ABC's hiring of Jenny McCarthy: a decision that could cost lives

[cali]

By choosing Jenny McCarthy to be a host on "The View", ABC made a decision that could end up costing lives--even worse, the lives of children.

Jenny McCarthy believes that vaccines caused her son to be autistic. Never mind that it's not clear that he was actually autistic, none of the claims she has made about vaccines and autism are backed up by, um, any medical evidence. But that doesn't stop Jenny McCarthy from making those claims very publicly. She is a supporter of Andrew Wakefield, the British doctor whose study linking the MMR vaccine and autism was found to be based on fraudulent data. The fact that he has been discredited by the medical community and lost his license doesn't stop her from supporting him.

Vaccines save lives. So many fewer children get sick from polio, diphtheria, measles, chicken pox, tetanus, whooping cough and other vaccine-preventable illnesses. It's getting so that the latest generation of doctors haven't even seen some of these illnesses, these illnesses that used to be common--and sometimes kill. We have done, and continue to do, extensive research on vaccines and their safety. The consensus of the medical community--who care deeply about health, science and safety--is that for the overwhelming majority of people, vaccines are safe.

But that doesn't stop Jenny McCarthy from saying vaccines aren't safe. And the problem is, people listen to celebrities. They shouldn't--it's not like Jenny McCarthy has any kind of scientific training or expertise--but they do. Even though most people realize that celebrities aren't scientists, celebrities get our attention. And when they say things that scare us, well, it can be hard to shake. As my friend Seth Mnookin, the author of the great book The Panic Virus says, it's really hard to unscare people.

<snip>

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/mdmama/2013/07/abcs_hiring_of_jenny_mccarthy_a_decision_that_could_cost_lives.html

I don't know that I agree with the author/physician, but there is no doubt that McCarthy has been in the forefront of the anti-vaxxer movement.

[newfie11]

1. I am curious about this vaccine

I saw an interview the doctor made. He specifically said the vaccine causing the problem was only the one manufactured by Smith Kline Beecham. All other manufactures of this vaccine did not cause a problem when used. They used a different formula. He said he was trying to get the national health service to switch manufactures but they refused.
So why is everyone upset about this vaccine if there is a safe one or this doctor that reported it?
I must have missed something.

[Motown_Johnny]

78. Try this link:

http://blogs.plos.org/thepanicvirus/2013/07/16/a-psa-to-journalists-writing-about-vaccines-thimerosal-was-never-used-in-the-mmr-vaccine/






Note that Thimerosal had been in use since the 1930s but the increase in autism did not start until the 1970s and continues to increase even though it's use has been all but eliminated for years.

[newfie11]

79. Thanks for the link

[burnodo]

2. Is she a right-wing numbnut?

I don't think the crew will be talking about vaccines very much.

[live love laugh]

70. No she is not a RW nut. She has an autistic child and there have been many

theories regarding the contributions of vaccines to autism.

Whoever put this post out has some affinity or affiliation with big pharma IMHO.

Why not wait and see what McCarthy does?

[Orrex]

71. In point of fact...

There have been many crackpot theories but absolutely no actual evidence about "contributions of vaccines to autism."

Well, that's not entirely true: vaccines have actually been shown to have no causative relation to incidence of autism.

Many people still believe that there is a connection, but there is no evidence that this belief is correct.

Whoever put this post out has some affinity or affiliation with big pharma IMHO.

It's generally considered poor form to accuse someone of being a shill for big pharma.

Why not wait and see what McCarthy does?

We have already seen what McCarthy does, and what she does is preach dangerous anti-vax nonsense.

How about this: if she spouts off about vaccines and autism during her first two weeks on The View, will you agree to come back here and admit that we were right?

[pnwmom]

3. The writer's hyperventilating. McCarthy should be banned from all TV jobs

because she's spoken out in the past about what she thinks caused her son's autism?

I thought you believed in freedom of speech.

Maybe they should classify all the documents about vaccine side effects, and then you'd support her if she leaked them . . .

[cali]

4. wtf? Am I calling for her to be banned from all TV jobs?

No, of course not. I posted an article and even posted a disclaimer at the bottom of the post.

Giant fail. thanks for playing.

And stop putting words in my mouth, if you please. it's a contemptible habit. One you should work on curtailing. You employ it with reckless abandon.

[pnwmom]

7. You are not the writer.

But you posted her rantings, for some reason. You gave her a platform.

It's a contemptible habit.

[cali]

9. bwahahahaha. yeah. I gave her the platform

pitiful. as is your attempt to ape me. And it was hardly a rant. You need a good dictionary. rather badly. let me help you out:

1
: to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner
2
: to scold vehemently
transitive verb
: to utter in a bombastic declamatory fashion

nope. not a rant.

you really shouldn't play. you just accrue more fail.

[pnwmom]

10. You must have missed this: "to scold vehemently."

Or you missed this sentence, when she scolded vehemently:

"Have we really sunk so low as a society that ratings, and money, matter more than the health and safety of children?"

All because an actor has been given a job on The View. What nonsense.

[cali]

14. Sorry, there's nothing particularly vehement about that piece:

Here, let me help you out again: check the dictionary more often.


ve·he·ment
[vee-uh-muhnt] Show IPA
adjective
1.
zealous; ardent; impassioned: a vehement defense; vehement enthusiasm.
2.
characterized by rancor or anger; violent: vehement hostility.
3.
strongly emotional; intense or passionate: vehement desire.
4.
marked by great energy or exertion; strenuous: vehement clapping.


You really do like grasping at straws.

It's not like I'm unaware of your actual ranting about vaccines. You're DU's chief anti-vaxxer with rants about everything from veterinary vaccines to the hpv vaccine.

[pnwmom]

17. I say her comments were "characterized by rancor or anger." You disagree.

That doesn't make you right, Cali. It just means you disagree.

And I'm not an anti-vaxxer as you well know. My children and I have had all the required vaccines except for the one our pediatrician stopped, the old pertussis vaccine that was eventually replaced by a safer version (which we have all had, even though it is not required for adults).

Why do you continue to repeat that lie about me? Just because I'm not a hero-worshipper of big pharma, apparently.

[cali]

19. not a lie. anyone can check out your former posts.

including the recent one about hpv vaccines.

I'm hardly a worshipper of big pharma- which you would know if you followed the posts I've put up about the TPP.

[pnwmom]

25. Show me a single post where I have spoken against vaccines in general.

I think the HPV vaccine was pushed on the public much too quickly. They tried to require it in Texas less than 6 months after it was released, even though it is HPV is not spread through casual contact, like most of the required vaccines.

That doesn't make me anti-vax, any more than I am anti-medication. I also try to avoid new prescription drugs shortly after release because problems often only come to light after the drug is being used on the general public.

With regard to the HPV vaccine, we still don't have the long term data to know whether the vaccine is going to help or hinder the fight against cervical cancer. If immunity wears off too soon -- i.e., before 15 years, according to a lead investigator on the vaccine trials -- and women get fewer pap smears, we'll be worse off than before the vaccine.

I know it is hard for you to deal with nuanced positions on any issue, but I am repeating myself once again for the sake of others who might be able to handle a little complexity.

[cali]

39. I said you posted anti-vaxxer shit, not that you "spoke out against vaccines in general"

you've said a lot more than that about the hpv vaccine.

lol about my purported trouble dealing with nuanced positions. take a look at your absolutely hysterical and ridiculous posts accusing me of trying to muzzle poor wittle Jenny McCarthy, right here in this thread.

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3138376

[pnwmom]

45. What you actually said was,

"You're DU's chief anti-vaxxer."

I think vaccines should be as safe as possible, and I'm glad that the whole cell DPT vaccine was replaced by a safer vaccine, thanks to an earlier generation of parents who spoke out.

I don't think vaccines should be required unless a disease poses a public health risk -- in other words, that it can be spread through casual contact.

I think, since we do require vaccines, the Vaccine Court shouldn't make the few parents with injured children -- who have suffered injury in the service of keeping the rest of the population healthier -- wait years before receiving compensation for vaccine-related injuries.

On the other hand, my children and I are all vaccinated, even though my sister got encephalitis and died less than 24 hours after her 6 month vaccines. And yet, in your view, I am "DU's chief anti-vaxxer."

As I said, you seem to have a problem with nuance. Everything's black and white from your perspective, but not from mine.

[cali]

48. yeppers, that's what I said.

and now we're traveling in ever narrowing circles, ergo my farewell to you.

bye bye

[EOTE]

15. So, Cali should be banned from making all posts?

I thought you believed in free speech? Apparently all you believe in is anti-vaccine bullshit.

[pnwmom]

30. Where did I say Cali should be banned from posts or that I am anti-vaccines? n/t

[EOTE]

32. Oh, so only you are allowed to post stupid shit that no one actually says?

I thought you were FOR freedom of speech.

[pnwmom]

33. Oh, fine. As long as we're clear that you're purposely posting "stupid shit."

[EOTE]

35. Turn about is fair play, right?

Only I put words in people's mouths to demonstrate a point, you seem to be doing it as a matter of policy.

[Orrex]

43. Why shouldn't the writer be given a platform?

I thought you believed in freedom of speech.

[davidpdx]

21. I can't speak for Cali

and frankly I have no dog in this whole thing since I have no children, but I think the concern is she's going to use the show as a platform for spouting anti-science crap. The claims she makes have been been proven false. The majority of the people who watch that show are women, and women who have children. I have to ask is it a good idea for her to be making claims that vaccines are proven to cause autism on national television. I have nothing against her personally, though I think she's not a particularly intelligent individual.

Given that Joy Beher, Hasselbeck, and Walters are leaving the show will probably finally get axed. That might be the best thing that can happen.

[Deep13]

27. Yes, no one should hire her.

She can say what she wants, but that does not mean ABC should give her an audience.

[pnwmom]

31. So she should be banned from entertainment TV for life because of her views on

the cause of her son's autism.

Wow.

[EOTE]

36. Her views get lots of people killed.

But keep on pretending that you don't know what this is about.

[pnwmom]

40. Free speech is often a dangerous thing.

But of all places where she would not be posing a risk, it would be on an entertainment show like The View, with four other talkative women to speak up.

[EOTE]

44. Having alternative views on the show allows the appearance of objectivity.

So a number of people will think that her views are every bit as valid as the others. That makes her casting even more insidious. I like Jenny McCarthy, she seems like a good person otherwise, but she's going to cause a lot of harm on that show. Freedom of speech means being able to speak out against stuff like this. That's what you don't seem to get.

[pnwmom]

46. You clearly haven't watched that show. She's going to be interviewing celebrities,

not talking about vaccines.

Why not hold your fire till she does what you're so afraid of? Why muzzle her in advance?

[EOTE]

49. I'm guessing you haven't. Do you remember Elizabeth Hasselbeck?

It's a topical show. They cover political and current events. Hasselbeck got to spew her right wing crap non-stop on that show. McCarthy is FAR from right wing, and I like her for that, but her views on vaccines are DEADLY. I'm not muzzling her in advance, I'm speaking out about the harm that could come from her hiring. She's already got a fun and vapid night time talk show, I have no issue with that. On The View, she could cause even more legitimate harm. Anti-vaccine bullshit is killing children. I think that's far from OK.

[Deep13]

38. Which would put her in the exact same position as...

...almost everyone else.

[Spider Jerusalem]

63. Yep

her views are badly wrong and completely misinformed and have not one whit of supporting evidence backing them up. Giving ignorant people a platform to spread their ignorance is dangerous; these things have consequences. Thanks in part to the tabloid press fanning the flames of controversy when the initial withdrawn and fraudulent paper on MMR by ex-doctor Wakefield was published, uptake of the vaccine fell below herd immunity levels here in the UK; we had an epidemic, fairly recently, with over a thousand cases in one area in south Wales (88 of those ill enough to go in hospital, and one death)...compared to just nineteen cases the year before.

Jenny McCarthy has the right to say whatever she wants to on the subject of vaccines to whoever will listen; that doesn't mean she should be given a platform from which to do it. It isn't especially helpful to conflate the issue of free speech with the issue of whether her views mean she should be hired. If we were talking about Paula Deen getting hired to be on the View...would her racism disqualify her, in your view? She has the right to be a racist; no-one is under any compulsion to give her a job, though.

[JoDog]

37. No, she should be banned

because she is a talentless idiot.

Honestly, the entertainment machine has tried to jam this woman down our collective throats since the late 1990s. Take the hint!

"In 1997, the LA Times described her as someone who has been 'hurled...like a spitball, into the public's collective eye.' Somehow, the spitball that is Jenny McCarthy has managed to stay permanently lodged in that collective eye, bouncing from one talk show named after herself to the other. Yes, Jenny McCarthy's continued assumed relevance is a miracle far surpassing that of life or any other career in Hollywood. Yet here she is, living another day in front of us all."

http://jezebel.com/12-awesomely-terrible-failed-projects-by-jenny-mccarthy-789408698

[EOTE]

47. She's cute, personable and funny. It's no wonder to me why she's still in the public eye.

She seems genuinely nice, too. With the exception of her anti-vaccine nonsense, I really like her. Unfortunately, that's a pretty huge exception. I hope she wisens up quickly.

[JoDog]

67. To each their own

I have always found her "humor" never that funny at all, and to me, she is just another overdone, overblown blonde.

But, vive la difference. I am sure there are several things I enjoy that you do not.

Hope you have a good day!

[grantcart]

42. No she should be banned from this job because she relies on a theory that

was based on a single study that turned out to be faked and that will cause people to get improper medical care:

http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Anti-Vaccine_Body_Count/Anti-Vaccine_History.html

The idea that vaccines, and specifically the Measles/Mumps/Rubella vaccine, causes autism was first proposed by Andrew Wakefield. He was the lead author of a controversial 1998 research study, published in The Lancet, which reported bowel symptoms in a prospective case series of twelve consecutive vaccinated children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders and other disabilities, and alleged a possible connection with the MMR vaccination. Citing safety concerns, in a press conference held in conjunction with the release of the report, Wakefield recommended separating the components of the injections by at least a year. Given the widespread media coverage of Wakefield's claims, his recommendation was deemed responsible for a decrease in immunization rates in the UK. The section of the paper setting out its conclusions was subsequently retracted by ten of the paper's thirteen authors.

[longship]

61. Jenny McCarthy's speech has a body count.

What she says about vaccines is total made up rubbish. The doctor she cites, Andrew Wakefield, lost his license to practice medicine because of some severe ethical lapses in running the now totally discredited research on which Jenny McCarthy base their claims. Wakefield has a patent on a monovalent vaccine and stood to gain financially if the MMR vaccine had to be removed from the market. He rigged the research for personal gain and was correctly stricken off for that.

Meanwhile people are dying because there are many who believe McCarthy's rubbish. Without herd immunity some communities are seeing increases in diseases which are not normally a problem in a vaccinated populace. Particularly pertussis has become a problem (whooping cough) in areas with low vaccination rates. Make no mistake, pertussis kills.

Jenny McCarthy is yelling fire in a theater. That's not free speech.

And don't get me started about what Jenny McCarthy used to say about her autistic son. That puts what she now says into perspective. How anybody would give such an ignorant, stupid person a platform is beyond me.

[LuvNewcastle]

5. Until scientists come up with an explanation as to

what causes autism, there are going to be people making claims like this. The number of children with autism has skyrocketed in the last 20 years or so, and people are understandably scared. All the scientific community can do at this point is continue the research and arm parents with the known facts. If they try to censor people, the public will sense a conspiracy and the hysteria will only get worse.

Not many people are going to stop vaccinating their children. Schools require children to get their shots and the vast majority of parents will comply with that. We can't stop people from pulling their kids out of school and homeschooling them if that's what they choose to do. When someone brings up the subject around me, I always ask them if they would be able to forgive themselves if their child died of a preventable disease because they were afraid of vaccines. It's an emotional argument, but that kind of argument tends to resonate with parents.

[cali]

6. actually, it doesn't take a lot of parents to stop vaccinating their children

to cause real problems.

The great northwest of the U.S. is known for its natural beauty. It’s also a high-tech region with a highly educated public – not exactly the kind of place one would expect to fall for the anti-science rhetoric of the anti-vaccine movement.

But it has. The anti-vaxxers have convinced a frighteningly high number of parents in Washington State to withhold vaccines from their children. A story in The Seattle Times last year reported that

<snip>

When the vaccination rates drop, everyone becomes more vulnerable to infectious diseases. When more than 90% of the population is vaccinated, we have “herd immunity” – this means the disease can’t spread because there aren’t enough susceptible people in the community. So the high rate of vaccine refusal in Washington makes it easier for whooping cough (and other diseases) to spread.

<snip>

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevensalzberg/2012/07/23/anti-vaccine-movement-causes-the-worst-whooping-cough-epidemic-in-70-years/

What’s the Matter With Vermont?
Anti-vaccine activists derailed a bill that could have blunted the whooping cough epidemic.

magine coughing so hard and for so long that you turn blue and stop breathing. Pertussis, or whooping cough, can do that to an infant. The disease is caused by the bacterium Bordetella pertussis and occurs in three stages. The catarrhal stage, characterized by runny mucous, is highly contagious. It’s followed by the paroxysmal stage—unstoppable, sustained, violent coughing accompanied by a “whoop” when you inhale. (Listen to a baby with whooping cough here, or see a video of a boy with whooping cough here.) In the final, convalescent stage, a cough can linger for several weeks. Pertussis can affect anyone, but it poses the most danger to infants.

A pertussis vaccine became available in the 1940s, and incidence of the infection dropped from around 200,000 per year to barely over 1,000 by 1976. But today the United States is in the middle of a pertussis epidemic. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, more than 41,000 cases of pertussis were reported nationwide in 2012. At least 18 people have died, mostly infants younger than 3 months of age—too young to be fully vaccinated. There hasn’t been such a major outbreak since 1959. The states with the most cases per capita are Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Vermont.

<snip>

Vaccination needs a critical mass to effectively confer “herd immunity” on a population. When vaccine rates fall below 90 percent, diseases spread readily enough to endanger people who can’t be vaccinated because of illness or because they are too young. In parts of Vermont, the vaccination rate is only 60 percent. It is one of 20 states that allow a philosophical as well as religious exemption to vaccines, and it has one of the highest philosophical exemption rates in the country.



George Till, a state House representative and a physician, tried to change that last year by proposing a bill to eliminate the philosophical exemption to vaccines. Instead, Act 157, which became law on July 1—when the current pertussis epidemic was already raging—turned into a complicated, compromise vaccine bill that preserved the philosophical exemption.

Till lives and practices near Burlington, Vt., and was elected to the House four years ago. In his re-election campaign, he spent $18.55 for dog bones. With dog treats in hand, this soft-spoken doctor went door to door and asked his neighbors to vote for him. Till, an OB-GYN and a Democrat, did not accept donations to his campaign from any group—he even sent back a check from Planned Parenthood.


<snip>

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2013/02/pertussis_epidemic_how_vermont_s_anti_vaxxer_activists_stopped_a_vaccine.html

[LuvNewcastle]

8. Wow it's hard to believe the vaccination rate is only 60%

in some places. That is scary. They shouldn't have given people an exemption. What's scariest about this is that the Pacific NW and New England have some of the best-educated people in the country. I'm not saying that people should be forced to take the shots, but I think it should be difficult to avoid taking them. Schools and employers should require that people are vaccinated.

I think the best solution to all of this nonsense is to increase research into the causes of autism. Censoring isn't an option and there are obviously people who will defy the rules to have their shots no matter the consequences. When we know the causes of autism, people won't be able to make these claims anymore. We must do the research anyway, because rates of autism are steadily increasing and the disease is going to affect every aspect of our lives if it isn't stopped.

[pnwmom]

13. More than 94% of WA state kindergartners are fully vaccinated -- more than the 90% required

for herd immunity. 5.5% are not fully vaccinated for at least one vaccine.

http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2015215221_vaccines03m.html

[SwissTony]

55. The anti-vaccers in Australia have set a sham church to allow people

to gain an exception on religious grounds.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/anti-vaccine-zealots-form-sham-church/story-fni0cx12-1226653266194

[cali]

58. Here in the state of vermont, it's even worse.

it's philosophical grounds. No church necessary.

[WinkyDink]

11. I'd like to know why this dame is suddenly all over TV.

[treestar]

12. nobody is forced to adopt her opinions nt

[Deep13]

28. Wrong. Children are forced to adopt them...

...when their parents believe her. Further a few people listening to her puts the entire population at risk.

[treestar]

54. The parents don't have to believe her

There is no solution other than quashing freedom of speech.

[Dawgs]

64. I don't think you understand what 'freedom of speech' means. n/t

[Deep13]

68. But many will.

What about my freedom of speech? ABC hasn't ever offered me a talk show. What makes this moron's opinion's better than mine or yours?

There actually is another way around this. Make vaccinations mandatory.

[davidpdx]

16. I totally agree with you

Giving her a platform for her anti-vaccination rants is irresponsible. I'd like to see someone start a Change petition to have ABC and Walters reconsider the decision.

[pnwmom]

18. If you'd ever watched The View, you'd know that this is ridiculous.

They don't sit around and talk about vaccines. They interview whatever celebrity is there that day.

[cali]

20. they also discuss big news items and politics.

Not to mention that they go for ratings.

[pnwmom]

23. So do you agree with the writer you quoted or not?

Do you think Jennie McCarthy should be muzzled forever on TV because of statements she's made in the past about her beliefs about the cause of her son's autism?

Doesn't sound like you're much of a believer in free speech, much as you like to pose as one.

[cali]

29. no, I certainly don't think Jenny McCarthy "should be muzzled forever"

how dramatic you are. rather fond of hyperbole, as you make clear.

I think Jenny dear should be allowed to babble on about how vaccines cause autism, as should you. I believe the best antidote to bad speech is more speech.

As for free speech, seems like you have no idea what that is, either.

gadzooks.

[Orrex]

50. Anti-science zealots in general...

And anti-vax zealots in particular love to cry "freedom of speech" whenever someone explains that vaccines don't cause autism or points out that Wakefield is a fraud.


It's a bullshit rhetorical tactic that hopes to shift the discussion from "Jenny McCarthy's ill-informed notions are a danger to public health" to "why do you hate freedom of speech?"

[cali]

52. yeah, I should have caught that earlier. dumb of me.

[Orrex]

53. Meh. You and me both.

I've fallen into that trap countless times by making the mistake of thinking that it's an honest, good-faith discussion about vaccine safety.

[Dawgs]

65. Not hiring her to be on TV again IS NOT the same as preventing free speech.

Come on now.

[davidpdx]

22. I actually have watched it

Granted it has been awhile as I am outside the US and they don't have ABC over here. From what I've seen of the show's format, they do talk about other things. Whether the topic of vaccines would come up or not is debatable.

[Orrex]

56. No, it probably wouldn't turn into The Vaccine View, but...

Since it's a pet crusade for Ms. McCarthy, there's a good chance that the subject will come up whenever she's inclined to introduce it.

Rosie O'Donnell certainly wasn't afraid to use her position on The View to bring up topics that were important to her. The big difference is that O'Donnell's advocacy was unlikely to kill anyone.

[SidDithers]

24. Jenny McCarthy body count...

http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Anti-Vaccine_Body_Count/Home.html

Renamed to The Anti-Vaccine Body Count in Dec 2012.
http://antivaccinebodycount.com/Anti-Vaccine_Body_Count/Home.html

Sid

[grantcart]

41. tks for the link

From the same website




The idea that vaccines, and specifically the Measles/Mumps/Rubella vaccine, causes autism was first proposed by Andrew Wakefield. He was the lead author of a controversial 1998 research study, published in The Lancet, which reported bowel symptoms in a prospective case series of twelve consecutive vaccinated children diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders and other disabilities, and alleged a possible connection with the MMR vaccination. Citing safety concerns, in a press conference held in conjunction with the release of the report, Wakefield recommended separating the components of the injections by at least a year. Given the widespread media coverage of Wakefield's claims, his recommendation was deemed responsible for a decrease in immunization rates in the UK. The section of the paper setting out its conclusions was subsequently retracted by ten of the paper's thirteen authors.

[liberal N proud]

26. She is replacing 'Lizbeth who went to Fox and Friends

Other than that, I was unaware of her views.

[mstinamotorcity2]

34. You know

people on the right do not believe in science or math unless it goes to their point. And just because a person is great in aspects of their daily world does not mean they know everything. And we know repugs they say one thing and do something else. Which mean, since she believes her child developed autism from vaccinations means her child is receiving vaccinations.

[JoePhilly]

57. If you are getting your kid's medical guidance from Jenny McCarthy ...

you should probably not have children in the first place.

[Ilsa]

59. Any moron who bases a decision like this on what a TV

personality has to say about a medical matter doesn't deserve to have children. Unfortunately, for th children, they are the one's who'll pay the price for their parents' stupidity.

My decision to vaccinate my kids was based on my education, my research, and my discussions with my children's doctor.

[Javaman]

60. meh...

the view must fill it's moron quotient.

trash in, trash out.

[Safetykitten]

62. Agree.

[cali]

66. I'm sorry I posted this because honestly, who really gives a shit?

I idly posted this pre 2nd cup of coffee. dumb. What's depressing is how many replies it got, when far worthier ops like Muriel's about abortion get ignored.

[SomethingFishy]

69. LOL... 5 Hour energy's work better than coffee...

Only need one and it works fast.

And on the post, really, what idiot says "oh the playboy bunny told me not to get my child vaccinated so I didn't"

[Orrex]

72. That's a facile and silly objection

what idiot says "oh the playboy bunny told me not to get my child vaccinated so I didn't"

No one says that, of course. Instead, they say something along the lines of "here's a celebrity mom whose child has autism, and she is using her celebrity status to warn a wider audience about the dangers of vaccines."

Anti-vax zealots such as McCarthy will typically cite discredited "experts" and offer out-of-context references to anecodotal cases of autism. They rely upon fear and ignorance to further their cause, while inconvenient facts and data are ignored entirely.

It's naive to assume that McCarthy can do no harm simply because she has no expertise in the field. She presents an appealing case that confirms the anxieties and concerns of people who mistrust or are not familiar with the relevant science.

[SomethingFishy]

76. Ok, agreed, it was kinda lame...

But really, do people actually take the word of a celebrity over a doctor? I guess maybe some do. I will never understand that. It's not like we are talking about milk or something, this is their child's health. You'd think people would want to make an informed decision, not trust Jenny McCarthy because she lost weight on the Slim Fast diet...

[Orrex]

77. You've identified a serious problem, in fact

Last edited Tue Jul 16, 2013, 06:21 PM - Edit history (1)

People mistake "celebrity" for "authority" all the time, and they ascribe expertise to people whose knowledge of a subject is dubious at best. It happens all the time, and it's enormously successful, which is why we see celebrity "spokespersons" all the time.

[LittleBlue]

73. I don't think she should be prevented from working

just because she has a certain view of vaccines.

Everyone has the right to make their own choice. Jenny McCarthy cannot cost anyone else's child their life, it's up to their parents to filter the near limitless stream information about parenting.

[Corruption Inc]

74. Here's an idea for people, stop watching TV as it's nothing but propaganda

There are a few things on TV still worth watching, just a few.

[Apophis]

75. Anti-vaxxers are the worst type of people.

I hope ABC rethinks their decision.