisoning. Use her venom to fuel your fire to

educate others about the fact that vaccines can only cause disease, disability

and death. Common sense (which she doesn't have) dictates that if a person or

baby doesn't have an adverse effect it is simply and thankfully that that body

was able to neutralize the poison.

Her reasoning is false. I don't have cancer. I eat broccoli . The reason I don't

have cancer is because of the broccoli. This is the kind of stupid reasoning

these idiots use. The WHOLE VACCINE AND DRUG THEORY IS BASED ON A CONCLUSION.

Think about this with drugs. You get sick. You take a drug. You get well.

Conclusion you get well because of the drug. Its time for a wakeup call. The

allopathic octopus has more than one leg. Their reasoning is false and the

profession is dangerous and useless in all areas of drugging and vaccines. Their

good is in the area of trama and crisis. I personally love to take on fools like

this. One at a time. Face to face. We will win this war because we have the

truth and logic on our side. Resolve to keep learning and keep moving forward.

Jim O'

Founder of S.I.N.B.A..D.==A.D.T.

Shots in body's are dangerous--and drugs too.

Re: Vaccination is the New Flouridation

WOW...that is nuts! Okay...she is nuts! That is so maddening I don't

even know what to say except I think we all need to go to that site

and bombard her with our FACTS! This woman wants facts, then

she should get them. Wow!

>

> Wow, what a crazy, angry article! Go to the website to read the

comments.

>

> http://www.alternet .org/blogs/ healthwellness/ 85345/

>

> Vaccination is the New Flouridation

> By Marcotte, Pandagon

> Posted on May 14, 2008, Printed on May 15, 2008

>

http://www.alternet .org/bloggers/ http://pandagon. blogsome. com/85345/