Dear ABC: Putting Jenny McCarthy on “The View” will kill children

She’s an anti-vaccination nut being mainstreamed for consumption. Fools will let their kids die because her idiocy comes from beautiful beestung lips nicely situated beneath a cute nose, high cheek-bones, lovely eyes and attractive hair artfully arranged over a completely empty head.

  • Fabio Paolo Barbieri

    Amen. The trouble is that you can’t protect scientific truth by law. The only protection is people’s commonsense – which is being undermined all the time by official batshitteries that leave people feeling as though either they must be mad or the rest of the world is – and confidence in the authorities, which is now, deservedly, at a historical low. So people begin to feel that any viewpoint may be equally valid. And if you dress your insanity in careful media savvy and the occasional underlying soft call to paranoia, there is little limit to the harm you can do. It’s not just children who will die if this blonde maniac has her way; the whole population will be left open to infection, according to well known principles of epidemiology.

  • Thinkling

    Another chip in the edifice of civilization surely is that so many people prefer to get medical information from a Playboy bunny than from their doctor.

    The toxic legacy of Andrew Fakefield dies hard. It is poosible someday his legacy will be seen to be as bad as Rolf Hochhuth.

    • Newp Ort

      Man, I’m not running to Wikipedia for you!

      /looks over shoulder
      /googles Rolf Hochhuth

      • Thinkling

        The Deputy dude, The Deputy.

        Both made up a small falsehood that took on lives of their own, and caused massive massive harm.

        • Newp Ort

          Ohhhh, why didn’t you just say The Deputy, dogg?

  • Patrick

    Having worked in a medical technology company for years, I can tell you that many, many people are saving their own lives and those of their loves ones by refusing to sit back and blindly accept what the medical establishment feeds them (thalidomide, gardasil, Vioxx, etc). Information is getting freer by the day thanks to the internet. Doctors and hospitals kill more people each year than anybody can fathom, like a fully-loaded 747 crashing every day, but “Don’t challenge the conventional wisdom!” There is far too much money to be made peddling vaccines to let somebody like McCarthy escape the usual charges (“HERESY! MURDER! QUACK!”). Meanwhile, very educated people, including medical professionals, are watching their own children or children close to them change radically after getting their shots. Portraying this as “Playboy bimbo is killing children” is so childish it’s sad.

    • HornOrSilk

      Oh, come on. There is a huge number of “sucker quack medicine” ala “natural news” types out there which make big money off of this nonsense. They want to scare people away from traditional medicine and offer them snake oil.

      Are all vaccines the same? No. But the mentality which treats them as all dangerous and doing no good is exactly the kind which will lead to an epidemic and kill people. Mark is 100% right.

      • Patrick

        So what do you say to people who have taken their health into their own hands and beaten cancer with a change in diet while refusing traditional cancer treatment (which many physicians also do, knowing full well that the accepted treatment for some cancers is simply not effective and yet is recommended and pushed hard)? Should they have ignored those who suggest that perhaps our burn/cut/poison medical industry doesn’t have all the answers? That the same industry that gave us thalidomide, and Vioxx, and Gardsil perhaps is not omniscient? Not everyone who recommends looking at the vaccine issue warily is pushing a product of their own. Again, “conspiracy”, “snake oil”, and “junk” are easy epithets to throw around, but there is no substance behind them and they are not an argument. You obviously have no first-hand experience with a child who undergoes a radical change within 48 hours of getting a shot. Are you in the medical field? Do you have a dog in the fight to protect conventional thinking? You probably would have laughed Semmelweis into the sanitarium yourself. Mark is not 100% right. He might be 10% right, or 2%, or 52%; you don’t know, and neither does he, and neither does the medical field. It’s the ones who are willing to admit that they don’t really know who will make progress in finding the truth.

        • HornOrSilk

          I say you are believing snake oil. “I beat cancer from this new age quackery.” Crazy nonsense. when one looks at the claims, they do not prove cure for cancer from them. It’s nonsense.

          • Patrick

            “That doctor over there says that we can prevent deaths by the hundreds if we would just wash our hands….can you believe that? 1000 Forint says he’s got stock in the hand soap company, or the paper towel company. What an idiot…pure snake oil, true quackery. It’s nonsense. Everybody knows that we have reached the peak of knowledge about how the body works. There can be no new knowledge. Only conspiracists think otherwise. And that other guy says our sailors can be healthier if they eat citrus fruit….what an idiot! Your health has nothing to do with your diet.”

        • AnsonEddy

          I ask them if they are familiar with Steve Jobs’ and the decisions he made regarding his cancer treatment.

    • kenneth

      Anti-vaccine crusaders aren’t “challenging the conventional wisdom” with any real science or even science-based critique. They’re peddling pseudo-science and superstition and a quasi-religious doctrine which reflexively rejects anything produced by “mainstream medicine.”

      • Andy, Bad Person

        Excellent. I see the way you tried to tie in anti-vaccine nuts with the Great Unwashed Religious. Subtle.

        • HornOrSilk

          What he is saying is that a lot of it is new age quackery, with new age religion, that is trying to attack mainstream science so as to open up a place for its snake oil to sell.

          • Andy, Bad Person

            If this comment was made in a vacuum, I’d agree with you. Kenneth is constantly on here taking potshots at believers, though.

            • Kenneth

              I like to think my work is more deliberate and focused than “potshots.” I do in fact have deep disagreements with some core viewpoints within Christianity and other religions, but those largely have to do with how those beliefs intersect with public policy. It’s probably fair to call me a rabid secularist. I am not, however an atheist. I’m a pagan, and the Richard Dawkins crowd considers me just as superstitious as any of you.

              I am not trying to lay the anti-vaccine movement primarily at the feet of traditionally religious. There does seem to be a certain cross-over between the anti-vaccine movement and some pockets of conservative Christianity, but it spans the rest of society, and certainly my corner of the spiritual spectrum is well-represented. I see the anti-vaccine problem as arising from a mixture of conspiracy theory, an appalling lack of scientific literacy and lack of critical thinking skills combined with justifiable suspicion of the mainstream medical industry and government.

  • freddy

    As a Catholic and a mother of a son who had a legitimate vaccine reaction I find the hysteria on both sides of this issue unhelpful. Both the “vaccines cause autism” (proven false) cry and the cry of “kids are gonna die” (complicated) are used to stifle real discussion about real vaccine issues.
    Parents with concerns about vaccines: either those who worry about or have lived through frightening vaccine reactions, or those concerned about the moral dimensions of using medicines developed from aborted children (no, parents who vaccinate their children are not morally complicit with evil, but it is a concern,) are increasingly sidelined when the two radical extremes of thought on this issue confront one another.
    Good parenting requires parents to educate themselves on this issue. Certainly the viewpoint of those like Ms. McCarthy must be strenuously opposed, but also the view that every parent must have every child vaccinated according to the current schedule regardless of family or individual health history. That viewpoint imperiled the life of my son, and would possibly have killed his younger brother.

    • Newp Ort

      The claim that “kids are gonna die” is not complicated. It’s documented fact that when vaccine rates drop outbreaks of deadly diseases occur.

      • freddy

        It’s also a documented fact that some kids die because of vaccines.
        And it’s also a documented fact that there are outbreaks of diseases, such as measles and pertussis, that occur every 10-15 years among vaccinated communities. Screaming “kids are gonna die!” is just a way of shutting down communication, same as screaming “vaccines are eeeevil!” Slogans make bad medicine. Reasearch, honest discussion, and options for parents make much better medicine.

  • James

    Such shameful language Mr. Shea. By the way, any research from you will surface the countless stories of the media and CDC mocking and lampooning Ms. McCarthy’s views. She is not loved by he mainstream, and it is known by the media and government industrial complex. So, why is she carted around on ABC? Thy need other things to make news around the country while they blind us into losing focus on real news. When the FDA and the CDC, and the President and Sebelius tell your kids to get vaccinations, go right ahead. Don’t be disturbed by mercury levels or other such nonsense, even aborted fetus cells. Just do it.

    Don’t get me wrong, McCarthy is no doctor, but we cannot say she is in a love affair with ABC. She is hated by the mainstream Left, that is, the Democratic Party, the President, the Communist Party, the UN and other front groups. These groups work and promote their ideas on ABC.

    • HornOrSilk

      You are saying she is representative of the right? Really? So the right is all about using porn to get their message across?

      Seriously, this is nonsense. She has nothing right/left about her quackery. People from both political positions detest her actions in regards to medicine. But of course, you are trying to make it as if some poor little conservative (!!) is being lambasted by “commies” for rejecting vaccines. Talk about having lost one’s mind.

      • James

        You are quite a joke if you think America is right or left. All I mentioned is that mainstream liberals control the airwaves. I said nothing about her being Republican or conservative. Jenny McCarthy is a leftist, but she is not mainstream. This is akin to Bob Dole being a main stream Republican but not a conservative.

        • HornOrSilk

          You said she is hated by the mainstream left, it’s all a commie thing, etc. You said far more and revealed far more of your paranoia than you realize. Typical conspiracy theorist with no real brain.

    • Irenist

      “the mainstream Left, that is, the Democratic Party, the President, the
      Communist Party, the UN and other front groups. These groups work and
      promote their ideas on ABC.”

      Ah, yes. The Communists are after our precious bodily fluids. Mustn’t let them fluoridate. The Communists? Other front groups? James, the world just doesn’t work the way you think it does.

  • James

    Seeing that they have out Ms. McCarthy on air, one can merely deduce that it is a much needed platform for them to ridicule her and silence public opinion on vaccinations once and for all. They ned to have the discussions on air, so that we can be distracted from other real news. Let’s forget about Snowdon, Syria, Benghazi and other such news. It’s working.

  • BigBlueWave

    Mark, I’m not an anti-vaccination nut, but I never got any childhood vaccinations, and I’m not dead. Let’s keep things in perspective

    • HornOrSilk

      BigBlue

      Fallacious argument 101, eh? Seriously? So you didn’t die from lack of vaccination therefore the whole theory of vaccinations saving people is bunk? Really? The point is not that a particular individual will be dead if they do not get vaccinated (they might, they might not), but if more and more do not get vaccinations, then the diseases will spread, becoming a widespread epidemic.

      • BigBlueWave

        I did not trash vaccines. I’m find the tone of the title exaggerated.

        • HornOrSilk

          The perspective is if we start spreading this mind-rot as truth, and I see it in a lot of “conspiracy theorists” circles, the end result is as Mark has said. To defend against various diseases, the vaccines need to be universal. Each doses isn’t a guarantee for an individual, but as for a population, it exponentially increases success and livelihood, and without it, the death toll rises.

          • Patrick

            If you’re worried about disease, then get your shots. If you’ve had your shots, then you won’t need to worry, will you?

            • HornOrSilk

              That is not how it works. The shots might not be 100% effective for an individual person. They might help, but the results are not perfect. Which is why you need a group net with such protection. That is what prevents the spread.

              • Patrick

                Well, since these shots are offered to me by folks I can trust 100% for their altruism, and since there is nothing to be gained by anybody out there if the shots I’m given also happen to plant seeds of long-term disease which happen to be “manageable” with expensive treatments which also don’t help anybody out there profit, I’m all for it. I say give newborns 50 shots! Why stop at the measly 24? Remember how people were dropping like flies back when you only got 3 within hours of birth? And how the autism rate has plummeted since then? We’ll only be really safe when Pharma, Inc. is allowed to give our babies all 250 doses that we really need. No more sickness!!

                • AnsonEddy

                  Pharma companies don’t really make that much money off vaccine production. To much overhead for a product they can’t get much compensation for. The fear in the 80s was that the whole anti-vaccine movement would result in pharma companies ceasing vaccine production altogether due to liability concerns.

            • Beadgirl

              My son has a slightly weakened immune system and a number of respiratory issues; a simple cold virus can send him to the ICU for a week or more. He’s been vaccinated, but that’s no guarantee that he can’t catch whooping cough or measles. Not to mention all the children who *can’t* be vaccinated, because they are too young, or they have a compromised immune system, or because of some other medical issue. So no, it’s not that simple.

        • Newp Ort

          did you ever have polio, measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria or tetanus? if you didnt there’s a good chance you have been protected by group immunity. if you are unvaccinated in a population that largely is, you are protected by their inability to catch and therefore to transmit disease.

          It is a documented fact that measles outbreaks have occurred recently in communities where vaccinations were administered late or not at all. when this happens, the most at risk are very young children who are not old enough to have been vaccinated (under one year old), and they are at high risk for death or permanent disability from measles.

          discouraging vaccination based on bogus information actually has caused serious illness and death

          • HornOrSilk

            Exactly right.

          • BigBlueWave

            I did have measles. My brother had measles. And whooping cough. And so did a lot of kids. I don’t want to discourage vaccination. As I said, I think the tone was exaggerated.

    • Irenist

      BigBlueWave, to keep things in perspective, please remember that it’s not just about you. Herd immunity is important. By not getting your vaccinations, you endanger others.

  • TheodoreSeeber

    The Vaccination thing was years ago. She’s now moved on into additional nuttiness, she’s now an “Indigo Mom” and her child isn’t autistic, he’s a “Star child”, part of a cadre of messiahs here to save us all.

  • Sheila Hughes

    I have a son with autism and since his diagnosis 4 years ago, I’ve been doing a lot of reading. I’ve heard of Jenny McCarthy and from what I understand, she is not against vaccinations, but wants them looked at more intensely as well as the vaccination schedule, as do I.

    I have recently come across a group called The Thinking Mom’s Revolution: http://thinkingmomsrevolution.com/when-doctors-lie-oh-hell-no/ and did you know that there are at least 60 studies showing a causal relationship of autism from vaccines? It’s not just Wakefield’s study, regardless someone’s opinion of that. http://adventuresinautism.blogspot.com/2007/06/no-evidence-of-any-link.html

    Moms like me, we do think and research, and not just “quack” studies come up. Real studies do. Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute, who is trying to make more ethical vaccines without the aborted fetal cells discovered a link between the rise in autism and when aborted fetal cells were introduced into vaccines: http://soundchoice.org/research/

    I know this is a big debate with Jenny McCarthy and frankly, I’m glad as the door should not be closed on exploring the relationship between vaccines and autism. The rate, last I heard is 1/50 kids, after just being 1/88 and it’s not just better diagnosis. If I could go back and do anything differently with my son, it would start with the vaccines. I did what I was encouraged to do and I regret it. What baby needs a Hep B shot on the day they are born? In 1983 the dosage schedule was 24 doses until adulthood. Now, it’s 71 and I don’t see much evidence of people being much healthier, to be honest. I do see more and more kids (and I work in the mental health field) with neurological problems, ADHD, Sensory Processing Disorder, Autism Spectrum Disorder, as well as asthma, and allergies.

    Just as God worked through Rahab, He can also work through Jenny McCarthy. It is the people, who get educated on this and not just repeat the medical establishment, CDC, FDA, etc. talking points, that will insist on change in this area. Congress has asked the CDC if any studies have been done comparing vaccinated kids and unvaccinated kids and autism and they haven’t done those studies. Why not?

    I’m grateful for this post and I certainly don’t have all the answers, but I wanted to at least share what I’ve discovered along our journey. What I do know is my kids don’t need all the vaccines that are being pushed on them and as I provide healthy food/supplements and natural remedies, their bodies get healthier and stronger. I have a friend with a 3 year old, not vaccinated for the whooping cough who was exposed to kids who later got it, despite being vaccinated and she’s healthy. Yes, it’s most likely not scientific, but the kids getting the vaccines are getting sick from stuff they were vaccinated against and it’s not from those who haven’t been vaccinated. Certainly something to consider. We have better medical care than 100 years ago so if kids do get these illnesses, they are not affected as severely. I’m not saying kids aren’t all reacting the same, as some kids are simply healthier than others, but why is that? Perhaps that is what needs to be studied more. Since we’ve cut out all the processed foods, trying to avoid GMO and making more from scratch with organic, (when we can afford it), we are doing much better and the bodies are healing. It’s a tough battle, though, especially when the kids are tempted everywhere they go by processed foods.

    I know I’ve gone on about this, but with an autistic kid, another with sensory processing disorder, and two more, with ADHD, asthma and allergies, (all conditions on the rise in the last 30 years), this mom is trying to do something different and going against a huge tide in the process.

    • HornOrSilk

      Sorry, you do not understand the monetary reasons why many are trying to create this story about autism and vaccines. It’s bunk. It ignores many other factors such as the rise of the recognition of autism itself.

      • Patrick

        It would appear that perhaps you do not understand the monetary reasons why many are pushing more and more shots. New insights into gut health and the effects on helpful flora by the introduction of things in these shots are helping shed light on a subject that is far more complex than you wish to admit. Is it just the shots? Is it the shots coupled with one other thing? How about coupled with 10 other things? How about coupled with GMO’s, or antibiotics, or GMO’s AND antibiotics AND electromagnetic fields…etc. Dismissing something in this arena as bunk is the height of arrogance. You have absolutely no idea, but at least some people out there are willing to look at the data from a different perspective and ask questions.

        • HornOrSilk

          Here comes the conspiracy theorist. It’s funny they always say it is about the money, then they go and point to some natural cures, some new age wackery to use instead of traditional medicine. This is called projection. The whole “they want you to buy buy buy” medicine is junk. It’s simple — the more of a shield you develop, the more protection you get.

          I have every idea. The thing with junk science is no matter how wrong it is, you have conspiracy theorists finding ways to defend it.

          • Patrick

            It’s hardly a conspiracy theory that businesses are in business to make money. It is easy to fling that term around, though, when it’s hard to answer an argument. You are the one who brought up monetary reasons; are you conspiracy theorist? Ignoring scores of studies, highly-educated not-prone-to-”conspiracies” professionals, including those directly involved in medicine, whose children are radically changed after getting shots, and terming anything that doesn’t conform to your definition of “acceptable science” as “junk” is silly.

            • Patrick

              “Ignac Semmelweis? What a quack! His junk science should be ignored. After all, it flies in the face of everything we know!”

            • AnsonEddy

              There isn’t actually a lot of money in vaccine production as far as pharmaceutical companies are concerned. Read “Deadly Choices” by Paul Offit. There are a lot of production costs for a product that they can’t sell for much money.

    • Dave

      Sheila, I wish I could like your post 100 times.

      • Sheila Hughes

        Thanks, Dave! I appreciate it!

  • Ian Bibby

    I don’t know Jenny McCarthy’s views on vaccines, but I think that some degree of skepticism about the modern vaccine schedule ( such as seen here: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2013/07/vaccines-science-and-equipose.html ), and whether it may be overlay aggressive or not absolutely necessary in all of its details, is reasonable.

  • JoAnna Wahlund

    We selectively vaccinate for moral reasons; namely, we refuse all vaccines derived from aborted fetal stem cells. (http://soundchoice.org) We’d gladly use ethical vaccines if they were made available, but since it’s not profitable for the large vaccine producers, we can’t get them. Does that make me a nut?

  • JoAnna Wahlund

    Incidentally, my oldest has mild autism and she’s never had the MMR vaccine due to the aborted fetal stem cell issue. So, take that as you will.

    • Dave

      Any vaccine can cause autism or other types of issues, not just the MMR. I personally know people who say that their child immediately got nervous system/brain problems after receiving the pertussis vaccine. I have no reason to doubt them, as they have been normal people in every other way.

      On the other hand, vaccines do help to minimize the risk of some pretty bad diseases, so it’s not like there’s a perfect choice. I’d certainly not vaccinate for more manageable diseases like chicken pox, flu, hepatitis B, etc. though. And the one thing I’d do at all costs is make sure that your child’s immune system is as healthy as possible if/when you do vaccinate (not just that they don’t have a cold)

      Watch the DVD “The Greater Good”. We are in the process of watching it right now…it gives a balanced view.

  • Urbanmom

    Really Mark, I usually agree with you on a lot of your posts.but as a mother with a child who regressed after his 15 month vaccinations, this is one of those things of which you do not know of which you speak. The mere suggestions that the current vaccine schedule is too aggressive and should be studied, (because it hasn’t…) does not make one a murdering antivax fool. Give me a break!

    I have little patience for this kind of thing. My son is in school right now so this is the reason I have time to write anything.

    Please people! For the love of God, try and get past the fact that Ms McCarthy is blonde, has big boobs and was a playboy bunny! That doesn’t mean she was born without a brain. Honestly! She’s a mother! She has a son who regressed after vaccinations. Forgive us if we want REAL answers and don’t trust the CDC who has big Pharma running it to give us those answers. They’re only now trying to pass a law in congress to study vaccinated vs unvaccinated. The CDC were asked to do this over 10 years ago! And they still haven’t!

    And there are over 60 studies that show a link between vaccines and autism. Just because you don’t agree with it doesn’t make it bunk or pseudo science or new age quackery. And no i’m not antivax and Ms. McCarthy isn’t either. We’re asking for safer vaccines.

    Here’s a link of the studies.

    https://www.facebook.com/notes/ginger-taylor/72-research-papers-showing-that-vaccines-can-cause-autism/10151550806568920

    • HornOrSilk

      Post hoc ergo propter hoc. You are reading the vaccinations as the cause of other issues. It’s a scapegoat.

      • Dave

        Look, dude. There are lots of moms that are absolutely convinced that something happened to their children after being vaccinated. Most of them had no concerns beforehand. The reaction, according to the moms I have talked to, was immediate and unmistakable. You can talk about scientific studies all you want, and there are scientific studies either way (probably depending on who is paying for them.) I prefer to listen to actual people. Nobody knows their kids better than their moms.

        • HornOrSilk

          There are a lot of moms convinced because they were told this must be the reason. They are not looking to other factors, such as age when things manifest, environment they live in, etc. I know the issue quite well, with aspergers in my family. The thing is, it’s manifest in several generations, which shows it is genetic. This is ignored by the fear-mongers, and there is a reason for this. And moms often do NOT know the science, and listen to fear-mongers who are using things like the net to spread junk-science.

          • Dave

            There is an epidemic of these issues today. There is a genetic component, as there is to almost everything, but there is an environmental component as well. When moms are convinced that a big change took place in their kids immediately after vaccination, I don’t see why I shouldn’t believe them. Sure, there could be other factors, but vaccination is the obvious one.

            As far as “science”, my opinion is that there’s precious little “real” science being done nowadays. Most is funded by groups who have a vested interest in the outcome.

            • HornOrSilk

              Post hoc ergo propter hoc. That’s why

              • Dave

                Certainly, the fact that it happens immediately afterwards doesn’t absolutely PROVE that it’s because of it. But it seems pretty convenient to say that it just happens at a certain age, and a strange coincidence that it always just happens to occur just after vaccination. I don’t hear people saying, geez, my kid just suddenly regressed significantly, and there was no apparent reason.

                This should be fairly easy to study. Can’t they study the Amish or other groups around the world who generally don’t vaccinate and see if they get similar rates of autism, etc? They could also study disease rates, as some claim that the decline of infectious diseases was based as much on public health practices and knowledge as upon the vaccines themselves.

                • HornOrSilk

                  Things have been studied, that is the thing. Every study is ignored by the conspiracy theorists.

                  • Dave

                    There are studies both ways. Obviously, someone is fudging the data or some of the studies are set up in a certain way as to get a certain result, or the results are reported simplistically or incorrectly. I’ve done enough research on scientific studies in other areas to know that what is reported as the “result” of a study isn’t always true, if you dig deeply into the methodology and the study itself.

                    • HornOrSilk

                      Yep, spoken like a true conspiracy theorist.

                    • Patrick

                      Dave – just be aware that your conspiracy cabal has successfully infiltrated the Telegraph. Well done.

                      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/5438844/Scientists-faking-results-and-omitting-unwanted-findings-in-research.html

                    • Dan C

                      In the world of research, there is just so much money. In recent memory, Autism Speaks had very prominent defections based on its inability to accept study after study that failed to demonstrate vaccine ill effects.

                      Allison Singer, one defector to the Autism Science Foundation, “There isn’t an unlimited pot of money, and every dollar spent looking where we know the answer isn’t is one less dollar we have to spend where we might find new answers. The fact is that vaccines save lives; they don’t cause autism.”

                      Eric London, a founding member of the Autism Science Foundation: that “there might be rare cases of ‘biologically-plausible’ vaccine involvement… are misleading and disingenuous”, and that Autism Speaks was “adversely impacting” autism research.

                      Autism research poured good money after bad pursuing vaccines as a culprit. They misspent money better spent in pursuit of the culprit(s). Money was wasted pursuing research demonstrating time and again: no effect.

                    • Dave

                      Honestly, I don’t have enough interest to pore over all those studies (and all the studies that reportedly do show a connection), but it’s possible they could be flawed. All it takes for me to think that there is probably some linkage is a few moms (and dads) who affirm that their child was perfectly normal before the vaccinations and declined precipitously immediately afterwards, and there are a lot more than a few.

                    • Dan C

                      “and all the studies that reportedly do show a connection…”

                      That would be Andrew Wakefield’s controversial paper. It would take more time to go through the forensic analysis of the falsification of his data than the paper.

                      “All it takes for me to think that there is probably some linkage is a few moms (and dads) who affirm that their child was perfectly normal….” So…I am not expert on exactly the form of bias in this that reduces the scientific clarity of such anecdotes, but, since you read studies, perhaps you know its name. For such an assertion is a clear bias when reporting anecdotes. That much I know.

                    • Patrick
                    • Dan C

                      http://www.nature.com/news/2011/111109/full/479157a.html

                      http://leftbrainrightbrain.co.uk/2012/01/10/brian-deer-responds-to-david-lewis-complaint/

                      And while folks are on the subject of “conflict of interest,” Andrew Wakefield’s conflict of interest remains undiscussed.

                    • Dan C

                      Obviously? Obviously?

                      What evidence permits such blanket assertions of malificence?

                    • Dave

                      Because there are studies that both sides of the controversy cite (and not just Wakefield.) They can’t all be right. I suppose, actually, it could be that the studies ARE all right, but they aren’t being interpreted correctly in one way or another. The “obviously” was meant to refer to the fact that studies showing opposite results need to be reconciled.

          • Sheila Hughes

            15% of the cases of autism are caused by genetics, last I checked. It might not be the exact number, but the majority of the cases are brought on by environmental factors. There may be a genetic predisposition to autism, just as heart disease, diabetes, etc., but it doesn’t mean we can’t look at the environmental toxins to be a determining factor. It stands to reason that the biggest assault on a child’s immune system with toxins are when they are vaccinated, especially with 4 shots at at time which can consist up to at least 12 separate vaccinations. Yes, there are a lot of environmental factors and they all must be looked at, especially regarding GI issues, which most autistic kids have, which, btw, are also affected by vaccines. There’s a lot to look into and considering the lack of resources and an average family’s ability to get the kind of treatment paid for, there is great cause for concern.

            So, Dave, just as heart disease, etc. runs in families, it doesn’t mean you should still go ahead and not take preventative measures to at the very least, minimize the negative affects of a genetic condition. There are moms out there who aren’t fear mongering, but actually studying the issues and looking for solutions because we are the ones living with this, every day, and as for this mom, I want my kid to have a fulfilling life and be a productive member of society. Can you just imagine the 1/88 kids currently diagnosed all on Social Security when they are adults? We are looking for healing for our kids and instead of discounting the questions that go against the tide, please, take some time to learn more about it and understand from another perspective.

  • Stu

    Wow. That’s some bitter language towards Ms. McCarthy. Bitter language towards Father Z yesterday as well. Just plain bitter.

  • Chad

    Friends lost a daughter. Cause of death listed on death certificate is MMR vaccine. They don’t vaccine their kids anymore. I don’t think one has standing to say to their face they are foolish.

    We avoid vaccines with aborted fetal DNA remains. It means we don’t fully vaccinate our kids. We are not anti-vaccine. We understand the risks. We watch closely for changes in the “herd”. Every single decision we make is done to protect our kids as best as we possibly can. We proceed carefully. These are not the marks of the foolish.

    Gotta get off Mark’s blog. Just not an enjoyable place to visit. Love your books, love seeing you speak Mark. But for my own peace of mind, I have to say goodbye. You wield a very broad brush, and you seem to be gripping it tightly. I wish you better days filled with peace.

    • Dave

      Besides the aborted fetal DNA remains, there are also mercury (thimerosal) and aluminum in vaccines (and probably other things as well). Studies are ongoing, but I am pretty sure that none of those things are good for anyone, much less an infant or small child.

  • Stu

    I think skepticism of the medical establishment is healthy, especially when you factor in the money involved. Governor Perry’s support for the HPV vaccine
    is in my mind looks like an example of such influence.

    When my last child was born in the local military hospital,my wife and I were hassled to give our son a Vitamin K booster, which we declined. They finally sent in some poor nurse (LT) to make the case for getting this done. She cited the statistic that having the booster caused a 50% reduction in dangerous hemorrhaging for boys undergoing circumcision and it was in our best interest to give our son the booster. She pleaded that I read some material from a health journal to get informed. I relented and did read the material. It turns out that without the booster, 6 outof 1000 boys experience dangerous hemorrhaging during circumcision. With the booster, it goes down to 3 out of 1000 boys. Indeed, a 50% reduction. The LT wasn’t even aware that these were the
    actual numbers even though they were right there in the material she provided.

    My only thought was that someone is getting wealthy with these boosters. Now does that mean all vaccines are bad? Certainly not. But there is nothing wrong with questioning such things.

    • Rebecca Fuentes

      The medical community also responds to women’s complaints about severe menstrual pain or cramps by giving them hormonal birth control. There is a mentality among some doctors and many patients to, “Give a pill and solve the problem” instead of looking at end causes. The most frustrating thing for me, when I started researching vaccines, was the wide disparity of information–everything from “the doctor says it’s safe so it is” to “never vaccinate it will destroy your children” (It’s like researching raw milk safety–some claim it will kill you and others claim it’s a cure all). I tend to think that truth is usually in the middle. There are pretty strong indications that certain children, because of their own health problems or certain autoimmune problems within the family, who shouldn’t be vaccinated or who should be given a much more drawn out, careful schedule. The number of vaccines had risen over the past few decades, and I think it’s good for people to start educating themselves on the issue. I have to wonder if some of the new research on epigenetics might shed light on the root causes of autism, since there does seem to be both genetic and environmental links.

      • Stu

        You could add, part of a similar problem, the growing pressure to deliver children by c-section for almost any reason.

        • Patrick

          My wife mentioned some story she read recently about research being done into how passing through the birth canal somehow affects gut flora in the baby, and that c-section babies may be suffering from this issue in ways we don’t yet understand. This could certainly be a contributing factor in the autism explosion…if you believe conspiracies, anyway.

          • Rebecca Fuentes

            I’ve seen the info about vaginal birth and baby gut flora, and since I’m pregnant, I’ve read up on births and interventions. I might call it a correlation or unintended consequence, but not a conspiracy. I do know that the one of my three births so far that had no medical interventions at all, not even any sort of pain medications, was the easiest to recover from, and that one of my babies was the strongest early nurser and the best sleeper. I know my son is fussier and more prone to becoming overwhelmed if I let him have sugar regularly and more even-keeled if I don’t. I think we are just beginning to see how what we put into our bodies can affect the systems, for better or worse.

    • Dan C

      Someone gets wealthy in a capitalist system. Unless you are suggesting a socialization of these vaccines, something for which I am all in.

      Is it just when people get wealthy for vaccines, or do you dislike people getting wealthy with other drug manufacturing?

      How about when people like Halliburton get wealthy from war? Are you so direct as to call those guys out too?

      • Stu

        I’m saying that getting wealthy sometimes cloud people’s judgment on what is truly good for society.

        Caveat emptor.

        • Dan C

          Such is termed “conflict of interest.”

          A conflict of interest can occur without malice. Acting on such a conflict is the problem.

    • Sus_1

      All my kids are vaccinated although we did it on a delayed schedule. I was scared not to vaccinate and I was scared to vaccinate. There’s so much information on both sides. Some of it is pure lunacy.

      I never felt any kind of pressure about vaccinating until the past 6-7 years ago. Now it seems like every time we are in the doctor’s office, for any reason they are hawking some kind of vaccine – flu, pneumonia and HPV mostly. The pressure makes me think it’s financially motivated.

      I don’t know what to do about the HPV vaccine. Only 2 of my kids are old enough for it and we haven’t done it yet.

      Jenny McCarthy is a nut job. I’d like to see Mark guest co-host on The View for Guy Fridays.

  • Andrew

    I’m not antivax and all my kids have had their vax’s and are doing just fine. However, a few years back my middle-child’s doc (well, nurse) goofed on the vax sched and he was given a 2nd MMR booster 6mo or so ahead of schedule. Many years later, he’s 100% fine.

    However, we had no idea about the “accidental” MMR booster if we weren’t, out of the blue, sideswiped by calls, letters and profuse apologies when they discovered the mishap. The way they fell all over themselves was the worrisome part, not the accidental booster. Just saying…

    • Dan C

      Many vaccine schedules outside the US involve the issuance of a vaccine at 12 months and then a booster at 13 months of age.

      Prior to the advent of good anti-retroviral care for individuals with HIV, children with HIV received MMR on this schedule, to ensure some immunity prior to the collapse of their immunity.

      MMR in general has been given on many schedules.

  • Zippy

    Mark, my friend:

    You are badly in the wrong on this tricky subject, which does not lend itself to a tribal “vaccines good, anti-vaccine people are kooks” narrative; and it would be better if you simply avoided comment on it.

  • Franklin

    Is somebody who finds conspiracy theories around every corner a conspiracy theorist? Or just someone who is lazy and would rather try to diffuse every argument they prefer not to have to engage intellectually?

    Those who want to throw Dr. Offit out as a disinterested wise man on the shots (my shorthand for immunizations/vaccines) question should do some research into his own financial benefit from shots. It’s not hard. While you’re doing that, look into his false statements about a CBS reporter looking into this question. Most likely it was a conspiracy to make him look bad, I’m sure, but that’s an acceptable conspiracy. There must have been another conspiracy to frame the CDC researcher responsible for looking into the autism connection for stealing $1M of research money. CDC people are altruists who would never do something underhanded for money, so we know he must be innocent and all his research pure and true.

    All those parents out there who noticed radical changes in their children immediately after a shot was administered? They’re just idiots who are buying in to a mass hallucination caused by conspiracy theorists. Nobody knows these people’s children better than HornOrSilk.

    • HornOrSilk

      The anti-vaccination issue IS a conspiracy theory. It’s not “finding a conspiracy theory around every corner,” it’s finding a conspiracy theory, a classical, new-age conspiracy theory, being promoted by people who probably do not know better. It’s how pseudo-science quackery spreads. They have an issue, they engage fallacies (everyone who ate corn 5000 years ago died, therefore, don’t eat corn!), and then find all kinds of reasons to ignore legitimate answers. This kind of quackery is spread on the net and all Catholics who follow REASON should outright reject it. It’s hogwash.

      • Patrick

        Can you please explain how, exactly, the anti-vaccination issue is a conspiracy theory? Who is conspiring? To what end? Enlighten me with your REASON.

        Again, you do not have a reply to those parents who probably do know better and have seen changes from shots, other than, “they’ve been conditioned to expect this so they’re really chasing a phantom, the shot had nothing to do with it.” There are doctors in that group who used to drink your kool-ade, until they were affected and forced to re-assess. They obviously are not being REASONable, since you have defined any questioning of the safety of shots (which do not have a control group test behind them, by the way…try doing that with some medicine you want to get to market) as quackery and conspiracy and lunacy and junk science. And we all know that you know exactly how the body works, just like the rest of the world, which is why all research into the human body has ceased.

        Mark – “Franklin” was an unintended side-effect of doing way too many things at once (among which involves Franklin county) but it is interesting to see what will actually get you to comment on this issue that seems so near and dear to you (to the point of posting, but yet not engaging)

        • HornOrSilk

          Seriously, are you that brain-dead? The anti-vaccination crowd have all kinds of conspiracies about vaccinations, from: they spread the disease, they purposefully put contaminants in vaccines to cause harm, to the simple “they are pushing vaccines for big money.” There is also the “they are hiding all the evidence” conspiracy aspect of it. It’s a simple conspiracy theory. Very classic. Enough with this nonsense.

          • Patrick

            Brain-dead? Really? “The anti-vaccination crowd” = who, exactly? Are my relatives in that “crowd”? There are many, many people out there, including physicians, who have seen enough real world trauma from shots that they think some caution is prudent. How, exactly, are they part of a conspiracy? Are those clinicians being duped? Did they watch Jenny McCarthy one night on TV, and then start seeing fake weird behavior in their kids? Again, silence from you, and with good reason.

            “Enough with this nonsense” is yet another easy out, isn’t it? “You dare challenge my wisdom, which I present to you brain-dead idiots? I shall leave, and take my ball with me! That will show you how stupid you are!”

            Bravo! Such REASON is breathtaking.

        • Kenneth

          The anti-vaccine movement is a conspiracy theory because it employs the standards of evidence and logic of conspiracy theorists. It has failed, for centuries, to back its central assertions with solid, reproducible data. The answer to that problem invariably is that “the truth is out there, but The Man is suppressing it.” The movement is also very big on personality cults built around heroic figures who are then painted as martyrs anytime they discredit themselves with forged data, hinky statistical practices etc. It is a conspiracy theory and a pseudoscience because it writes its hypothesis as the conclusion of its “studies” and then cherry picks data and plays games with burdens of evidence and rejects out of hand any data which disagrees. Like all conspiracy theories and pseudoscience, it avoids at all costs a fair fight on a level playing field with transparent rules. It states up front that “anything the other side says is a lie, because they are evil” and “since they can’t know absolutely everything, they can’t prove that we might not be right.” That ain’t science, it’s pure ideology.

          I can assure you firsthand that modern vaccine studies absolutely do have control groups. I am presently a volunteer in a vaccine study and recently learned I was in the placebo arm. Over the course of this study I and other volunteers were very closely monitored for side effects, and all of that data is monitored by a third party. When it becomes clear a vaccine is unsafe or (as was the case), failed to do its job, the study is shut down early.

          • Patrick

            Were you in the study done on infants when you were an infant? No? Neither was anybody else, because there is no such thing. Our children ARE the experimental animals.

            • kenneth

              They’re also the experimental animals when you let them take their chances with deadly and disfiguring epidemic diseases. We have centuries of data on that approach, and the safety record sucks.

      • Dan C

        If one marks the modern vaccination age with smallpox and 1796, we get evidence of an anti-vaccine movement through varied religious groups decades prior. Most clear evidence is the sermon “The Dangerous and Sinful Practice of Innoculation” from 1772.

        The anti-vaccination movement was already ahead of the vaccines.

    • chezami

      Patrick: When you change your handle to Franklin to make it look like more people agree with you, the only person who looks like a conspirator is you.

    • Dan C

      Are you propsoing that an alternate to Paul Offit’s profit motives would be….socializing these vaccines?

      If so, I’m all in!

  • Sam Schmitt

    I’m would have thought Mark would be a little more skeptical about the whole vaccination juggernaut given his views on the global climate change agenda – (where I think hes right on the money, BTW). Seems like there are similar overheated “how dare you question the establishment” and “there are no studies supporting your position” sort of of scare tactics on both these issues.

    • Patrick

      Mark is too busy with his conspiracy theory about how the NSA spies on everybody illegally to spend time on a conspiracy theory about how an industry with incestuous ties to the same government (see: CDC Director takes job with Merck’s vaccines dept) might actually be pushing a product that isn’t as safe as they want us to think.

  • Dan C

    I am a fan of vaccines as a physician.

    Yes, deaths, brain injury, loss of limbs, etc from vaccine-preventable diseases is thankfully rare in this country today. Because of aggressive vaccine efforts, deaths from pertussis in infants have decreased, largely due, not exclusively as a consequence of the vaccination of the infants, but due to the vaccination of those around the infants.

    I have seen deaths due to pertussis in infants, sad horrid deaths. I have seen deaths due to pneumococcal meningtis, chicken pox, and brain injury due to measles infections. Most folks should be grateful that these do not occur more often. That they do not is the gift of vaccination efforts.

    Vaccination fulfills an individual responsibility to oneself, and a responsibility to one’s children. Communal responsibilities are fulfilled also, because vaccination protects others, especially those with weakened immunity.

    My mother recalls the era of polio, of not going swimming in public pools due to outbreaks, and I had a piano teacher that had a paralysis in her legs due to polio. I had a cousin who died as a consequence of pneumococcal meningitis, a now preventable problem. His parents did not recover from the trauma of losing their son-his death haunted them for 60 years.

    The era of epidemic measles, meningitis, and severe invasive bacterial disease is discussed by older physicians as soldiers relate war stories. The era sounds exciting. I am glad, however, to have missed that era, a time in which children suffered intensely while parents lost children day and night in pediatric hospitals due to illnesses we can now prevent.

    • Zippy

      The modern prescription drug regime rides, ideologically, on the historical coattails of the genuine successes of basic modern medicines like antibiotics. But it is in its current form an utter disaster, as (for one) Dr. David Healy documents in his many books, including most recently Pharmageddon.

      Vaccines may be different — I for one have not done enough due diligence to have a firm opinion, although the way they are relentlessly presented as an unmitigated public good and critics are painted as not just wrong but evil murderous heretics does tend to peg the skepticism-o-meter. And I know better, now, from personal experience in the family (among other things), than to trust Orwellian “evidence based medicine” and the clinical trial regime when it comes to evaluating vaccines, side effects, etc.

      Yes, historically, vaccines have been enormously life-saving – statistically speaking – by creating herd immunity to some deadly diseases. Of course statistics aren’t all that meaningful to the individuals on the other end of the stick who were killed or maimed by vaccines. But give the Devil his due: public health has improved enormously with vaccination.

      However, that historical account does not constitute a blanket justification of the current, present day vaccination-industrial-government complex. At all. Just because war has been justified and has saved lives in the past it doesn’t follow that today’s war is just.

      • HornOrSilk

        Conspiracy theorists always “document” a selective reading.

        • Zippy

          David Healy isn’t a conspiracy theorist. If you did a small amount of due diligence and actually read his book, you would know that.

          • HornOrSilk

            He most certainly is a conspiracy theorist — he has all kinds of conspiracies with drug companies and “ghost writers” and the like. Seriously, this article shows the radical craziness of this guy, when it points out he says junk like this:

            “Any drug released since 1990, esp the biologic gp of drugs, should be considered a poss candidate for late side effects”

            http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnlamattina/2012/06/27/why-david-healy-is-wrong-about-the-safety-of-new-medicines/

            This is exactly conspiracy theory territory. And the more one researches his audience and who listens to him, and what he says, it is clear, he’s not credible. Like all conspiracy theorists, he uses some truth, some issues, to make it appear he is credible.

            • Zippy

              You put “ghost writers” in quotes as if there were no such thing. But the majority of medical papers on clinical trials are written by ghost writers. A relative of mine actually is one, as it turns out

              I think you actually have developed an immunity of a sort – an immunity sometimes referred to as crimestop.

      • Dave

        +100, Zippy. “Anatomy of an Epidemic” is another good book along the same lines as Dr. Healy’s books.

  • Ann

    After reading comments from mom’s of kids who reacted, how
    about a comment from a kid? (Not that I am a kid anymore.) My mom said I screamed inconsolably after my MMRB. That makes sense to me since my earliest memory is an unbearably painful pressure in my head. I don’t have autism, but I did go through therapy to correct moderate learning and social disabilities. I can’t
    say for sure they are linked, but I haven’t had a shot since I was 4 or 5 and I’m not
    dead. My younger siblings have never had a shot. There’s no way I will do that to my kids either.

    • Kenneth

      If you had instead suffered a broken collarbone from a freak seat belt malfunction in a mild fender bender, would you conclude, from that one data point, that seat belts are more danger than they’re worth and not make your kids ever wear them? It’s great that you’ve gotten away with no shots, but does that establish that it’s a good idea? We can all name people who got away with a lifetime of heavy smoking, or habitual DUI driving, or running with the bulls at Pamplona. Should we conclude that everything they tell us about the dangers of those things is nonsense? We don’t do that because we know to look at the big picture of how the risks play out over time and large numbers. We use that standard of risk-benefit weighing everywhere else, except vaccines.

      You’re making a life decision based on a vaccine injury you don’t even know for sure happened. I’ll give you a real one. Five years ago, I lost most of the use of my left arm from a vaccine reaction. A simple flu shot set off a freak immune reaction that destroyed some of the nerve endings in my shoulder. It’s called Parsonage Turner Syndrome, and there’s no maybe about it. It was vaccine induced. I had weeks of intense pain followed by partial paralysis. I couldn’t lift an aspirin above my navel with that arm, or do anything else requiring shoulder movement (fortunately I’m a righty, and I recovered after many months of therapy).

      Even with all that, I still don’t reject the entire technology of vaccines. I look at the relative risks of influenza to myself (and my elderly relatives) versus what happened to me that one time, a side effect that happens something like 2 in 100,000. It is rare enough that my neurologist was (on a professional level), delighted to see a case firsthand. So there you have it. Vaccines are not 100% safe, but in a very unsafe world, they are still a damn good bargain for most of us most of the time.

      • Zippy

        How many people are treated like murderous heretics for pointing out that driving is dangerous?

        • kenneth

          None, because unlike anti-vaccine advocates, they’re not advocating doing something even more dangerous than the original problem.

  • Duh

    Well, duh! Of course Mark Shea is going to side with Salon! This makes perfect sense. Sad. But makes sense.

    • HornOrSilk

      I guess I could write:

      Well, duh! Of course you are going to side with a Playboy Playmate! This makes perfect sense. Sad. But makes sense.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X