The damage of the anti-vaccination movement

[HuckleB]

Childhood diseases once mostly eradicated are making a comeback. And children are dying.
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/feb/05/opinion/la-oe-fumento5-2010feb05

"...

Anti-vaccination groups have popped up like toadstools after rain (there are more than 180 on the Web), while older ones such as the National Vaccine Information Center were reinvigorated. For the most part, these groups have had only a marginal effect on national vaccination rates, but they have encouraged localized boycotts of immunization. (In one Washington county, 27% of children had vaccination exemptions in 2006-07.) The result has been a resurgence of diseases gone so long that some doctors don't even recognize them. And children die because of it.

Before the MMR vaccine became available in 1971, measles, mumps and rubella annually afflicted 530,000, 162,000 and 48,000 U.S. children, respectively, killing a total of more than 600. By the middle of the last decade, there were fewer than 7,000 new cases annually and zero deaths. But the anti-vaccine groups generally claim the injections were irrelevant and that factors such as better nutrition caused the declines.

...

Anti-vaccinationists initially claimed California autism cases dropped. False. The "data do not show any recent decrease in autism in California" despite the discontinuation of thimerosal use, the state's Department of Developmental Services found in 2008.

...


Brie contracted the disease when she was a month old, too young for her first pertussis vaccine. "I'm not laying blame," her mother, Danielle, told me. "But people need to know they can infect other people's babies. It kills. People think these diseases don't exist anymore, but that's only because children are being vaccinated."


..."

---------------------------------


I'm tired of the dishonesty shown by anti-vaxers everywhere. Cut the crap.



:mad: :puke: :argh: :crazy:

[Lisa0825]

1. someone unrec'd already. nt

[HuckleB]

2. Cool!

[pnwmom]

3. The CDC says that vaccine coverage among infants and toddlers is HIGH.

And that the recent upsurge in CA is primarily due to unvaccinated ADULTS and TEENS. Have you had your Tdap yet?

I'm tired of the dishonesty of the vax-to-the-max crowd. The National Vaccine Information Center is not "anti vaccine." It is pro-information, pro-informed consent and pro-vaccine safety. Thanks to its efforts, children like Hannah Poling can be compensated when they experience vaccine injury. And thanks to the lobbying of the NVIC, the government voted to fund research for a DTP vaccine (the one now in use) that is much safer than the one that killed my baby sister.

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/other/news/sep1610childvax-jw.html

"The survey shows that immunization of children 19 to 35 months old against vaccine-preventable diseases is high," Dr. Anne Schuchat, director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, said at a morning news teleconference. "Fewer than 1% of children did not get any vaccines at all."

"Today's report is generally very reassuring despite concerns we've seen in the past about whether parents are continuing to have their children vaccinated," Schuchat said.

[HuckleB]

4. I love the red herrings!

Thanks for offering! I had salmon tonight, though.

Yes, I've had my tdap, as you know.

Why do anti-vaccinationists defend themselves with articles that indicate that vaccination rates remain, although there are areas of concern? Do you want vaccination rates to be high? Do you want there to be areas of concern?

:shrug:

[pnwmom]

6. Why are you calling me an "anti-vaccinationist"? My children are fully vaccinated,

except for the single vaccine that gave them serious reactions (high fever and seizures) -- the same one that killed my sister.

And I'm up to date on my own vaccines and have had pneumonia and flu shots.

I'm for vaccine safety; I'm for research into populations that may be more susceptible than others to adverse effects; I'm for letting parents and doctors spread out vaccines so that any problems can be more easily identified; and I'm for sensible decisions about which vaccines should be required as opposed to optional. I think most European countries are taking a more sensible approach than we are by requiring a smaller number of essential vaccines. I think the states' decisions about which vaccines should be required should be made based on epidemiology -- rather than on whatever potentially profitable vaccine a drug company happens to develop.

[HuckleB]

7. That's your claim.

Your posts at DU indicate otherwise. BTW, it's well established that "vaccine safety" is just another of the many guises of the anti-vax movement. Your mask was removed long ago. Further, if you weren't anti-vax, you probably wouldn't have wasted time responding to this thread in the manner that you did.

[pnwmom]

8. I'm pro vaccine SAFETY. That's why I spent my time

on this thread. If you had lost a family member due to a vaccine, wouldn't you be concerned about vaccine safety?

[HuckleB]

9. Well, your posts DU appear to be anti-vaccine.

[pnwmom]

11. Reread them. I have stated over and over that I am in favor of

vaccinations. Why else would I have had my children vaccinated? I was especially happy when the chicken pox vaccine was developed because my oldest child had had a terrible case. My younger children could avoid this.

But I'm also in favor of vaccine safety and informed consent and the other issues I listed in my post. I don't think we should all be sheep, blindly accepting any vaccine that big pharma develops. We need to be as smart about vaccines as we are about any medical issue. Don't you ask your doctors about the prescriptions they give you? Vaccines are another kind of prescription, and we should be able to make informed decisions about them, too.

[HuckleB]

13. So you speak out of both sides of your mouth.

Your anti-vax side gets to talk a whole lot more, however.

[pnwmom]

16. No, it's just that I'm not a black and white thinker.

Unlike some on this issue.

[HuckleB]

19. Actually, you're an extremely black and white thinker.

You also choose to ignore all evidence that goes against your preconceived notions.

[pnwmom]

47. I follow the evidence where it leads and when I do so,

you call it talking out of both sides of my mouth.

[HuckleB]

62. You repeatedly ignore all evidence that is contrary to your preconceived notions.

Try again.

[pnwmom]

64. You are describing yourself. You should work on all that projecting. n/t

[HuckleB]

65. ROTFLMAO!

I suppose you actually believe that.

:rofl:

[mzmolly]

68. Hear hear!`

:hi:

[mzmolly]

23. Actually you're a 'thinker' period, which is a problem for some.

Those who freak out over 5% of school children not having the latest booster, while ignoring 98% of their parents, are not thinking - period. ;)

[HuckleB]

31. As usual, you offer a fiction-based attack against a fictional group.

That's quite pitiful.

[mzmolly]

42. Parents are not a fictional group.

And 98% of them, are not vaccinated for pertussis.

[HuckleB]

50. And now you go offer in another direction.

Thanks for giving us examples of all your bizarre posting techniques.

[mzmolly]

69. Same direction.

Sorry.

[HuckleB]

81. Not on planet earth.

[mzmolly]

92. Same subject, same planet in which 98% of parents are not vaccinated

against pertussis and most school aged children are. Yet who are you focused on? A few kids. Pathetic attempt at improving public health, I might say. You do great damage to your agenda when you prove that you can't be trusted. The 'anti-vaccine' movement will surely use these misleading, dishonest articles against you and yours, which weakens your cause. How? By demonstrating you lacking credibility. I suggest a new approach.

[HuckleB]

96. ROTFLMAO!

Why do you think going back to another one of your out-of-context tirades changes anything?

[mzmolly]

20. Your posts are logical. The 'anti-vaccine' card is pulled out

against anyone who doesn't promote caustic, misleading rhetoric from vaccine profiteers, who wish to sell their products to our children at any cost.

[HuckleB]

32. Prove that her posts are logical.

I'd like to see that.

[mzmolly]

43. She proves it,

when she posts.

[HuckleB]

49. .

:rofl:

[mzmolly]

21. Everyone who doesn't toe your illogical line is deemed anti-vaccine.

Given that, I ask that you stop with the continued group attacks here. It's against the user rules to call out or attack other DU-ers which you do, by your own admission.

[HuckleB]

30. Now that's the hypocrisy you're known for offering.

[mzmolly]

44. I think it's clear who the hypocrite

is.

[HuckleB]

51. That's for sure.

[Rhiannon12866]

5. K&R. This is just tragic!

Thanks for posting... :scared:

[mzmolly]

24. Yet it's false.

The CDC is reporting high rates of vaccination according to very recent data.

[HuckleB]

33. The CDC is reporting that rates are on the decline.

And the CDC is reporting serious concerns about pockets where vaccine rates are quite low.

You can pretend otherwise, as you have shown that you will, but the real world is not the one you attempt to portray.

[mzmolly]

46. The article I posted in health, clearly demonstrates your continued desire to mislead

in spite of the evidence.

[HuckleB]

52. The article you posted.

Uh, huh. Should we talk about the article you post in LBN, which contained the CDC's concerns that you choose to ignore?

[mzmolly]

67. The concern about 98 percent of parents?

Or a few kids who didn't get a Hep A vaccine? :eyes:

[HuckleB]

82. Once you babble about something or another.

:rofl:

[mzmolly]

91. 98% of parents are not up to date on their pertussis vaccine, so why are you

scapegoating 5% of children? Is it because it doesn't fit the pre-conceived notion that those with an agenda have fooled you into believing? Or do you have an agenda of your own?

[HuckleB]

94. Now there's a red herring and an ad hominem in the same post.

Nice try.

[K8-EEE]

10. You sure post about vaccines a lot!

Just sayin'.....

[pnwmom]

12. Hmmm . . . .

[HuckleB]

15. Nice confession.

[pnwmom]

17. I didn't know you confessed. n/t

[HuckleB]

18. And a second one from you.

You're a little too obvious.

[pnwmom]

75. Hmmm . . . n/t

[mzmolly]

29. Hmmm, indeed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=92959&mesg_id=92995

[HuckleB]

34. And now to the classic anti-vaccine ad hominem attack.

:rofl:

[mzmolly]

39. The term "anti-vaccine" is an ad hominem

attack. However if the pro-industry shoe fits ....

[HuckleB]

53. Yup.

Pro-science is not pro-industry. Anti-vaccine is anti-vaccine, however.

[mzmolly]

71. The science indicates that there are legitimate concerns with vaccination

as well as the absurd rhetoric that it only matters if children are up to date on their vaccines.

[HuckleB]

83. BAM!

Thank you for going back to your usual baseless anti-vaccination nonsense. YOU have just shown that you don't want the vaccination rates to be what they are. Yet you are ranting at every chance to pretend otherwise.

Thank you for closing your own door.

[mzmolly]

90. Even the CDC will admit to this so uh, "BAM"

to you as well.

[HuckleB]

100. The CDC does not abide by your fake concerns. BAM!

[HuckleB]

14. You're saying nothing.

[mzmolly]

25. Yes indeed. Some also box DU-ers into an 'anti-vaccine' box and later promote false

rhetoric saying 'anti-vacciners are killin our babeez'. :crazy:

[HuckleB]

35. The truth hurts, doesn't it?

[mzmolly]

45. Truth?

You don't deal in truth.

[HuckleB]

54. Perhaps on some fantasy land of your creation.

[mzmolly]

28. Some also quote lobbyists as reliable sources.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=222&topic_id=92959&mesg_id=92995

[mzmolly]

22. Where is the science in this misleading pro-pharma

crap? You know that vaccination rates did NOT plummet according to the CDC data. This is nothing but a dishonest group attack.

How much do you want to bet that baby "Brie's" Mother isn't vaccinated against pertussis, like 98% of adults?

[Name removed]

36. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HuckleB]

85. Rates have plummeted in pockets.

They are going down.

[mzmolly]

26. More about the pro-corporate, right wing author of your piece.

A common theme is his claim that many liberal environmental groups have a hysterical response to most man-made chemicals. He writes that naturally occurring food chemicals are often every bit as toxic as artificial compounds, and there is no scientific reason to view natural compounds as inherently safer. Environmental groups, he holds, will willingly accept claims that man-made compounds cause cancer, but gloss over the fact that the toxicity tests often involve quantities millions of times larger than any human being would ever ingest. Several of his articles deal with the agricultural chemical Alar, banned as a carcinogen in the United States; Fumento notes that the dosages in one Alar study were the equivalent of almost 30 thousand apples a day for life.<5> In his view, it is impossible to test megadoses of chemicals on mice or rats and extrapolate the results to conclusions about small doses on humans. The statistical nature of these studies, often analyzed by non-statisticians, leaves them vulnerable to extrapolation error. Researchers remain divided on the utility of such tests and on the safety of Alar in particular.

He also has been a frequent critic of activist Erin Brockovich since her eponymous movie first appeared in 2000.<6>

Fumento describes himself as a political conservative.<7> He has drawn criticism from liberal and veterans' activist groups for his views on Gulf War Syndrome, (His Reason Magazine article “Gulf Lore Syndrome”<8> was a National Magazine Award Finalist in 1998<9>) and for his writings since 1987<10> which stated that the threat of AIDS to the heterosexual population was greatly overstated. He promotes a position of "skepticism" towards claims that man-made chemicals cause cancer in humans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Fumento

Yet another pro-cancer, pro-industry hack you're quoting without any science to back up these assertions.

The truth is the CDC just put out the following press release - http://www.cdc.gov/media/pressrel/2010/r100916.htm

CDC Survey Finds Childhood Immunization Rates Remain High

Immunization of children aged 19-35 months old against most vaccine-preventable diseases remains high in the United States, with coverage for most of the routine vaccines remaining at or over 90 percent, according to a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Less than 1 percent of young children got no vaccinations, the CDC report said.

[HuckleB]

38. More ad hominem nonsense, and a repeat of the story you are currently repeating...

... over and over again, without the real context.

And you want to talk about logic?

:rofl:

[mzmolly]

41. It's not an attack to point out that the author of your piece is a PAID monsanto mouth

piece. Who else gives him money, that he doesn't feel the need to disclose?

[HuckleB]

55. Yes, it is.

Do you know anything about basic logic?

[mzmolly]

72. Well then, allow me to say it again. The author of this piece was schooled by the tobacco

industry, has taken money from Monsanto and denies global warming. He's a paid shill. Are you paid too, or are you on a free mission for Monsanto lobbyists?

[HuckleB]

84. We all know you can repeat cliches that have nothing to do with the content of discussion.

[mzmolly]

88. I think the fact that your author is a paid industry lobbyist is very

relevant. This is the kind of person you are emulating, here. "Your agenda is clear."

[HuckleB]

97. A double ad hominem in the same post!

[mzmolly]

27. More on Michael Fumento the pro-industry, global warming denying, hack.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Michael_Fumento

Fumento no longer works for the Hudson Institute. He is a graduate of the partly tobacco-funded National Journalism Center (NJC),<2><3> although he graduated in 1985 <4> and the tobacco connection dates back only to 1993. <5> According to a 1993 Five year plan written by Thomas J. Borelli of Philip Morris Corporate Scientific Affairs department, PM "Support(s) the efforts of...the National Journalism Center to conduct policy forums and issue papers on junk science and health care reform."<6> He has been a vocal critic of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's 1993 Risk Assessment on secondhand smoke.<7> In a July 7, 1996 article in the Rocky Mountain News, Fumento disputed whether the nicotine in cigarettes is addictive, stating "The FDA is using the addiction issue as an excuse to gain the power to regulate tobacco." though he added, "personally I like some of" the proposed regulations.<8> Elsewhere, in distinguishing between active and passive smoking he has written that active smoking is "a terrible killer" <9> and "Smoking – real smoking – is both vile and deadly." <10>

According the National Journalism Center's profile of him, Fumento attended an NJC course in the fall of 1985 and has subsequently been "National Issues reporter, Investor's Business Daily, legal writer, Washington Times, editorial writer, Rocky Mountain News (CO), U.S. correspondent, A3 Umwelt (Austria)." Fumento has also held a number of positions at conservative think tanks, including being a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a science advisor to the Atlantic Legal Institute.

Pro-GMO (Which It Pays To Be)

"Scripps Howard News Service announced Jan. 13 that it's severing its business relationship with columnist Michael Fumento, who's also a senior fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute," reported BusinessWeek in 2006. "The move comes after inquiries from BusinessWeek Online about payments Fumento received from agribusiness giant Monsanto -- a frequent subject of praise in Fumento's opinion columns and a book." Scripps Howard general manager Peter Copeland said Fumento "did not tell SHNS editors, and therefore we did not tell our readers, that in 1999 Hudson received a $60,000 grant from Monsanto." The grant was for Fumento's book BioEvolution published by Encounter Books. <11>

Fumento called himself "extremely pro-biotech" and said that, as he was soliciting financial support from "everybody" for his then-unwritten book BioEvolution, he told Monsanto, "The biotech industry is going to look really good, and you should contribute." Fumento said his recent columns, including a January 5, 2006 piece praising new Monsanto products, were not "quid pro quo." He added, "I think there's a statue of limitations on that." <12>

Fumento insists that there was nothing ethically wrong with his failure to disclose Monsanto's contribution to his book. "I acted completely ethically, and within a month or two nobody will doubt that," Fumento wrote in an e-mail to Businessweek.

Anti-Environmentalist

In a December 1998 article published in the Idaho Statesman, Fumento complained of "environmentalists' never-ending campaign against pesticides." His ire had been provoked by a Natural Resources Defense Council report titled, "Trouble on the Farm: Growing up with Pesticides in Agricultural Communities." He referred to NRDC as "a group of suit-wearing city slickers who rarely get closer to a farm than watching 'Green Acres' reruns." <13>

Those of us who note a seemingly blind, pro-industry, pro-lobbyist flavor by some here, are not imagining it.

[HuckleB]

37. How many times are you going to repeat the same ad hominem attack on this thread?

Got obsession?

:rofl:

[mzmolly]

40. It's not an attack to point out that industry has blind and or paid

supporters like the libertarian, global warming denying, anti-environmentalist hack in your OP.

[HuckleB]

48. It's nothing but an ad hominem attack.

It's one of your usual excuses for ignoring all evidence that is contrary to your preconceived fictions.

[mzmolly]

70. It's a relevant point that you're posting articles from a lobbyist who takes money from industry.

:nopity:

[HuckleB]

80. It's your only response to the vast majority of information that speaks against your propaganda.

Why is that?

[mzmolly]

89. Propaganda is unproven, agenda driven rhetoric, like that of the paid mouth piece

you quote above.

[HuckleB]

98. Name one thing in that piece that science has not proven.

[pnwmom]

76. But mzmolly, Big Pharma isn't anything like those

other multi-nationals! And their "corporatists" are the good guys! We should trust everything they do implicitly because they would never do anything wrong. In fact, we really should abolish the FDA -- it's so redundant -- they don't do anything the corporations couldn't do. The scientists at Big Pharma should just regulate themselves.

:sarcasm:

[mzmolly]

77. Yes, those poor pharma companies have so much more integrity, (VIOXX)

than their, (VIOXX) corporate counterparts. ;) :hi:

[HuckleB]

99. WOW!

Ad hominem! Ad hominem! Ad hominem!

Now, let's talk about the anti-vax masters you follow.

[HuckleB]

56. FLU VACCINE SAFETY BASED IN FACT, WHILE ANTI-VACCINE CLAIMS LACK EVIDENCE, SAY PUBLIC HEALTH EXPERTS

http://thealbanyjournal.com/2010/09/flu-vaccine-safety-based-in-fact-while-anti-vaccine-claims-lack-evidence-say-public-health-experts/

[HuckleB]

57. Daily Kos: Anti-Vaccine Idiocy

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/18/794249/-Anti-Vaccine-Idiocy

[HuckleB]

58. Why I feel duped by the anti-vaccine movement

http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/parenting/why-i-feel-duped-by-the-anti-vaccine-movement-528740/

[HuckleB]

59. Impact of anti-vaccine movements on pertussis control: the untold story

http://www.fcs.uga.edu/cfd/cdl/docs/vaccines_exemptions.pdf

[mzmolly]

74. This article speaks to whole cell pertussis vaccine concerns and does not pertain to any current

"outbreak."

Our findings provide strong evidence of a causal relation
between movements against whole-cell pertussis vaccine
and pertussis epidemics...

Apparently the CDC, in suggesting a partial cell vaccine is part of the "anti-vaccine" movement now?

The article also notes -

...Anti-vaccine movements have had some
beneficial effects. Their call for safer vaccines
underscored the need for acellular vaccines against
pertussis, and their efforts have encouraged surveillance
of adverse events and development of vaccine-injury
compensation programmes.

Though vaccine safety movement is a more accurate description, I agree with the study authors. Promoting vaccine safety has resulted in a safer DPT vaccine, as well as an important surveillance system.

[HuckleB]

79. As always, you can't connect the dots.

Meanwhile you pretend the other piece that does connect the full dots doesn't do what it does.

And you want to be taken seriously?

:rofl:

[mzmolly]

86. No dots to connect

in this case. The CDC just reported that most parents (over 90%) vaccinate their children against pertussis, with every single recommended jab. The numbers PROVE RECORD HIGH COMPLIANCE RATES.

[HuckleB]

95. The dots are connected below, in the piece you attack with pure ad hominem nonsense.

You have enjoyed telling other DU posters that they have "blood on their hands" the past two days, but you do everything you can to make yourself feel better.

:rofl:

[HuckleB]

60. Antivax kills.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2009/05/04/antivax-kills/

[HuckleB]

61. Since anti-vaxers think it's ok to rant about individuals rather than discuss the evidence...

John McCain Enters the Autism Wars
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/john-mccain-ent.html


Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Indeed.

[HuckleB]

63. A History of Anti-Vaccine Campaigns

http://jdc325.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/a-history-of-anti-vaccine-campaigns/

[HuckleB]

66. Another piece that covers the part of the story the anti-vaxers don't want to discuss.

http://therelativelyinterestingblog.blogspot.com/2010/09/thanks-to-anti-vaccination-movement.html

[mzmolly]

73. Gee, another blog post by a dweeb without any references. How 'scientific' and stuff.

:eyes:

[HuckleB]

78. And another ad hominem attack.

The blog information I offer is far more scientific than anything you ever offer, with your selective, out of context nonsense.

[mzmolly]

87. Nothing scientific from the paid, right wing, corporate shill in question,

period.

[HuckleB]

93. BS.

[HuckleB]

101. More Parents Decline or Delay Children’s Immunization in U.S

http://topnews.us/content/219129-more-parents-decline-or-delay-children-s-immunization-us

[HuckleB]

102. Low Vaccination Rates Drive Whooping Cough Outbreak

http://www.examiner.com/infectious-disease-in-rochester/low-vaccination-rates-drive-whooping-cough-outbreak

[HuckleB]

103. Using attacks on science by the anti-vaccine movement as a “teachable moment”

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=6852

[HuckleB]

104. Making Money Promoting Anti-Vaccine Myths

http://blogs.forbes.com/sciencebiz/2010/04/27/making-money-promoting-anti-vaccine-myths/

[HuckleB]

105. Why do anti-vaccine advocates want to pretend they're not anti-vaccine advocates?

:shrug:

[laconicsax]

106. Something about washing their hands.

'I never said not to vaccinate! Just that vaccines are dangerous and people should choose whether to vaccinate.'

Thus, when people buy their fearmongering and choose not to vaccinate, they can pretend that they had nothing to do with the subsequent outbreaks of preventable disease.

[xchrom]

108. indeed their mild mannered 'concern' is a real killer.

in debates past it was routinely suggested by the mild mannered crew that measles and such weren't deadly and we should go back to exposure parties.

[HuckleB]

107. Christiane Northrup: more bad medicine

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=6907#more-6907

I have a headache now.

[HuckleB]

109. RAND PAUL and the AAPS are ANTI-VAXERS, TOO!

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20100924/NEWS0106/309240084/1008/NEWS01/Rand+Paul+part+of+AAPS+doctors++group+airing+unusual+views

"...

The AAPS advances the claim that women who have abortions are at a higher risk for breast cancer, although the National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society say there is no such link.

And the group opposes mandatory vaccinations and promotes a now-discredited study linking thimerosal, a longtime component of many vaccines, to autism in children.

Its journal published a study purporting to show such a connection by an obstetrician, Dr. Mark Geier, who testified for plaintiffs in vaccination injury cases, and his son, David, who worked as a consultant for plaintiffs on similar cases.

An overwhelming majority of the medical community, however, doesn’t accept that there is a link. As recently as Sept. 13, the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics published a study funded by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found no evidence suggesting that thimerosal, a preservative containing mercury, causes autism.

..."


----------------------------------------------------


They offer a whole bunch of other bizarre wooiness -- much of it noted in the article above -- too!


----------------------------------------------------

Addendum:

Since right wing wackawoos are the topic of this post, I'll add more in regard to the Geier goons noted in the Rand article.


When (Anti-Vax) Politics Intrudes
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=7002

"...

Another issue that frequently is caught between politics and science is vaccinations – and just such a conflict is heating up in Florida. Penn Bullock and Brandon K. Thorp report in the Miami News Times that a wealthy chiropractor, Gary Kompothecras, is using his political connections, earned by generous campaign contributions, to promote his apparent anti-vaccine agenda. Kompothecras has two children with autism and he blames thimerosal in vaccines for their condition. Readers of SBM know that thimerosal (which contains ethyl mercury) has not been connected to autism. The scientific evidence overwhelmingly shows that vaccines are not to blame. Most notably with regard to thimerosal specifically, this preservative was removed from most childhood vaccines over 8 years ago in the US, and autism rates have not plummeted as proponents of the thimerosal hypothesis predicted. Yet some, like Kompothecras, still cling to this discredited notion.

A year ago Kompothecras (who calls himself the “rainmaker” – a reference to his political connections) was pushing for a law that would have weakened Florida’s vaccine requirement for public school. Such measures are always sold as parent choice or health freedom, but they are really just anti-vaccine. The bill, which is still languishing, would outlaw certain vaccines with thimerosal and would allow parents to space out and delay vaccines.

This is a good example of the disconnect between science and politics – there is no evidence that delaying or spacing out vaccines has any health benefit, but it does leave children vulnerable to preventable diseases for longer. So delaying vaccines has risk but no benefit.

This is therefore and example of one man who is using political connections to push for legislation that is not based upon science and runs contrary to the consensus of expert opinion.
Kompothecras is now at it again, using political pressure to “bully” the Florida department of health into releasing confidential vaccine records. Kompothecras is a friend and contributor to governor Charlie Crist, and was appointed to the governor’s task force on autism (a scary thought in itself). He wants the DOH to give this confidential information to the infamous father and son team of Mark and David Geier.

..."


Goodness.

:yoiks: