Skip to main content

Oh no, here we go again. The antivaccination cult, lacking any real evidence, grabs onto the flimsiest of stories, disregarding the foul and corrupt individuals promoting the story–using it all to scream "GOTCHA" to anyone involved with vaccines. Last year, it was laughably jumping on some comments of Dr. Diane Harper, who was promoted by the antivaccination crowd as the "lead researcher" for Gardasil, that appeared to say that Gardasil was useless.

Or promoting an "Italian court" that decided that MMR caused autism, relying upon the discredited and retracted study by one of the greatest scientific criminals of the past 100 yearsMrAndy Wakefield, who fraudulently alleged a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism.

Or furthering the story of a French businessman, who claimed to have intimate knowledge of Merck's data about Gardasil–all of it negative. Except he never worked in Merck's R&D department, and was made redundant when his company was acquired by Merck.

The Church of Antivaccines, whose god, Mr. Andy Wakefield, should be held criminally responsible for deaths of children who never got the MMR vaccine, are so bereft of any real evidence to support their beliefs, they will either invent, misrepresent, or manipulate any story that even tenuously supports their dogma that vaccines are dangerous.

So, what is the Antivaccine movement saying? They're pushing a story that a CDC researcher, Dr. William Thompson, has "admitted" that the CDC itself has covered up or hidden damning evidence that MMR vaccine actually causes autism. It was presented in a heavily promoted video, narrated by the aforementioned conman, Wakefield. If you really want to watch the video, you can find it here, but you'll have to check your skepticism at the door, or bring an emesis basin to collect the vomit from watching it. In other words, it's a 0.00000001-star movie. Don't ignore the Godwins comparing the CDC (and I suppose the researchers) to Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and others that I might have missed.

The producers of the video, the Autism Media Channel, have a long history of producing videos that allow Wakefield to shill his particularly vile brand of misinformation. One of the worst videos was about Alex Spourdalakis, an autistic child that was murdered by his mother and another caretaker, because they could not handle his autism. Essentially, Wakefield and his sycophants excused the murder because the poor mother and caretaker couldn't deal with the "vaccine injuries", and "they had no choice." It gets worse. Wakefield, in his full narcissistic glory, takes the opportunity to ask for money from the viewers.

So the video announces that Dr. Thompson, who has published numerous articles with the CDC, all analyzing vaccine safety, is a CDC whistleblower. One of his studies, coauthored with prolific CDC researcher, Frank DeStefano, is the target of the antivaccination cult. Their study concluded that there was no difference in the rate of autism in Atlanta-area African-American children between those who were vaccinated and those who weren't. It's one of dozens upon dozens of studies that have shown NO link between vaccines and autism.

The center of this manufactroversy (it's a word, one of my favorite portmanteaus) is an article by Brian Hooker, published in Translational Neurodegenerationa journal with such a low impact factor, it doesn't actually have one. In other words, it's probably one of the bottom feeder journals in the world of medical journals, the place where you send your article when no one else will publish it. Hooker essentially reexamines the data from DeStefano et al., coming to a completely opposite conclusion about the data:

The present study provides new epidemiologic evidence showing that African American males receiving the MMR vaccine prior to 24 months of age or 36 months of age are more likely to receive an autism diagnosis.
So who is this Brian Hooker? Dr. Hooker is an engineer with no background at all in any of the key areas of study regarding vaccines: immunology, virology, microbiology, epidemiology, public health, or anything. He's on the faculty of Simpson University, an uncompetitive, low-ranked California based Christian university. It teaches creationism in the biology department, so being on the faculty there is a serious indictment of the quality of scientific research performed at the school. There is nothing in Dr. Hooker's background that indicates he knows anything about vaccines, save for being a shill for the anti-vaccination group, Focus Autism. Liz Ditz does an excellent job reviewing the backstory of this brouhaha.

Rejiggering the data from the original DeStefano article is transparently nothing more than trying to "prove" that the research is bad. But let's ignore the bad quality journal in which this article was published. Let's ignore the nonexistent credentials of Hooker. Let's ignore his presumed motives. Let's just critique his reevaluation of the original data.

According to a thorough analysis of Hooker's article by David Gorski, MD,

Hooker did a cohort study. He analyzed data collected for a case-control study as a cohort study. Basically, he looked at the risk of an autism diagnosis in the groups first exposed to MMR at different age ranges. Remember, case control = comparing risk factor frequency in people with a condition compared to controls; cohort = examining risk of condition in people with different exposures.
So, Hooker took data collected in one manner, and chose to analyze it as if it was collected in a way that would work with his analytical methods,  just to fit his pre-conceived conclusions, that vaccines cause autism (and somehow the CDC criminally withheld this data). Hooker's methodology reminds me of a quote from Mark Twain (probably the most quotable American author ever): "Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable."

Additionally, Hooker's article cites studies from Mark, and his son David, Geier, infamous "researchers" who push the "vaccines cause autism" myth, and who used to push the horrific Lupron Therapy. Essentially, the Geiers believed that mercury causes autism (no, it doesn't), that chelation removes mercury (which is incredibly dangerous), but testosterone in children binds to the mercury (no it doesn't) so injections of Lupron, a potent drug that has specific uses in treating some types of cancer, are used to remove the testosterone. Horrifying. In fact, their Lupron therapy was so dangerous to children that several medical boards stripped them of their licenses. Neither of the Geiers, including David who has no known advanced degrees in anything and may have been practicing medicine without a license, have any experience in pediatrics, immunology, epidemiology, virology, vaccines, or anything related to vaccines. They are, at best, delusional, and at worst, a clear and present danger to the children that were under their care. They are charlatans. They violated all aspects of the physician oath of "do no harm." It is irresponsible that any journal, even a low ranked, barely credible, barely cited journal like BioMed Research International  would publish any article that had the Geiers as co-authors.

But the critiques of Hooker's article get worse, much worse. According to the Poxes Blog (subscribe to it, it's great), the statistics that Hooker used was borderline (hell, it was over the line) ludicrous:

Next come the statistics. Hooker uses Pearson’s chi squared test to see if there is a significant association between MMR and autism in children at different ages. DeStefano et al used conditional logistic regression. For the non-biostatisticians out there, the technique that DeStefano et al used accounts for confounders and effect modifiers, different traits in their population that could skew the results. Hooker’s technique doesn’t really do that, unless you stratify results and use very, very large datasets. Hooker’s approach is more “conservative,” meaning that it will detect small effects and amplify them, and those effects can come from anything.

So why did we not see this in the other ethnic groups or in girls? The answer here is simple, again. Hooker had a limited dataset to work with when he boiled it down to African-American baby boys. In this table, for example, he tells us that he had to modify the analysis to 31 months instead of 36 because he had less than 5 children in that group. It’s the same goddamned mistake that Andrew Jeremy Wakefield wanted to pass off as legitimate science. You cannot, and must not use small numbers to make big assertions…

Some of these "big assertions" are so huge that it's used in the Wakefield/Autism Media Channel video to declare that the suppression of this data is as horrifying to the African-American community as was the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, a travesty in which the US Public Health Service infected young/poor black men with syphilis to study its effects. The study lasted from 1932-1972, and has been widely condemned by modern researchers.

The "Tuskegee" strawman argument is offensive on so many levels. First, no experiments were done on the black children in the original DeStefano study–the complete opposite of the Tuskegee experiments. The DeStefano article presented an epidemiological case-control study, that just accumulated data from medical records and birth certificates. No one was harmed in this study.

Second, if the strawman is that we are hiding evidence that the MMR vaccine is harming black children, we don't have that evidence. In fact, the better evidence, published by DeStefano says that MMR vaccines have NOTHING to do with autism.

Third, and most importantly, there is NO plausible biological reason that black children would be more at risk of autism than white, Asian, or other children. Only if Hooker, Wakefield, and anyone else promoting this nonsense is a complete racist (and I have no clue if they are or not), they should know that white, black, Native American, Asian, Arabic, or any other children are genetically nearly exactly the same. There simply isn't anything biologically different between these ethnic groups. Well, unless you're an advocate of the racial laws of Nazi Germany. Sorry, couldn't resist the Godwin.

Ignoring Hooker, the Geiers, Wakefield, the Autism Media Channel and anyone else promoting this story, ignoring their lame pseudoscience, completely ignoring their junk-filled video, there are some facts that need to be reviewed:

  • Where is William Thompson, Ph.D.? If he's a whistleblower, where is he? Has he spoken to the FBI or a Federal prosecutor in an investigation of the CDC? Or is Thompson some poor sap who stated things to Hooker (and maybe Wakefield) in some naive belief that they would understand what he was saying? Since all we have is hearsay from Hooker, we actually don't know what Thompson actually said. Who knows what was taken out of context. Who knows what Thompson really believes.
  • Hooker hasn't shown anything to anyone that the original DeStefano article somehow got it all wrong. African-American children are at no more of risk from autism caused by vaccines as any other ethnic group-that is no risk.
  • Let's not forget one important scientific fact–after 15 years of looking, and looking hard in huge studies, no legitimate research has shown any link between vaccines, specifically the MMR vaccine, and autism. None. None. None. There are literally hundreds of articles, published in actually high impact factor journals, that refute, debunk, and discredit Andy Wakefield's fraudulent claims that the MMR vaccine causes autism.
  • Let me repeat myself. Vaccines do not cause autism.
  • See above.

It's clear what's happening here. Thompson, through sheer ignorance or total incompetence may have had a conversation with Hooker. Given the fact that the antivaccination gang lacks any serious scientific evidence supporting their dogma that vaccines cause autism, they jump on anything, however tenuous, that makes it appear that all of the evidence that refutes their dogma should be thrown in the garbage.

The CDC has published a comment about this kerfuffle (thanks to loyal reader, Lawrence McNamara, for posting the CDC's reply):

The data CDC collected for this study continue to be available for analysis by others. CDC welcomes analysis by others that can be submitted for peer-review and publication.

Additional studies and a more recent rigorous review by the Institute of Medicine have found that MMR vaccine does not increase the risk of autism.

In other words, the mountain of evidence discrediting the link between the MMR vaccine and autism stands.

To be honest, I was going to ignore this story (hence I'm kind of behind all of the other bloggers in writing about it), because I thought it was incredibly stupid. Naively, I just thought that "no one is going to pay attention to this crap." A whistleblower who hasn't said anything. A lame reanalysis of a published study that has to manipulate statistics to fit the preconceived beliefs of the antivaccination cult. Wakefield getting involved. And not one thing that refutes the scientific fact that vaccines don't cause autism. No one should have listened.

But I forgot that in lieu of science, the usual suspects involved in the antivaccination myths use their massive public relations machinery to manufacture a controversy out of thin air. And all the skeptics and all of the scientists now have to respond.

Key citations

Originally posted to SkepticalRaptor on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 07:59 PM PDT.

Also republished by SciTech and Science Matters.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Saw the title and loaded my donut-launcher... (34+ / 0-)

    Then I saw the author. Donut launcher, standing down.

    Whew. I hate it when you do that to me, SR! Did get my attention, tho ;-)

    Screw John Galt. Who's John Doe?

    by Mike Kahlow on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 08:13:46 PM PDT

  •  I'm sorry (10+ / 0-)

    Could you rewrite this diary in English?

    What is MMR? I'd appreciate it being spelled out in the first reference.  I guess it's something to do with mercury.

    I am a reasonably intelligent person with a college degree, but I've never heard of a chi squared or the other statistical terms. Please briefly explain why those terms matter.

    I understand that you want to flay your enemies. But this diary is very hard to follow.

    I am uncertain what your enemies asserted but it was bad for breaching some statistical norm. I think the original study concluded no effect.

    The sample was small, why is that good for our side and bad for our enemies?

  •  If you get one person on this site defending the (11+ / 0-)

    anti-vaccine hucksters I will have lost the last nano-gram of hope I have for the future of humankind.

    And I am Kilrain of the 20th Maine. And I damn all gentlemen. Whose only worth is their father's name And the sweat of a workin' man Steve Earle - Dixieland

    by shigeru on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 08:23:00 PM PDT

    •  you must be new here ;) (33+ / 0-)

      We have half a dozen or so anti-vax crackpots here (including the ones who declare "I'm not an anti-vaxxer but . . . " and then go on to parrot all the standard anti-vax horse shit). Some of them overlap the pro-homeopathy fans, and some also overlap the anti-science fringe of the anti-GMOers.

      They usually show up in any diary that mentions the "v" word, if you just wait long enough.

      Then you, too, can be part of the Big Pharma Conspiracy (tm)(c).  (snicker)

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 08:37:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's like the person who says... (14+ / 0-)

        "I'm not racist, but...."

        The next thing you know, they've pulled out the swastika, and are defending Rush. Limbaugh. Not the rock group.

        Skepticism is evaluating the quality and quantity of evidence to reach a conclusion. It is not gathering evidence to support a closed minded conclusion.

        by SkepticalRaptor on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 08:56:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  it's VERY common amongst creationists (12+ / 0-)

          "I'm not a creationist, but . . . (insert regurgiquote from ICR or AIG here)"

          I take it as a GOOD sign that we are seeing it here. It means that even the anti-vaxers recognize that most people think they are crackpots, and they are now forced to do their best to hide their crackpottery so people will listen to them.

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 09:00:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Just check out comments on NCSE blogs. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Lenny Flank

            The creationist trolls have no qualms about identifying their mania.

            The problem is they are usually quite ill educated in rhetoric, and while they attempt to spout ICR or AIG arguments, they come out like gibberish.  A sample from a Young Earth Creationists on a blog about the history of the Scopes' Trial:

            "Not everything written in the '30's was right!
            its not science verses fundamentalism(read historic christianity).  Its a opinion made in small circles that claim to know better then mankind and revealed religion.  Its attacking christian doctrines from a status of great authority on research in earth history.  So defending against this attack, then and now, is profiled as a attack on science. This to discredit the attack.  Well then it should be said to be a attack on religion. Right!  Actually its different conclusions and a struggle over which conclusion political authories back up.  I see the scopes trial as a attempt to stop the people from resisting a exclusive doctrine of origins from evolution.   The Scopes trial was not for free enquiry but to stop it.  today this is why creationism is censored in public institutions.  it really was a upper class attack on middle and lower classes beliefs and ability to defend those beliefs in public instittutions that must decide what is true.  Seems that way from Canada."
            If you can parse an argument from that gibberish you are doing better than me.
            •  well, they don't need to hide it now--they've (0+ / 0-)

              already lost all the court cases.

              Back before the Dover ruling, though, they HAD to keep hush-hush about it, since their entire legal argument was that Intelligent Design "Theory" was NOT creationism.

              Of course, many of them blabbed anyway. It led to what became known in anti-creationist circles as "Flank's Law":

              "The ability of a creationist to shut his mouth about creationism's religious motive is inversely proportional to the legal necessity of their doing so."

              http://dododreams.blogspot.com/...

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 05:17:59 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Not new here - just avoid the new agey (5+ / 0-)

        end of the left and tend to stay out of these things.

        The last medical discussion I entered into was when I replied that a bit of scaremongering about Ebola was necessary and actually did some good. But I was criticized a bit for that. And for stating that no one paid attention to Ebola because no white folk had died from it. Yet.

        This diary is great though. One that I wish I could give extra ratings to.

        And I am Kilrain of the 20th Maine. And I damn all gentlemen. Whose only worth is their father's name And the sweat of a workin' man Steve Earle - Dixieland

        by shigeru on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 09:56:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  it's not really a New Agey thing here (20+ / 0-)

          As far as the anti-vax and the anti-science fringes of the anti-nuke and anti-GMO goes, it tends to be an anti-corporate ideology that has been taken to a John Birch Society level of silliness, where everything is a capitalist plot and there are corporate conspiracies to "hide the truth" lurking behind every tree.

          I've been a commie since I was 16, but most of the anti-science crackpottery we see here is just cartoonish anti-capitalism with the Big Bad Corporations as comic-book supervillains.

          It's silly CT.

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 10:03:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Exactly (6+ / 0-)

            Some people are so virulently (no pun intended, lol) anti-corporation that literally anything that involves a corporation is evil.  Which is stupid.

            I understand that Pharm companies don't make it easy for us to defend them, as there have been legitimate problems with under reporting side effects, not doing long-term studies, etc.  I acknowledge those incidents and repeatedly call for vigorous regulation of the industry.

            But many of us would be dead if vaccines were never invented and adopted.  We wouldn't have even made it past infancy.

            Pharm companies, for all of their issues and interplay with structural national health care problems, at least make medicines that improve the quality of life for hundreds of millions of people.  Way more than can be said about hedge fund assholes that just beam electrons between servers.

            "Give me a lever long enough... and I shall move the world." - Archimedes

            by mconvente on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:05:51 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  We get the same irrationality with the anti-Israel (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            shigeru, ebohlman

            stuff. A rec list diary actually compared an Israel attack on an apartment house that had a Hamas command bunker with the 9/11 attacks, even though Israel had given a warning that the apartment house was going going to be attacked, that Hamas (unusually) did not try to force Gazans to stay in the apartment as human shields, and there were apparently no casualties.

            You don't have to be an apologist for the Netanyahu government to realize that that comparison is ridiculous.  

        •  that's the thing, shigeru (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          myboo, G2geek, charliehall2, shigeru

          white folks have died from it.

          Just none (that we know of) in the continental USA (yet).

          LBJ, Lady Bird, Van Cliburn, Steve Earle, Ann Richards, Barbara Jordan, Molly Ivins, Jim Hightower, Sully Sullenburger, Drew Brees: Texas is NO Bush League!

          by BlackSheep1 on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 10:42:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Big Pharma needs to start cutting those checks . (10+ / 0-)

        I'm tired of providing complementary shilling for vaccines,  effective pharmaceuticals and funding for R&D.

        Moochers.

        © grover


        So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

        by grover on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 10:31:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  you are referring to me (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wa ma

        I'm not an anti-vaxxer, but....

        What you don't seem to understand is that people can have a nuanced view of these things.  I support the points of this diary.  You will get no argument from me.

        I still don't see the harm, though, of separating out the M, the M and the R for children with compromised immune systems.  Before I traveled to Africa I got multiple new vaccines in one day, and my body really felt it.  In retrospect I would have preferred to space them out and I think parents should be given that option too.

        •  and now we can see how the anti-vaxxers are (8+ / 0-)

          evolving yet again . . . . . .

          There is zero evidence that the number or timing of vaccines does any harm whatsoever to anyone, anywhere. Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nada. None. Not a shred.

          This whole "parents should be given an option!" thingie is the exact equivalent of the creationist "teach the controversy!" horse shit. It is a deceptive dishonest and deliberate attempt to manufacture a controversy where there is none.

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 06:09:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I haven't "evolved" on this issue (0+ / 0-)

            I am not an anti-vaxxer.  One of my recent diaries was to assist a kickstarter-type funding for a malaria vaccine and both of my children and I are fully vaccinated (except for yearly flu shots, which we skip).

            •  "i'm not an anti-vaxxer"..... (0+ / 0-)

              And yet here you are, as you are in every vax diary, regurgitating all the standard anti-vax arguments.....

              What we are seeing here IS the evolution of the anti-vax movement. They now realize that their "vaccines will kill us all oh noes" speeches just make them look like lunatics, so now they have massaged their message. Now, they declare, they "aren't against vaccines" and they "don't mind if everyone else gets vaccinated", but they just want everyone to be "informed" about all the "potential dangers" of vaccines so people can "choose if they want" to be "exempt" from receiving them.  And what are these "potential dangers"? Well, conveniently enough, it's the very same big long list of bullshit that they have been preaching for years now.

              It's the same bird, with the same squawk. All they've done is change a few feathers.

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 09:58:40 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  oh, in the other comment you didn't know (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                RunawayRose, wa ma

                who I was.  Pick one.

                I'm not against vaccines, I'm against crappy science, inflammatory diaries, comments full of personal insults and black and white thinking.  There are only two vaccines that I have some reservations about (based on the actual science), and neither one is the MMR vaccine.  The MMR vaccine is an important vaccine and everyone should get it.  I am just baffled why my one minor caveat of saying that high-risk children should get it in three separate shots is such a red cape for you.  That gets me put into the InfoWars, Illuminati reptilian camp?  Yes, that might slightly decrease compliance rates but surely there is a way to improve follow up and regulation to compensate for that?

          •  you see, this is wrong (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            cordgrass, raincrow


            I am a diabetic, and I was recommended to get a pneumonia vaccine a few weeks ago.  Prior to getting the vaccine I had to answer a series of questions... you see, you aren't supposed to get the vaccine if you have recently had pneumonia, for example, within the last year.  Why?  Because it can have a negative effect.  And I was advised that if I developed a high fever or swelling at the injection site, or headache, I should return to the doctor or go to the ER.  Why?  Because sometimes people have reactions to vaccines.  And I had to sign a paper acknowledging the risks and dangers associated with the pneumonia vaccine.  Quackery?  I think not.

            And I have read several papers that show MMR vaccines have led to large (i.e. many hundreds of thousands of dollars) of settlements in cases of encephalitis in children.  While admittedly the government did not admit that the MMR caused the encephalitis, it was considered likely that it may have triggered it, leading to permanent neurological impairment.

            It is one thing to say "no link has been proved to autism."  It is quite another - and patently false - to say that vaccines do no harm ever, or that MMR has absolutely no links to this or any other condition.

            So the flaming rhetoric does no service to science, and it excludes the very real issue that any live virus vaccine has a risk associated with it.  And all you have to do is read the label to see the risk involved.  That is why there is a vaccine court that settles claims in cases where a live virus vaccine (such as MMR) is likely to have produced a systemic reaction such as encephalitis.

            "Kossacks are held to a higher standard. Like Hebrew National hot dogs." - blueaardvark

            by louisev on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 07:35:38 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  yes, vaccines can have side effects (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              aimeehs

              This is a surprise to you?

              Ps--there is no evidence that vaccines cause encephalitis, or any other disease.

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:39:46 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  That is complete bullshit (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                raincrow, wa ma

                Here is a link from the NIH on Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis

                http://www.ninds.nih.gov/...

                First, unlike MS patients, persons with ADEM will have rapid onset of fever, a history of recent infection or immunization, and some degree of impairment of consciousness, perhaps even coma; these features are not typically seen in MS.
                •  Do you know what the incidence rates are? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  ebohlman, aimeehs

                  http://www.sciencedirect.com/...

                  Small comfort if you're in the 1-2 in 10,000,000 I suppose, but probably not a good idea to compromise the vaccination schedule for much more common deadly diseases.

                  •  It IS a good idea for the very few (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    louisev, raincrow, wa ma

                    high risk children.  

                    But that's not my point with that post.  I wasn't using it to support my premise that separating the MMR vaccine should be an option for high-risk children.  I was pointing out that Lenny Flank was lying.

                    •  How do you identify children (0+ / 0-)

                      at high risk for ADEM or normal encephalitis, especially when the risk for developing those diseases is FAR HIGHER from the actual infectious disease itself (e.g. 1000x higher for measles vs. the measles vaccine).

                      •  see below (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        raincrow

                        This is a start:

                        http://www.nytimes.com/...

                        Vaccination Recommendations for People with Compromised Immune Systems

                        In general, vaccines are not completely effective for patients whose immune systems are compromised by disease or medications. Often, such patients are given immune globulin if they are exposed to infection. It may take 3 months to 1 year before a person who has stopped taking immunosuppressant drugs regains the full ability to be successfully immunized against disease.

                        Live-virus vaccines are not usually given to people whose immune system has been compromised by illness or by the use of medications.

                        People who should not get live-virus vaccinations include:

                            Persons who have immune deficiency diseases (such as HIV or AIDS).
                            Patients with active leukemia or lymphoma.
                            Patients who are receiving treatments that suppress the immune system, such as corticosteroids, alkylating drugs, antimetabolites, or radiation. (There are important exceptions, however, which are noted in the discussion of individual vaccinations below.) Short-term corticosteroids (given for less than 2 weeks) should not affect any live-virus vaccination. Patients who need vaccinations and who take long-term or high-dose topical steroids should check with their physicians.

                        •  Is there any correlation (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          T100R

                          between people with compromised immune systems and ADEM? Given that's what we were discussing, I don't see the immediate relevance. How do you identify children at 'high risk' for ADEM?

                          Furthermore, given that this is already the recommended medical practice for people with compromised immune systems, why then do you find it necessary to encourage parents to exercise the 'option' in other cases, especially since the issue is with live virus vaccinations rather than vaccinations in general, or any of the chemical products in the vaccine.

                          Finally, given that un-vaccinated children who actually catch measels, mumps, or rubella are ~1000x more likely to develop ADEM, how does that factor into your risk analysis?

                          •  It's not already the recommended (0+ / 0-)

                            medical practice, as far as I know.  That advice was for children who should temporarily (or permanently) avoid vaccinations altogether.  But it makes sense that children with those indicators in their history might benefit from taking the MMR vaccine as three separate vaccines.

                            Another reason for parent choice is that given the choice, maybe some anti-vax parents would choose to vaccinate their children if it could be done this way.  I know the argument against that is compliance, but I think we could work out some kind of workaround.  That pertains to your last point.  I'm not saying wait six months between each separate vaccination.  The increased risk of having the vaccine administered over two weeks rather than one day is negligible.

                            The analysis of ADEM risk factors is still in its infancy, but seems to be tied with MS.  

                          •  ADEM is tied to MS (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            T100R, aimeehs

                            in the sense that it seems to lead to MS with a higher rate (and even this is controversial), I don't know of any 'indicators' in children that would identify those at high risk for ADEM, especially considering it appears to be virally induced, which of course makes it useless as an indicator for vaccine avoidance.

                            As far as your first point, I'm not sure what you mean. Of course immuno-compromised children have a different medical profile when it comes to vaccinations, that's well known:

                            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...

                            But once again, this has ZERO to do with giving parents an 'option' with regard to their healthy children.

                            You can't use risk factors for immuno-compromised children as a way to justify changing a vaccine schedule for children not in that group. That makes no sense, completely different risk profile.

                          •  "can't" is a pretty strong word (0+ / 0-)

                            What if a child had a high risk genetically of MS?  I don't see how a two-week vs. one day window of risk would make that much difference.  Again, it's hard to say definitively because research is still early days, but why not err on the side of caution.

                            I am not a doctor and I don't know the ins and outs of vaccine protocols, but if a child who already had a past history of being immuno-compromised (even if it is just from what the parents say rather than in a medical log) is automatically now (when healthy) give separate doses of the MMR vaccine, then I am content with the current state of affairs.

                          •  You're right. (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            T100R

                            Can't was the wrong word.

                            Of course you 'can', but you shouldn't. Because it puts the healthy child at greater risk.

                            Your appeal to 'caution' only makes sense if you are actually evaluating all of the risks involved, and in this instance your 'caution' may actually be incautious and lead to greater net risk.

                          •  I see your point (0+ / 0-)

                            But theoretically it could be set up so that parents are given a date for the physical.  If the child is at risk, they could make two additional appointments two weeks and one week before the physical.  If the family is a no-show for the first two visits, at the physical the child gets the full MMR.

                            Nuance.  :D

                          •  I'm still not sure (0+ / 0-)

                            what you mean when you say "if your child is at risk". If your child is immuno-compromised, you'll do it differently.

                            What other risks are you talking about?

                        •  where did you get this link from? (0+ / 0-)

                          Since I doubt very very much that you sit around reading five-year-old back issues of the New York Times, I presume you found this link on some website or another dealing with vaccination issues.  Which one?

                          That will tell us a lot about your sources of information, as well as how seriously we should take your claims of "I'm not anti-vax, really!"

                          Which is precisely why I expect you will not tell us.

                          In the end, reality always wins.

                          by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 04:02:11 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                  •  with this I do agree (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    cordgrass


                    The issue I have with the diary is that it (and so many, many other comments) that there cannot possibly be a safety issue or any problem with vaccines, despite the fact that MMR vaccine is considered a risk factor for the fetus in pregnant mothers, and that there are risk associated with many vaccines, most particularly the live virus type.  Small chance of adverse reaction does not equal NO chance of adverse reaction, and my objection is that in a blog post meant to be 'scientific' the idea that there is any risk associated with vaccines is considered a 'conspiracy theory that is hide-ratable' is simply not in line with medical facts or practice.  

                    "Kossacks are held to a higher standard. Like Hebrew National hot dogs." - blueaardvark

                    by louisev on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 09:34:38 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Pretty sure that's a strawman. (4+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      T100R, aimeehs, tarkangi, ebohlman

                      Saying that there is no link between austism and vaccines is not saying that there are never any adverse effects to vaccination.

                      However, these adverse effects are strongly outweighed by the risk of not getting vaccinated for pretty much everyone.

                      The risk from live virus vaccines to immuno-compromised patients is already part of medical protocol, that isn't what the pie-fight is about now, is it?

                      We're not defending doctors forcing vaccines on immuno-compromised patients, and you're not defending parents protecting their immuno-compromised children.

                      No, you guys are protecting the right for under or mis-informed parents of normal healthy children to exercise an 'option' to compromise the safety of their children and the general public.

                      The CT has to do with the insistence on facts that are flat out wrong, like drug companies are hiding the link between vaccines and autism.

                      •  nope (2+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        cordgrass, wa ma


                        I've never had any conspiracy theory on autism and vaccines.  I am pointing out to you - and to those here who are so hyped up on shooting down anyone who has any reservations at all about the safety of vaccines (particularly infant vaccines of the live virus type) that you are not promoting a scientific view, but instead indulging in groupthink.

                        See the patently erroneous 'fact' that Marin County schools have < 50% vaccination rate posted elsewhere.  now THAT is a conspiracy theory, and all it takes as a minute or two on Google to see just how distorted some of the claims in this diary are.

                        "Kossacks are held to a higher standard. Like Hebrew National hot dogs." - blueaardvark

                        by louisev on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 11:09:09 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  "You guys" (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          aimeehs

                          was a general identification of the people promoting anti-vax views. If some of the critiques don't apply specifically to you, feel free to ignore them.

                          But what exactly do you mean by this:

                          anyone who has any reservations at all about the safety of vaccines (particularly infant vaccines of the live virus type)
                          What reservations are you talking about specifically?
                        •  Nobody, here or anywhere else, is arguing (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          T100R, Cassandra Waites

                          that there are no risks to vaccines (and no, "big pharma" and the "medical establishment" are not saying that). What rational people are arguing is that, except in very specific and well-known situations, the risks of not vaccinating vastly outweigh the risks of vaccinating. And guess what? Standard medical protocol is that people in those situations don't get vaccinated (and thus must rely on the people around them getting vaccinated to protect them from exposure).

                          Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

                          by ebohlman on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 01:55:18 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  you are mistaken (0+ / 0-)

                            From earlier in the comment stream, Lenny Flank wrote:

                            yes, vaccines can have side effects (1+ / 0-)

                            This is a surprise to you?

                            Ps--there is no evidence that vaccines cause encephalitis, or any other disease.

                            you are also mistaken about the so-called anti-vaxxers here.  In the comments section here I haven't seen anyone saying that it's okay to skip the MMR vaccine.  I believe everyone posting here is pro-vaccine, including myself.
                          •  (sigh) (0+ / 0-)

                            If you are going to bullshit about me, then don't do it where I can see.

                            I'm the one who also wrote:

                            Yes, some vaccines have side effects. This is a surprise to you?
                            But thanks for the word games.
                            In the comments section here I haven't seen anyone saying that it's okay to skip the MMR vaccine.  I believe everyone posting here is pro-vaccine, including myself.
                            And yet all our regulars seem to be (again) quoting typical anti-vax crapola from typical anti-vax crapsites, and are full of typical anti-vax stories about how "dangerous" and "harmful" vaccines are and how "Big Pharma" conspires to hide all that data and evidence from us.

                            Walking. Quacking. Duck.

                            In the end, reality always wins.

                            by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 03:45:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ps---since I doubt very much that you sit around (0+ / 0-)

                            at night reading the FDA's website, can you tell us which website you got your FDA quote from?

                            That will tell us a great deal about your sources of information. . . . . . . . .  .. . .

                            (Which is why I don't expect you to tell us.)

                            In the end, reality always wins.

                            by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 03:53:02 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I googled it (0+ / 0-)

                            do you want my search words?  I'm not sure I can remember them.  

                          •  search history was in the dropdown list (0+ / 0-)

                            for my google search box

                            "mmr vaccine separate shots risk"

                            I flipped through the results until I found a reputable source (the FDA).  It shows up on the third page.  You can do the same search yourself.

                    •  yes, people who think that science is a (5+ / 0-)

                      Corporate conspiracy to 'hide the truth', are, by definition, anti-science CTers. And should be banned on sight, per KosRule Number 13.

                      Ps--if you would like to compare the 'adverse reactions' Of vaccines with the known effects of preventable diseases, I'm game any time you are.

                      In the end, reality always wins.

                      by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 11:08:28 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  and what is your source for this link? (0+ / 0-)

                  Since I doubt very much that you sit around at night reading the NIH's website for entertainment, I presume this link was provided to you by some website with an interest in vaccines.

                  Which one.

                  That will tell us a great deal about where you get your information, and how seriously we should take your "I'm not anti-vax" claims . . . .

                  (which is why I don't expect you to tell us.)

                  In the end, reality always wins.

                  by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 03:59:39 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  ps------- (0+ / 0-)
              And I have read several papers
              Where.  Where have you read them.

              Since I doubt that you sit around at night reading epidemiological journal articles for entertainment, I presume you "read" them at some website or another.  Which one.

              That will tell us a lot about your sources of information . . . .

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 03:57:37 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  ps--don't flatter yourself (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cordgrass, mconvente

          Although I do remember your user ID from numerous crackpot discussions about homeopathy and GMOs and vaccines, all of the crackpots here run together in my mind, and I don't give a rat's ass about any of them as individual crackpots.

          So I'm not "out to get you !!!". Mostly, you mean less to me than the kid who delivers my pizzas does.  (shrug)

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 06:48:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  "Nuanced view" (7+ / 0-)
          "You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant." -Harlan Ellison
          Many vaccines have, for some people, short-lived side-effects. That doesn't make them harmful. Traveling to Africa, I imagine your vaccine set included the typhoid and yellow fever vaccines, both of which have fairly high rates of fatigue and soreness (up to a week, especially for the yellow fever shot) as side effects. Your chances of experiencing these conditions would not have been changed if you had taken them separately, except that, if you were unlucky with your side effect profile, you would have had more days with side effects.

          Likewise, for the general pediatric population, there is absolutely no medical reason why the MMR vaccine should be separated into its components. Doing so provides absolutely no benefit whatsoever, but does increase the chances that the full vaccine sequence will not be completed (for whatever reason), leaving the child at risk (and, even if not, delays vaccination for one or more dangerous diseases).

          "Too many too soon" is a specious anti-vax argument. Anyone making such a claim is either willfully anti-vaccination or making uninformed arguments about medical issues. The former are delusional conspiracy theorists who should be made unwelcome in public discourse, and the latter, I direct to the wisdom of Mr. Ellison.

          •  thank you for mansplaining (0+ / 0-)

            my soreness and fatigue to me.  Yes, I indeed received both the typhoid and yellow fever vaccine and would have preferred to have had them done separately.

            Also, I did not say "for the general pediatric population" that the MMR should be administered separately.  I said that it made sense for certain children.

            •  No, that's not what you said (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              aimeehs

              You said that "parents should be given that option".

              And that's wrong.

              •  what I said in full was (0+ / 0-)

                I still don't see the harm, though, of separating out the M, the M and the R for children with compromised immune systems.  Before I traveled to Africa I got multiple new vaccines in one day, and my body really felt it.  In retrospect I would have preferred to space them out and I think parents should be given that option too.

                •  And it remains wrong (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  aimeehs, ebohlman

                  The universe of children who manage to be sufficiently immunocompromised as to be unfit for the MMR combination vaccine but yet adequately immunocapable to receive those shots individually is very, very small.

                  But regardless of the absolute number of children for whom a delayed vaccine schedule might, maybe, possibly be a good idea, parents should not be given the option to alter the vaccine schedule. They lack the medical expertise necessary to make that determination, and they are not entitled to compromise their child's standard of care out of ignorance.

                  •  This is why I am phonebanking for Berwick (0+ / 0-)

                    President Obama's appointee to run Medicare and Medicaid, who is now running for governor of Massachusetts.  Patient-centered care that takes into account the patient's input will greatly improve medical care.

          •  It also means more needlesticks for the (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            pasadena beggar

            kids.

            Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

            by ebohlman on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 09:07:01 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  See above re: "sample size." (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ER Doc, aimeehs

          There's no evidence that separating vaccinations achieves anything of significance. In the case of the MMR vaccine, it is estimated that more than 500 million doses have been administered since the three vaccines were combined in a single dose in the early 1970s. That's a LARGE sample size.

          The greatest harm (statistically speaking) of separating MMR (or MMRV) into separate vaccinations is probably patient compliance; the likelihood of completing the full suite of vaccinations in a reasonable amount of time drops significantly - and children are left vulnerable to those diseases against which they have not yet received vaccination.

          In short, there's no demonstrated need to separate them, and the risks of doing so would outweigh the purely hypothetical benefits.

          The word "parent" is supposed to be a VERB, people...

          by wesmorgan1 on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:10:35 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  There really isn't any nuance here (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jrooth, ER Doc, aimeehs

          There really aren't any vaccines given in the US today that carry the risk of common serious adverse events. And the reason that vaccines are given in combo doses is to make it MORE convenient for parents, and to reduce the cost of distribution.

          The only real question that I as a scientist have for the vaccine establishment in the US is why we don't give the BCG tuberculosis vaccine here -- most of the world does.

          •  Nice that you live in a world without nuance (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            raincrow

            common serious adverse events

            This is all based on statistics, and I am a statistician.  But some people are outliers, some children are known outliers, and those children should be able to have three separate vaccines.

            •  Got any evidence that the triple vaccine (0+ / 0-)

              is worse than three separate ones? From any peer reviewed study?

              •  sort of, yes (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                wa ma

                http://www.fda.gov/...

                This is from the FDA, so can be considered the horse's mouth.

                Increased rate of fever was previously identified as a safety signal in the ProQuad prelicensure studies. To better understand the risk of febrile seizures that might be associated with ProQuad vaccination, Merck committed to conduct a large, postmarketing study at the time of licensure. In January 2006, Merck initiated a large Phase 4 observational study to evaluate the risk of febrile seizures in 25,000 children receiving their first dose of ProQuad. The study was recently completed and the data are undergoing analysis, but the interim results of the study are reflected in this labeling revision.

                The interim analysis of Merck's post-marketing study showed that febrile seizures occurred more frequently 5 to 12 days following vaccination of approximately 14,000 children with ProQuad (0.5 per 1,000) when compared with a historical, age and sex-matched control group vaccinated with MMR and varicella vaccines administered separately at the same visit (0.2 per 1,000). In the 0-30 day time period following vaccination, the incidence of febrile seizures with ProQuad (1 per 1,000) was not greater than that observed in children vaccinated with ProQuad's individual components, MMR and varicella vaccines, at the same visit (1.3 per 1000).

                this was comparing MMR combined with chickenpox vaccine vs the two vaccines administered separately at the same visit.  Mind you, the control was at the same visit, not spaced a week apart.
                •  This does not prove your point (0+ / 0-)

                  This is MMR + varicella together, vs. MMR separately from varicella at the same time. It days nothing about M, M, and R spaced apart or even separately at the same time.

                  •  It proves that combining separate vaccines (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    wa ma

                    into one vaccine shot can end up being more risky, healthwise.  

                    But as for the specific MMR alone, compared to the monovalent vaccines, I found out something interesting.  I am usually pretty handy with the google, but was having a really hard time finding anything at all on this subject.  I found this:

                    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...

                    And this is an excerpt from that article:

                    In recent years, there has been growing controversy over the safety of the MMR vaccine, which has been allegedly associated with a variety of rare conditions including thrombocytopenic purpura, aseptic meningitis, joint pain, sensorineural deafness, convulsion, encephalopathy, chronic enterocolitis with regressive developmental disorder and Crohn’s disease [6]. From the public health perspective, it is important to identify whether the combined vaccine is associated with adverse events compared with its component vaccines.
                    Despite much attention on MMR, the methodological quality and applicability of the evidence of possible unintended events following MMR compared with its single or double antigen component vaccines have not been assessed.
                    Recent reviews are descriptive and mainly focus on the
                    alleged association with Crohn’s disease and autism [6,7].
                    In other words, at least up until 2003 when this article was published in the peer-reviewed journal Vaccine, those comparisons of adverse events were never conducted.  So unless you have a link to more recent studies doing this comparison, neither one of us can claim the facts in this matter.  It has never been formally studied.  However, the warning by the FDA in my comment above certainly does indicate that there could be a difference in risk between three monovalent and one trivalent vaccines, especially if they were administered over a period of a couple weeks rather than the same day.
      •  The "Woo Woo" brigade. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ebohlman

        Who will then mock the Right Wingers for Climate Change Denial. Just as bad.

        WTF!?!?!?! When did I move to the Republic of Gilead?!

        by IARXPHD on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 12:33:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Get ready to sweep up (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      G2geek, shigeru, T100R, aimeehs

      those nano-grams because there are a few people here who fit that description.

      Cancel is as important as send

      by susans on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 08:38:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  We have them. (16+ / 0-)

      But this community has decided that anti-vax is dangerous CT and is grounds for HRing such comments.  

      And we do. A few too many comments in a diary and a member may find himself on a timeout or worse.

      Anti-vax philosophy is actually more common than you might think among educated lefties. But we don't give it a chance to sprout.

      © grover


      So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

      by grover on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 10:27:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I hate this diary's title! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SkepticalRaptor, mungley, cordgrass

    It puts forth an absurd question as a legitimate topic for debate, and implies that there might be some truth in the title's assertion.

    The body of the diary was fine, but all too often people tend to glean only what they want to from other people's diaries.
    Readers scan, skip, and disregard arguments that they do not want to face and all too often only look for things that reinforce their own beliefs.

    Here are the things that someone who believes that vaccines cause autism might get from this diary... and might even think that you "skeptical raptor" agree with them...

    The CDC is covering up evidence and... from your first blockquote...

    The present study provides new epidemiologic evidence showing that African American males receiving the MMR vaccine prior to 24 months of age or 36 months of age are more likely to receive an autism diagnosis.
    Of course you debunk this in non-blockquotes below it, but people often only read what they want to hear...

    I don't think this is the message that you are trying to send, but I can totally see how a person looking for confirmation might read it in completely the opposite way that you intended.

    Or maybe, I only saw the pro-vaccination message that I wanted to see, as I read diaries through my own prescriptive lenses also.

    With the merchant comes the musket, with the bible comes the bayonet. Nepali proverb

    by tharu1 on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 08:35:14 PM PDT

  •  Interesting. (12+ / 0-)

    I just received a Facebook post on this subject from my aunt, noting that the CDC admitted the coverup of autism-causing vaccines.  I heaved a large sigh, but ultimately decided not to engage.  She's 81 and just lost her husband (my uncle, age 92) so what is the point of antagonizing her, I figure.  It's not like facts would change her mind, anyway ;-)

    •  there's a way to do this without... (13+ / 0-)

      ... leading to a fooferoo.  

      Just say something in passing along the lines of "it's a bunch of BS by some quacks who are trying to make a dishonest buck," and then change the subject.

      That's the simplest version of this, for use when it would take too long or be too tedious to explain the science in detail.

      BS, quacks, dishonest buck, case closed.

      GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

      by G2geek on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 09:25:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That's what makes science quackery troublesome. (8+ / 0-)

        Quacks rely on drawing in people to their side who are easily manipulated emotionally.  And then proceed to manipulate their emotions in order to exert power over them.  Often using them to spread the word or attack dissenters.

        Some of the quacks do it because the only thing they're qualified to do is manipulate people.  Some do it purely for the power it gives them.  Some do it because it's an easy way to gain vast amounts of wealth with little effort.

        Ultimately, they hide behind their victims and use them as a cover to get or do whatever they want.

        And if you challenge the lies, you get to hear cries of frustration, anger or just plain upset people who are mad at you because of someone else who lied to them.

        There's a TON of quackery out there with regards to science.  It's a shame any of that nonsense persists.

  •  The 'tell' is the diary title's question mark. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    G2geek, BlackSheep1, myboo, a2nite, ebohlman

    FOX uses this trickery all the time. They always present their nonsense in the form of a question. It gives them distance from their fake facts. Their answer will always be, "We just asked the question!"

    I get what you do, SR. Carry on.


    I cast a shadow, therefore, I am. You stand on my shadow, therefore, you are.

    by glb3 on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 09:06:16 PM PDT

  •  Great diary! (18+ / 0-)

    As a retired RN, I always look out for these informative diaries on vaccines.  Thank you for this one!!  T'd & R'd

    I like to go to the blog Incidental Economist

    I have a daughter who is slowly vaccinating my 2 yr old granddaughter.  It's driving me CRAZY.  Now my daughter is questioning the HPV vaccine when the time comes to vaccinate granddaughter b/c she read one of the scientists who discovered it has renounced it.

    Here's a short video of one of the Incindental Economists, Dr Aaron Carroll,  speaking on the HPV vaccine.  

    (I recommend subscribing to the "Healthcare Triage" youtube site!)
     

    Faux News ruined my state

    by sc kitty on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 09:22:03 PM PDT

  •  Another example (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gwennedd, G2geek

    of just how high you can pile bullshit...

    "the northern lights have seen queer sights, but the queerest they ever did see. Was that night on the marge of Lake Labarge, I cremated Sam McGee". - Robert Service, Bard of the Yukon

    by Joe Jackson on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 09:36:52 PM PDT

  •  The tendency to be anti vax and anti GMO (12+ / 0-)

    is one of the biggest embarrassments for the left.  People on the left should know better.  We should leave the anti-science nonsense to the right.

    •  Unfortunately it doesn't end there (10+ / 0-)

      Add homeopathy, ancient eastern medicine, supplements,antioxidants,etc and you are only scratching the surface.  

      You never know who will show up at Netroots Nation. Will you be there?

      by ETinKC on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 11:17:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  anti-nuclearism. (8+ / 0-)

        Most of the loosey-goosey stuff is harmless or at worst a waste of money by consenting adults.  But anti-vaxism causes dangerous disease outbreaks, and anti-nuclearism holds back deployment of clean energy we need for dealing with the climate crisis.  

        GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

        by G2geek on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 12:04:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  not to pick nits (6+ / 0-)

          with you G2geek, but the very real problem with nukes is where to store the waste. No one wants it. Until they figure that part out, I'll stay anti-nuke.

          Inconceivable! You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

          by hopeful on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 05:15:33 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I'd go part way with you (6+ / 0-)

          I'm fully with you that anti-vax is dangerous to the children who are not vaccinated; and even some who have been vaccinated may succumb to the disease, if herd immunity is compromised. There are a lot of innocent victims, and that puts this particular piece of nonsense in a class of its own. It is not a delusion that should be tolerated.

          On nuclear, there is a legitimate debate to be had as to whether it is on balance the right way forward. But as Windscale, Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima prove, the risks with nuclear energy are anything but invented. Personally I am ambivalent on the subject. But anti-nuclearism has a legitimate basis in fact that anti-vax just does not have.

          •  I've been anti-nuke since the 70's (9+ / 0-)

            But my opposition to nukes (and also to Monsanto and its use of GMOs) is social, political and economic, not scientific.

            But sadly, most of the "scientific arguments" i see coming from my fellow anti-nukers (and my fellow anti-Monsantoers) are, frankly, idiotic horse crap that shouldn't fool a fourth grader. When people wave their arms and scream that "the whales are fleeing to California to escape the Fukushima radiation!!!" or "eating GMOs causes cancer!!", they are just demonstrating their scientific illiteracy and their need to see what they ideologically want to see. I find it embarrassing to have people like that on the same side as me.

            There are plenty of good reasons to oppose nukes and the mis-use of GMOs. We don't need to make stupid anti-science shit up.

            In the end, reality always wins.

            by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 06:34:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The management and waste disposal issues (0+ / 0-)

              with nuclear plants are totally solvable. France does a great job with the former and is working on the latter. I'm not sure that the private sector model her in the US can do either.

              (Did I just implicitly advocate socialism? Wash my mouth out with soap!)

            •  Similarly, regarding Monsanto (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              PhillyJeff, T100R, aimeehs, RunawayRose

              there are lots of reasons to object to the business model of agribusiness corporations. But is Monsanto really any worse than Cargill, Archer Daniels Midland, or DuPont (whose agribusiness technology unit was founded by none other than one time Progressive Party Presidential candidate Henry Wallace!)? There simply isn't any evidence that GMOs are harmful to health or the environment, and humankind has been doing genetic modification to maize and wheat for thousands of years.

              And at least one GMO, golden rice, has the potential to save millions of children from malnutrition that can cause visual impairment. The agritech companies have, incredibly, surrendered their rights to patent royalties in order to push this project forward:

              http://www.goldenrice.org/

              •  The golden rice thing really bothers me (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                ER Doc, Ahianne, charliehall2

                It's one thing if people on the left were arguing that it wouldn't be useful, or if there were specific concerns related to that particular strain of plant.

                But the general consensus is that it's bad purely because it's GMO because all GMO is "frankenfood" with the potential to somehow destroy every ecosystem it's in.

                Natural things do that all the time - africanized honey bees, pythons in Florida, lionfish in the Caribbean etc.

                When we stop putting leaders from the past up on pedestals and ignoring their flaws, we can start seeing our present leaders for what they really are.

                by PhillyJeff on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:35:13 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  Happily, rubella was declared (4+ / 0-)

            "eliminated" in the U.S. in 2004 by the CDC. Now we can stick it in the file with smallpox, declared by WHO in 1980 to have been "eradicated" worldwide.

            Nobody gets vaccinated for smallpox anymore. Only people traveling to or through countries where rubella still exists need to be vaccinated, so I guess the vaccine manufacturers just haven't gotten around to turning the MMR vaccine into the plain old MM vaccine yet.

            Since I'm so old that I do have a smallpox vaccination scar, and earned my immunity to measles, mumps and rubella (and chicken pox) the old fashioned way, the arguments related to these vaccines are not something I take much interest in.

            I have long been interested in nuclear issues and find it kind of amusing that the industry's PR machine tries so hard to link anti-nuclearism with anti-whateverism (vaccines, global climate change, evolution, etc.) generally relegated to the "Nutty Conspiracy Theories" file. "Kind of amusing" only because it's so transparent as industry propaganda, especially in light of the nuclear accidents/disasters you've listed and far too many more that people don't generally know about.

            There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

            by Joieau on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 09:28:03 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It seems to be (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Joieau

              making a small comeback though due to imported cases.

              e.g. http://www.thedailybeast.com/...

              •  The "small comeback" (3+ / 0-)

                is newborns with congenital rubella syndrome. That's the sadly long list of bad things that happen to fetuses whose mothers got rubella during their first trimester. And that danger is the most serious risk of a rubella epidemic or outbreak, as it is a quite mild infection that, if it didn't have this awful risk to incubating fetuses, would be pretty much a shrug. We called it the 3-day measles when I was a kid.

                The appearance of these babies has nothing to do with active rubella that might present a danger to the American public.

                Thus the "imported" designator here is to the syndrome recorded in precisely three [3] babies born in this country of women who had rubella in their home countries 6-9 months previously. Those women don't pose a threat to the 'herd' either, since they are now immune. CDC still advises vaccine for people traveling to or through countries where rubella is still active. Far as I can see, if immunization has made this disease extinct in this country, there is no reason to still require vaccination for it in order to attend public schools.

                They'll get around to modifying the vaccine at some point, I presume.

                There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                by Joieau on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 10:12:05 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Maybe (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Joieau, Ahianne

                  Here in CA we are having a significant pertussis recurrence due to a combination of failure to vaccinate and imported cases. I could imagine a similar thing happening with rubella. We still have polio on the vaccine schedule even though there haven't been any cases in the US for a long time. Maybe they will drop it, or maybe they'll wait for it to be more widely eliminated first.

                  •  Ah, the DPT shot. (2+ / 0-)

                    In the Wayback time we got the oral polio vaccine, and the diptheria/tetanus shot. And, in my house, a tetanus 'booster' every damned time we got cut or scraped (I must have had a dozen of 'em). It got combined sometime after my kids got their DP shots and oral polio (early '70s), before the grandkids who all got the DPT as well as the MMR that didn't exist in the Wayback.

                    I recall polio occurring in the Amish and some immigrant groups decades ago, haven't heard much about it recently. It's an odd disease according to CDC, which does its serious damage to less than 1% of those who contract it while the vast majority of cases are entirely asymptomatic. We saw a lot of limb/motor damage when I was a kid, and bad old iron lungs, our parents were very concerned about it because they'd seen a lot of damage too. Seemed like a lot more than 1%...

                    There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                    by Joieau on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 10:39:46 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  eliminated vs. eradicated (6+ / 0-)

              To say that a disease has been "eliminated" in a geographical area is to say that the disease is no longer endemic there, i.e. that there's no sustained ongoing transmission of it. Measles, for example, is considered to have been eliminated in the US; all outbreaks are traceable to people who were exposed outside the country, and the outbreaks eventually die off.

              To say that a disease has been "eradicated" means that no cases have been reported in the entire world for a certain length of time. Strictly speaking, you can only say this about a disease that has no non-human "reservoirs". Smallpox is the only human disease that has been eradicated; rinderpest, which affects only cattle, has also been eradicated (just a few years ago). Note that the virus that caused rinderpest is closely related to the measles virus, which may have evolved from it.

              Eradication of a disease means that the need for vaccinations against it has gone away, but elimination doesn't. For example, measles had been declared eliminated in the UK, but it's now become endemic again because of inadequate vaccination.

              Thus continued rubella vaccination is still needed to keep it from becoming endemic again.

              Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

              by ebohlman on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 10:04:33 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yes, eradicated is better than (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                PurpleElectric, wa ma

                merely eliminated. And for all we know, rubella could be quite active in U.S. communities here and there, since it is such a mild infection that most don't bother going to the doctor. If they don't go to the doctor and don't get diagnosed, CDC would have no way of knowing about them.

                ...other than that it presents that nasty threat to fetuses in the first trimester, and if there were babies in America being born with congenital rubella syndrome, CDC would very likely know about it. See post above about the "small comeback." That's a total of three babies born with CRS in the U.S. of women who got rubella in their home countries when they were in their first trimester. Back in the day it was this threat to fetuses that spurred the development of the vaccine and push for total immunization. Given that there are more reported complications of the vaccine than reported cases of either rubella or CRS, the need for its continuance after elimination is questionable.

                U.S. Herd immunity is high, the vaccine has been required since its development and is still in the required MMR vaccine. I do not see that this country is in any real danger of a rubella epidemic if that component of the trivalent vaccine is removed. But until it is "eradicated" worldwide, the vaccine will still be advisable for international travelers.

                There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

                by Joieau on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 10:26:54 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  In the worst years recently, there have been only (0+ / 0-)

                9 cases of Rubella in the U.S. Other years have been around 5 cases. I'm guessing most, if not all, of those cases were imported. I'm not sure we've had any recent cases where an imported case resulted in transmission within the U.S.

      •  Add fear of chemicals generally (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        T100R, ER Doc, Ahianne, RunawayRose

        unless they are "natural."

        And food, unless it is "organic."  

        And "endocrine disruptors," despite there are plenty that are both natural and organic, including those we produce ourselves.

        Democrats give you the Bill of Rights; Republicans sell you a bill of goods!

        by barbwires on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 07:30:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Neither would be best. (0+ / 0-)

      I'd rather it not be on the left or right.

      But since that's not really an option in the near future, let's keep it out of our party at least.

  •  Well, what is causing the autism epidemic? (0+ / 0-)

    Something is causing it.  That is the important question.  So, rather than attacking people trying to figure it out, demand research to look at it's cause and prevention.
    We never hear about medical research probably because the 1% does not want it known.

    •  It's because they're adding fluoridated, geneti... (15+ / 0-)

      It's because they're adding fluoridated, genetically modified thimerosal to the chemtrails now.

      Ya gotta keep it on the DL here, though. Too many big pharma shills and sheeple here.

    •  This may be worthless but please read the diary (13+ / 0-)

      And follow the links.  We know it is not vaccines and if there is a rise then we will never find the reason if we have to keep shitting this crap down.  So much wasted time and money on falsified claims.  That and the murder are the true crimes here.  

      You never know who will show up at Netroots Nation. Will you be there?

      by ETinKC on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 11:14:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The noticing things epidemic. (11+ / 0-)

      Lots of other things are caused by that epidemic, too.

      •  this is also called (7+ / 0-)

        diagnostic bias. You diagnose it more because people are paying more attention-and now there are some sort of criteria for diagnosis.

        Inconceivable! You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

        by hopeful on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 05:17:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  On a certain level (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cordgrass, Ahianne, qofdisks

          (the high functioning of the 'spectrum') it could be like the "epidemic" of ADD/ADHD in recent years. Great for selling drugs for children, not so much good for addressing shortcomings in our educational system. Perhaps another labeling/categorizing craze.

          I attended three parent-teacher conferences when grandson was in grade school (he's a college graduate now). 2 out of those 3 teachers literally informed the parents of every single child in their classes that their child needed to be on Ritalin (yes, they specified by name brand). That looks a whole lot more like lousy teachers than it looks like all the 1st or 2nd graders in the area need ADD/ADHD drugs.

          There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

          by Joieau on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 09:45:45 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  ADHD appears to be both underdiagnosed and (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Joieau, Cassandra Waites

            overdiagnosed: it's usually missed in cases that don't present stereotypically (and those may in fact be the majority; it's a common mistake to assume that the most dramatic presentation of something is the most common), and normal behavior is often mistaken for the stereotypical presentation (a telling example of the latter is that in the US, kids born in November are more likely to be diagnosed than kids born in December; in the UK it's August vs. September. In both cases the kids most likely to be diagnosed are the youngest in their school year and the ones least likely to be diagnosed are the oldest).

            Note that a proper diagnosis requires that the person be affected in non-school settings.

            Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

            by ebohlman on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 02:08:56 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Gene mutations/variants (5+ / 0-)

      many of which are associated with bipolar spectrum disorders.

      http://www.autismdailynewscast.com/...

      I frequent a right wing blog where the author and many of the regular commenters have a child or two (and in one case, three) on the autism spectrum.  Many of these commenters have bipolar spectrum disorders- they admit to being Aspies or clearly have ADHD or OCD, lots of clinical depression and mania and mood disorders, anxiety disorders, etc.  And lots of the associated physiological disorders- migraine, Renaud's, hypochondria, chronic fatigue, digestive disorders, sensory hypersensitivity, tinnitus, seasonal affective disorder, etc.

      My impression is that militant anti-vaxxers tend to be parents of autistic children who themselves have OCD.  They've gotten fixated/obsessive on the vaccines and are in complete ignorance or utterly denial that their child may have inherited the disorder from themselves.

    •  see my comment above, under the header... (6+ / 0-)

      ... "wider diagnostic criteria."

      But as for the 1%, consider this:

      Two of the defining characteristics of autistics are a relative inability to lie, and a degree of social ineptitude.

      The psychiatric condition that is most common among the 1% is "antisocial personality disorder," or "sociopathy," which affects up to 10% of males in our culture and is over-represented in occupations that are concerned with power, such as politics and senior management.

      Two of the defining characteristics of sociopaths are pathological lying without guilt, and a high level of social "charm."  These characteristics enable sociopaths to be expert manipulators of other people.

      If the social characteristics of autism and Asperger's become common in the culture, a) lying will become a more significant transgression of cultural norms than it is now, and b) "charm" won't work as well as it does now.

      That situation puts sociopaths at a relative disadvantage: one of their tactics is rejected and another of their tactics becomes less effective.

      That creates an incentive for sociopaths to further stigmatize autism and Asperger's, and make a bigger to-do about them.  Thereby creating a diversion of attention from the sociopaths' own manipulative behaviors.  This doesn't entail any kind of conspiracy, merely the convergence of self-interest among sociopaths.

      And that, I believe, is the "covert culture war" in America today:  sociopaths seeking to protect their own privileges by using autism spectrum disorders as a distraction to keep attention off their own behaviors.

      Sociopathy, and narcissism which is its natural ally, are the biggest psychiatric pandemics in our culture today.  Think of the Neocons, Newt Gingrich, Mitch McConnell, the Wall Street fraudsters, Tom Delay, etc. etc. the list goes on.

      GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

      by G2geek on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 12:35:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  One of the telling things for me is that (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        G2geek, qofdisks

        there are admittedly anecdotal reports of autistic people failing 'what emotion is this person feeling?' tests by identifying the actors' REAL emotions instead of the acted-out ones.

        I've also heard of cases where autistic kids were berated for not trusting professionals and other adults who were acting friendly around them but secretly hated their guts. The kids knew.

        •  most interesting. that needs more research. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Cassandra Waites, qofdisks

          If there is a subset of autistic spectrum patients who have an elevated ability to detect others' actual emotions despite acting or disguising of emotions, that would be very very interesting.  

          What's needed is more research on this.  The test with actors is something that can be standardized using video.  The difficult part is to ascertain the actors' real feelings.  

          If the video is of films or TV programs, the research team would need to communicate directly with the original actors and ask them to report what they were actually feeling when they filmed the scenes in question.  This may be difficult since some of them will be major stars with little free time for this (unless they have become personally involved in supporting autism spectrum research or charities).  

          If the video is of a performance conducted specifically for this purpose, it runs into the confound that the actors will need to be subjected to emotional stimuli that induce feelings in them before they act parts that involve portraying different feelings.  This raises potential issues about inducing feelings in people even with informed consent, a) actual induction of actual feelings may put the actors in moods that are not conducive to acting, or b) the actors may recognize the induction and not respond by experiencing the intended feelings.  

          This is off the top of my head with my usual outlook on human subject research, that it has to be "tight" in a manner that would pass skeptical reviews.  

          However there are probably ways to operationalize the "actor/emotions" variables so they work.  

          It is definitely worth doing this, because the implications would be very profound on a number of levels.  One such level being this:  

          Assume that people who are on the autism spectrum all have an elevated ability to detect actual emotions despite others' attempts to pretend to other emotions.  This would create an emotional double-bind situation for these children, and could very well lead to many of their observed "socially withdrawn" behaviors.  

          Envision how you would react if you were suddenly dropped into a culture where people constantly lie to each other and your wellbeing depends on interacting successfully with that.  Many people in that situation would simply shut down.

          And needless to say, if autism spectrum patients can in fact detect false pretenses and emotional lying behaviors, then yes they are most definitely a threat to sociopaths including the ones in high places.  

          GOTV as if your life depends on it, because somebody's life does.

          by G2geek on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 02:39:21 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  If you stuck to that question (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      T100R, tarkangi, Ahianne
      Well, what is causing the autism epidemic?
      instead of falling back on the ridiculous answer that it must be the vaccines in the absence of any other definitive answer, then you might have a hope in hell of getting to the bottom of it.

      The more time you waste on something that has been proven not to be the cause to a higher level of proof than most other questions in science, the worse it is for all those who want an answer to that question.

      But as others have commented, by far the most likely answer to your question is that the condition is more likely to be diagnosed now than it ever was in the past. There may be no additional cases at all, merely a better chance of cases being diagnosed as such.

      Oh, and you never hear about the research because you never read the sort of technical journals where it is published. It is there, it is plentiful, and it is available for anyone to read and review.

      •  It is available for anyone to read (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        PurpleElectric, Ahianne, qofdisks

        A critically important point.

        The difficulties are that you have to find the relevant papers, it takes a great deal of time and effort to study the papers, and you have to have a certain level of education and knowledge and expertise to understand the papers and to weave them into the larger context.

        Most people then fall back on the popular press, which ranges in quality from outstanding down to ideologically motivated propaganda.  As it is not always obvious which is which, people often default to reading and believing what they want to believe - thus closing the loop.

        The unanswered question is, how do we as a society maintain an adequate level of scientific understanding.  My personal solution has been to read lots and lots of books, but that method doesn't seem to have caught on with the general populace.

        Vai o tatu-bola escamoso encontrar-me onde estou escondendo? Lembro-me do caminho de ouro, uma pinga de mel, meu amado Parati (-8.75,-8.36)

        by tarkangi on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 11:30:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  so it's all a . . . . . . . . (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tommymet, TheLizardKing, T100R, mconvente

      tumblr_m97z6aLRpZ1r4sd0zo1_1280

      (sigh)

      .

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 06:16:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  there is no "autism epidemic" (11+ / 0-)

      There is no evidence that the actual rate of autism is any higher now than it has ever been throughout human history.  We simply have better medical care now and can detect it more easily.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 06:29:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The research (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        T100R, raincrow, Ahianne, qofdisks

        on this question is not really clear cut. It's possible it's due to increased detection, but some research indicates an increasing prevalence even using the same diagnostic criteria over time.

        e.g. this study from CDC, http://www.sciencedirect.com/...

        There was a trend toward increase in identified ASD prevalence among 8-year-old children who met the surveillance case definition in 3 of the 4 study sites from 2000 to 2004. Some of the observed increases are due to improved ascertainment; however, a true increase in ASD symptoms cannot be ruled out. These data confirm that the prevalence of ASDs is undergoing significant change in some areas of the United States and that ASDs continue to be of urgent public health concern.
        or this study from UC Davis, (pdf) http://www.dds.ca.gov/...
      •  ... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        raincrow, qofdisks

        http://www.cdc.gov/...

        Network report provided data on ASD prevalence among children aged 8 years for 2004 (eight sites) and 2006 (11 sites) (10). When data from all sites were combined, overall ASD prevalence was 8.0 per 1,000 in 2004 (range among eight sites: 4.6–9.8) and 9.0 per 1,000 in 2006 (range among 11 sites: 4.2–12.1), or one in every 110 children aged 8 years in 2006. In 2012, the ADDM Network published data from 14 sites for the 2008 surveillance year, reporting a combined ASD prevalence of 11.3 per 1,000 children aged 8 years (range among 14 sites: 4.8–21.2), or one in 88 children (11). Comparison of the 2008 findings with those for previous surveillance years showed an increase in ASD prevalence of approximately 23% compared with the 2006 estimates and 78% compared with 2002.
        This recent and rapid increase in ASD prevalence underscores the importance of continuing surveillance to monitor trends in the population and the need to continue expanding research into risk factors,
        etiology, and effective interventions.

        "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

        by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 09:43:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  ok, so you don't know what (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tarkangi

          "detect it more easily" means.

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 10:02:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Good luck with that ! (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            qofdisks
            Quality Assurance
            All sites follow the same quality assurance standards established by the ADDM Network. In the first phase of ADDM, screening and abstraction of source records are checked periodically for accuracy. In the second phase, interrater reliability is monitored on an ongoing basis using a blinded, random 10% sample of abstracted records that are scored independently by two reviewers. For the 2010 surveillance year, interrater agreement on case status (confirmed ASD versus not ASD) was 90.7% when
            comparison samples from all sites were combined (k = 0.80).
            This exceeds the quality assurance standards established for the ADDM Network (17).
            .......................
            You claimed ,
            http://www.dailykos.com/...
            There is no evidence that the actual rate of autism is any higher now than it has ever been throughout human history.  We simply have better medical care now and can detect it more easily.
            The reality as reported by the CDC Surveillance Summaries / Vol. 63 / No. 2 March 28, 2014
            U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
            Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
            Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report
            This recent and rapid increase in ASD prevalence underscores the importance of continuing surveillance to monitor trends in the population and the need to continue expanding research into risk factors, etiology, and effective interventions.
            That is not "detection" that is "prevalence".

            If you don't believe the CDC , if you think you know better than the CDC , keep going the way you are . But if you bother to read the report http://www.cdc.gov/... , you will find they don't agree with you .
            You are free to disagree with the CDC all you want , I will not stop you . I on the other hand will defer to the experts who have done the work .  

            "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

            by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 10:34:51 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  and how again did they detect the "prevalence"? (0+ / 0-)

              Ohhhhh, that's right---through detection and diagnosis.

              (sigh)

              BTW, it's rather funny to see an anti-vaxxer citing the CDC on anything, since the CDC thinks the anti-vaxxers are all full of shit.  (shrug)

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 11:01:58 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  So you are now claiming I am an anti-vaxxer ? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Ahianne

                Tell you what you prove I am an anti-vaxxer and I will leave this site forever .
                On the other hand , if I prove that you are wrong you leave this site forever .
                ..................

                and how again did they detect the "prevalence"?
                Ohhhhh, that's right---through detection and diagnosis.
                They detected an increase in "prevalence". Play your little games all you want , but anyone who understands will see right through your little games .

                "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 11:09:45 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  (sigh) (0+ / 0-)

                  In the end, reality always wins.

                  by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 01:18:16 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I take it you have failed to support (0+ / 0-)

                    your ridiculous little bullshit accusation . Will you admit that you have failed completely to back up your bullshit with even the smallest of evidence ? Or are you going to just pretend that you have the smallest of respect for the truth ?

                    Where will you be going off to after you leave Daily Kos forever ?

                    You have been challenged , are you going to step up
                    or are you going to crawl away ?
                    .................

                    I challenge you again !

                     So you are now claiming I am an anti-vaxxer ?
                    Tell you what you prove I am an anti-vaxxer and I will leave this site forever .
                    On the other hand , if I prove that you are wrong you leave this site forever .
                    Are you going to take the challenge
                    or are you going to crawl away ?

                    "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                    by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 02:52:14 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  (sigh) (0+ / 0-)

                      Of course NONE of the anti-vaxers are anti-vaxers.  They all just happen to coincidentally show up in every vaccine diary parroting their idiotic conspiracy theories about Big Pharma hiding all the proof that vaccines do something bad to someone somewhere.

                      (sigh again)

                      PS--after the dishonest shit you pulled with Marine Chemist in his diary, you have some chutzpah talking to anyone anywhere at any time about anything.

                      In the end, reality always wins.

                      by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 02:56:03 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Still not a shred of proof . (0+ / 0-)

                        What you "think" , if it can be called that , isn't anything .

                        You have been challenged , more than once ,
                        are you taking the challenge
                        or are you crawling away ?

                        No more games , yes or no .
                        Put up the proof that I am an anti-vaxer
                        or fail and go away forever .

                        "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                        by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 03:02:37 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  What an anti vaxxers !!! (0+ / 0-)
                        Vaccines suck (2+ / 0-)
                        the death out of life !

                        http://www.cdc.gov/....

                        To bad there isn't a vaccine for not so bright .

                        jezmez68 please don't be a vector , please get all your jabs .

                        by indycam on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 07:45:39 AM PST

                         I got a tip for you (41+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                            Phoenix Woman, taylormattd, murphy, Pandora, madmsf, missLotus, sarahnity, Miss Blue, TiaRachel, Julie Gulden, william shipley, jct, pico, esquimaux, Eloise, DiesIrae, profh, Hedwig, VaBreeze, pgm 01, marykk, 0wn, Ken in Tex, ScottCatskill, The Bagof Health and Politics, tethys, LaFeminista, greengemini, soms, RoCali, smileycreek, Commoditize This, psfinla, LeanneB, Texdude, indubitably, Reetz, mydailydrunk, Jaffa Kree, spring representative, The Union Forever

                        Get vaccinated .

                        by indycam on Sun Oct 18, 2009 at 12:08:34 PM PDT

                        I read it . (39+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                            Ducktape, Phoenix Woman, taylormattd, murphy, madmsf, dsb, missLotus, Miss Blue, TiaRachel, peterborocanuck, parryander, Julie Gulden, historys mysteries, william shipley, Eloise, DiesIrae, profh, Hedwig, marykk, 0wn, FishOutofWater, Ken in Tex, The Bagof Health and Politics, tethys, Justanothernyer, WSComn, greengemini, soms, smileycreek, stegro, LeanneB, indubitably, Reetz, mydailydrunk, Kokomo for Obama, Jaffa Kree, spring representative, The Union Forever, Huginn and Muninn

                        then I commented .
                        Here is another tip
                        Get vaccinated twice .
                        Once for the "normal" flu
                        and once for the H1N1 .

                        by indycam on Sun Oct 18, 2009 at 12:11:36 PM PDT

                         Its their kid who gets sick . (2+ / 0-)

                        The kid did not make the choice to go without .
                        I'm thinking a huge fine for the parents who have kids get ill for a lack of vaccination .

                        by indycam on Tue Dec 10, 2013 at 09:39:27 AM PST

                        We put a man on the moon ... (3+ / 0-)

                        We eradicated smallpox ...

                            After vaccination campaigns throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the WHO certified the eradication of smallpox in 1979

                        We have nearly eradicated Polio ...

                        During the time we have done these things ,
                        we have done basically fork all in America re gun death / wounding rates .
                        We need to focus on the problem and work on the problem just as we did with the moon shot / smallpox / polio .

                        We can do it .

                        by indycam on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 01:01:04 PM PST

                        I think I can show a link between (0+ / 0-)

                        Vaccines and mental problems .
                        If you add a new vaccine to an old anti vaccer ,
                        clearly and repeatedly "problems" happen .

                        Without vaccines the anti vaccers might even be able to pass as normal ordinary people .
                        Or they might still have problems with other things ,
                        I say its worth funding a study of .

                        by indycam on Thu Jun 20, 2013 at 06:13:05 PM PDT

                         From Time magazine (9+ / 0-)

                        http://www.time.com/....

                            Vaccinate or Leave.
                            By Jeffrey Kluger Monday, Aug. 22, 2011

                        Get your kids up to date or find a new doctor . Don't bring your unvaccinated kids into my office .

                        by indycam on Tue Aug 30, 2011 at 10:05:32 AM PDT

                        When a diabetic eats poorly by choice (1+ / 0-)

                        and refuses to test his blood and take insulin after being diagnosed and given the testing equipment and insulin ...

                        When a person refuses to get vaccinated ...

                        When a person refuses to change their diet after a doctor has requested them to because of the health problems the patient has ...

                        Where do you draw the line ?

                        by indycam on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 09:46:59 AM PST

                         And if the parents don't ask about (2+ / 0-)

                        stairs , electricity , poison , vaccines etc etc etc
                        Then everything is fine and dandy !
                        Your method is a recipe for disaster .

                        Being proactive is a good thing ,
                        being less than proactive isn't .

                        by indycam on Thu Sep 15, 2011 at 10:47:02 AM PDT

                        I think insurance companies maybe should be able (1+ / 0-)

                        to fire if the person is not doing vaccines  / preventative care / etc etc . If a person is living an unhealthy life , refusing to get physicals , refusing to take a doctors advice , refusing to take needed medication .

                        by indycam on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 08:55:21 AM PST

                        I'm talking about testing blood (0+ / 0-)

                        and taking insulin , getting physicals as requested , getting vaccinated .

                        by indycam on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 09:26:42 AM PST

                        If the pts is in no need of care at the moment (0+ / 0-)

                        and the Doctor sends out a notice that says , get vaccinated in the next 6 months or find a new Doctor , is the Doctor right to fire the customer who refuses to get vaccinated ?

                        by indycam on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 10:08:13 AM PST

                        ... (1+ / 0-)

                        http://www.thedenverchannel.com/....

                            DENVER -- Some Colorado doctors are refusing to see patients who have not been vaccinated, pointing to recent whooping cough outbreaks in California and a woman with measles reported on a flight to Denver.

                        http://articles.chicagotribune.com/....

                            Some pediatricians taking stand for vaccine program
                            Doctors at certain practices refuse to treat kids whose parents refuse immunization schedule
                            Among those taking a stand are the eight pediatricians of Northwestern Children's Practice in Chicago. They no longer see children whose parents refuse to follow the childhood immunization schedule developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the American Academy of Pediatrics. A letter and email sent to parents this year announced the policy, which went into effect in June.

                        http://www.king5.com/....

                            Carl didn't die. But he lost both his legs and three of his fingers. That's exactly the kind of thing pediatrician Bradley Dyer wants to prevent. He's made childhood vaccinations mandatory at his practice.

                            "I think more physicians need to be more aggressive about vaccinating kids. If you're not willing to vaccinate your kids, if you're not willing to trust us and trust our judgment and education, then we have a philosophical difference here," he said.

                            Dr. Dyer says he has turned away families and encourages other doctors to do the same.

                        by indycam on Mon Jan 09, 2012 at 09:22:39 AM PST

                        Did Your parents get you vaccinated ? (0+ / 0-)

                        by indycam on Mon Sep 27, 2010 at 07:50:34 PM PDT

                        Anti vaccine = Darwin in action . (2+ / 0-)

                        Vaccines turn red states blue
                        .

                        by indycam on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 04:39:44 PM PDT

                         An expert said that the common test (2+ / 0-)

                        is not good enough to bet your life on .
                        He said that the only test to bet your life on is rare and that if you do not have that type of test done , get the H1N1 vaccine shot .
                        If you did really have H1N1 getting the shot will not harm you , but if what you had was not the H1N1 and you skip the shot , that might be a problem .

                        by indycam on Mon Oct 12, 2009 at 02:57:46 PM PDT

                        Gosh , if only someone could (10+ / 0-)

                        come up with some way to vaccinate people from getting the flu .

                        http://en.wikipedia.org/....

                            As many as 17 million died in India, about 5% of India's population at the time.[15] In Japan, 23 million people were affected, and 390,000 died.[16] In the U.S., about 28% of the population suffered, and 500,000 to 675,000 died.[17] In Britain as many as 250,000 died; in France more than 400,000.[18] In Canada approximately 50,000 died.[19] Entire villages perished in Alaska[20] and southern Africa.[which?] Ras Tafari (the future Haile Selassie) was one of the first Ethiopians who contracted influenza but survived,[21] although many of his subjects did not; estimates for the fatalities in the capital city, Addis Ababa, range from 5,000 to 10,000, with some experts opining that the number was even higher,[22] while in British Somaliland one official there estimated that 7% of the native population died from influenza.[23] In Australia an estimated 12,000 people died and in the Fiji Islands, 14% of the population died during only two weeks, and in Western Samoa 22%.

                        by indycam on Sun Oct 18, 2009 at 12:16:05 PM PDT

                        You doubt the effectiveness (8+ / 0-)

                        so you are not going to get the vaccine ?
                        Do you doubt the effectiveness of H1N1 also ?
                        One is known to kill .

                        by indycam on Sun Oct 18, 2009 at 12:39:05 PM PDT

                        CDC (14+ / 0-)

                        http://www.cdc.gov/....

                            Get vaccinated. Vaccination is the best protection we have against flu. Seasonal flu vaccine is available now and initial doses of 2009 H1N1 flu vaccine also are available, with additional doses available later this year.

                        by indycam on Sun Oct 18, 2009 at 06:37:32 PM PDT
                        ..........
                             But, but, but... (5+ / 0-)

                            Glen Be... oh wait, that guy is moran. I'll get mine next weekend.
                            by blueyedace2 on Sun Oct 18, 2009 at 06:40:44 PM PDT

                            ..........
                                 I even want beckhead to get the vaccine (0+ / 0-)

                                and all his ilk also .

                                by indycam on Sun Oct 18, 2009 at 07:41:36 PM PDT

                        I miss the iron lung , (13+ / 0-)

                        down with vaccines !

                        by indycam on Mon Oct 19, 2009 at 02:39:03 PM PDT

                        Among Children who get the regular flu vaccine (27+ / 0-)

                        The incidence of flu drops by something like 80%.

                        by skywaker9 on Mon Oct 19, 2009 at 02:29:55 PM PDT

                        .....

                             Yes but can you prove that it was (13+ / 0-)

                            the vaccine that did it ?
                            snark

                            by indycam on Mon Oct 19, 2009 at 02:37:11 PM PDT

                            ....
                                 It was magic! (7+ / 0-)

                                by Hedwig on Mon Oct 19, 2009 at 02:39:28 PM PDT

                                ......
                                     I'm going right down to the magic shop asap ! (5+ / 0-)

                                    by indycam on Mon Oct 19, 2009 at 02:46:15 PM PDT

                        "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                        by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 04:13:45 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  then stop quacking (0+ / 0-)

                          and people won't think you are a duck.

                          OK, you're not a hardcore anti-vaxer. Just a "Big Pharma Corporate Plot" fantasist.

                          But of course by posting all the "vaccines cause harm!" and "Big Pharma conspires to hide the data!" crapola, you are doing nothing but enabling the hardcore anti-vaxers.

                          So stop.

                          In the end, reality always wins.

                          by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 04:17:53 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Eh ? (0+ / 0-)
                            Just a "Big Pharma Corporate Plot" fantasist.
                            But of course by posting all the "vaccines cause harm!" and "Big Pharma conspires to hide the data!" crapola, you are doing nothing but enabling the hardcore anti-vaxers.
                            OK , once again , you are just making crap up .
                            Show where I ever posted anything along these lines
                            "Big Pharma Corporate Plot" fantasist ,
                            or
                            posting all the "vaccines cause harm!" and "Big Pharma conspires to hide the data!" crapola,
                            Put up the links that support what the are claiming .
                            I challenge you again .
                            Put up the proof or leave this site forever .
                            Do you think you are adult enough ?
                            Or are you going to crawl away ?

                            "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                            by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 04:32:50 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  (sigh) (0+ / 0-)

                            In the end, reality always wins.

                            by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 05:08:23 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No facts , no links ? How surprising !!! (0+ / 0-)

                            You got lots of nothing .
                            Nothing but Nothing .

                            Do you have any other wild , irresponsible , fact free , BS filled accusations to fling ?
                            Or are you done ?

                            "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                            by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 05:28:08 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

              •  Can you link to any proof (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                RunawayRose

                ..that indycam is an antivaxxer? Or are you BAD (as in DBAD)?

                Cogito, ergo Democrata.

                by Ahianne on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 01:39:45 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  The question of whether autism is increasing (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                qofdisks

                is an open one, possibly, but there's a fair amount of evidence suggesting that it's not merely increased diagnosis. It's not okay to suggest someone is a conspiracy theorist or call them names for citing the CDC's report that they believe autism is increasing.

                Just because we are certain that autism and vaccinations are not related does not mean ANYTHING about prevalence of autism. And there are plenty of reasons - including genetic - why this could be happening.

                Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!

                by elfling on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 05:59:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Sure (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  T100R

                  such as the fact that men, on average are having kids later in life.

                  However, the 'epidemic' that people are referring to is most likely, largely due to increased diagnosis and changing standards.

                  But let's not beat around the bush. The people who are accused of CT are the ones who proclaim that not only is there an epidemic of increasing 'true' autism rate (which is not supported by the evidence or the CDC), they also often insist that it's just gotta be because of some prevalent environmental toxins and/or this connection is being suppressed.

                  Heck, just browse the comments for this diary and you will see this show up more than once or twice.

            •  I think you are wrong: (0+ / 0-)

              http://www.cdc.gov/...

              From the executive summary:

              Whether increases in ASD prevalence are partly attributable to a true increase in the risk of developing ASD symptoms or solely to changes in community awareness and identification patterns is not known.
              (bold for emphasis)

              This is completely consistent with the quotes in your post because the CDC certainly wants to continue to monitor and study the issue to determine whether it the true incidence is really increasing, and also to identify the important risk factors.

              So, the CDC experts appear to disagree with you, they just used 'ASD prevalence' as a shorthand for detected incidence rather than true incidence.

              •  There is evidence that it is increasing (0+ / 0-)

                in prevalence .  You have read it yourself . I give you some credit for actually reading it .

                So, the CDC experts appear to disagree with you, they just used 'ASD prevalence' as a shorthand for detected incidence rather than true incidence.
                That they are waiting for further proof is fine .
                But that doesn't negate what they have seen already .
                The next study might show a decrease in prevalence ,
                but that does not change the fact that there is now evidence of an increase in prevalence .
                Anyone who says there is no evidence of increase is failing to report that there is in fact evidence of an increase of prevalence .

                "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 11:19:58 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You are conflating two different concepts. (3+ / 0-)

                  There is an increase in 'detected' autism.

                  This is a fact nobody disputes. Not me, not Lenny.

                  This is referred to by the CDC in the above quotes as 'autism prevalence'.

                  Lenny has stated, and the CDC and I both agree with him, that there is no evidence that this increased autism prevalence is because there is an increase in the rates of 'true incidence' of autism (that's why they say it is 'not known'). The CDC goes on to confirm that this increased autism prevalence may be related to increased detection, though again this is 'not known'.

                  This is why they want to do further studies, to find out whether the 'true rates' of autism are increasing, whether the increased autism is just from better detection, or whether it's a combination.

                  As of right now, they do not know, which means that any statement claiming there is an increase in the true rate of autism is just wrong, and not supported by the facts.

                  •  ... (0+ / 0-)
                    whether the increased autism is just from better detection, or whether it's a combination.
                    They are waiting for more evidence that will confirm . They have evidence and now they need to prove it or disprove it .
                    As of right now, they do not know, which means that any statement claiming there is an increase in the true rate of autism is just wrong, and not supported by the facts.
                    They have evidence , they don't know if the evidence they have in hand is or is not going to be shown to be fact . But evidence they have .
                    ..............
                    http://www.cdc.gov/...
                    Since the last ADDM Network report on ASD prevalence was published in 2012 (11), other studies conducted in the United States and Canada also suggest a continued upward trend in prevalence (3–5,12). This report from the ADDM Network provides updated ASD prevalence estimates for the 2010 surveillance year, representing 11 geographic areas in the United States. In addition to prevalence estimates, characteristics of the population of children with ASD are described

                    "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                    by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 11:55:34 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  "no evidence" (0+ / 0-)

                    http://www.dailykos.com/...

                    There is no evidence that the actual rate of autism is any higher now than it has ever been throughout human history.  We simply have better medical care now and can detect it more easily.
                    Do you agree that there is "no evidence" ? Is that factual in your mind ? Or is it that there is evidence and you don't trust the evidence as proof one way or the other ?

                    "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                    by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 12:02:56 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  They have evidence (0+ / 0-)

                      that the detected autism prevalence is higher.

                      They don't have the evidence that this is due to the true incidence rates or due to increased detection efficiency and/or changing standards.

                      I'm not sure why this is so hard to grasp as I bolded it for you: they do not know

                      Therefore, any statement that there has been an increase in the true rates of autism is false, based on our current understanding. If they had evidence that the true rate of autism was in fact increasing, they would have said so.

                      And you should refer back to the post that started this particular branch:

                      Well, what is causing the autism epidemic? (0+ / 0-)
                      Something is causing it.  That is the important question.  So, rather than attacking people trying to figure it out, demand research to look at it's cause and prevention.
                      We never hear about medical research probably because the 1% does not want it known.
                      This post not only assumes that there is a factual increase in the true rates of autism (which is wrong), it throws in a healthy dose of CT at the end. This is what we need to push back against.
                      •  Bingo ! (0+ / 0-)
                        They have evidence
                        that the detected autism prevalence is higher.
                        And they got that evidence how ?
                        By testing with the same same just a few years apart ?
                        Having there tests reviewed for problems ?
                        I'm going with the people who did the testing over people who ...
                        ..................
                        Quality Assurance
                        All sites follow the same quality assurance standards establishedby the ADDM Network. In the first phase of ADDM, screening and abstraction of source records are checked periodically for accuracy. In the second phase, inter rater reliability is monitored on an ongoing basis using a blinded, random 10% sample of abstracted records that are scored independently by two reviewers. For the 2010 surveillance year, inter rater agreement on case status (confirmed ASD versus not ASD) was 90.7% when comparison samples from all sites were combined (k= 0.80).
                        This exceeds the quality assurance standards established for the ADDM Network (17)
                        How well was the study done ?
                        Over how many years ?
                        Was the test method changed over those years or did the use the same same ?

                        "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                        by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 12:28:00 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  What are you going on about? (0+ / 0-)

                          Nobody is disputing that the detected autism rates have increased.

                          I am directly quoting the CDC when I say that they do not know if that increase is from an increase of 'true autism incidences'.

                          What more do you need? You said it yourself, trust the CDC. The CDC says they don't know if 'true autism rates' are increasing.

                          Seems like there's not much else to say on that, eh? But since you probably aren't yet satisfied:

                          http://www.nimh.nih.gov/...

                          The agencies conclude that the increase in prevalence of parent-reported ASD was largely due to improved diagnosis of ASD by doctors or other health professional in recent years, especially when the symptoms were mild.
                          Decades ago, those mild symptoms would remain undiagnosed. Today, that child has autism. All without any change in the underlying rate of true autism incidence.
                          •  We are not talking about something from (0+ / 0-)
                            Decades ago
                            The fact that you said "Decades ago" makes me wonder if you read the item I linked to / quoted from .

                            Tell me , when was the study done ?
                            From what year to what year ?
                            Tell me about the tests they conducted ?
                            Tell me how the tests they used changed over those years ?

                            ......

                            You said it yourself, trust the CDC.
                            Show me the quote ?

                            ......
                            From your link / proof .

                            The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Health Resources and Services Administration released a report titled "Changes in Prevalence of

                            Parent-reported Autism
                             

                            "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                            by indycam on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 12:56:06 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Yes we are. (0+ / 0-)

                            We are talking about the rise in autism prevalence since the 1970s.

                            Show me the quote ?
                            Which one, yours?
                            You are free to disagree with the CDC all you want , I will not stop you . I on the other hand will defer to the experts who have done the work .  
                            or the CDCs?
                            Whether increases in ASD prevalence are partly attributable to a true increase in the risk of developing ASD symptoms or solely to changes in community awareness and identification patterns is not known.
              •  Exactly (0+ / 0-)

                When one has insufficient evidence about the systemic error in what one is studying [either alpha or beta] then the reality cannot be ascertained, as the CDC flatly states.

    •  Not at all clear that there is an epidemic (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cassandra Waites, RunawayRose

      It is possible that the entire increase in prevalence in the US may be due to increased screening and awareness and greater availability of resources.

    •  You're presuming an epidemic... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RunawayRose, Ahianne

      ...where no evidence of such exists.

      Take a look at this NYMag article, "Is Everyone on the Spectrum? for details.

      Here's one good quote from the article:

      Despite much debate about the causes of the so-called autism epidemic, the consensus among experts is that the increase is mostly due not to a rise in incidence but to greater awareness, recognition, and testing, and to the wider parameters of who qualifies for a place on the spectrum (New Jersey, for instance, has some of the most robust autism services in the country). Such elasticity is nowhere so relevant as at the fuzzy, ever-shifting threshold where clinical disorder shades into everyday eccentricity.
      Seriously, give it a good reading; it's worth your time to so do.

      The word "parent" is supposed to be a VERB, people...

      by wesmorgan1 on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:27:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I'd never heard of Lupron Therapy... (9+ / 0-)

    Horrific is right. They're chemically castrating young boys as some type of bunk autism treatment?! Jesus Christ..

    Thanks for another great diary, Skep...

    •  Yep. And they were committing insurance (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      SixSixSix, Cassandra Waites, Ahianne

      fraud in the process of doing it: about the only indication for Lupron in kids is premature puberty, and the Geiers (note that "Geier" is German for "vulture") were dianosing premature puberty in 12-14 year-old boys in order to get insurance companies to pay for the Lupron.

      Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

      by ebohlman on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 09:21:25 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I was quite distressed to see this nonsense on RT! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank, charliehall2

    But then science was not their strongest suit during the USSR days....

    I must be dreaming... (3764 forever!)

    by murphy on Mon Aug 25, 2014 at 11:52:54 PM PDT

  •  GO SKEPTICAL RAPTOR! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    T100R, mconvente

    You are fast becoming my favorite new diarist.

    "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it... unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." -The Buddha

    by Brian A on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 04:29:58 AM PDT

  •  Robert Kennedy Jr spent years on this issue (0+ / 0-)

    says he wants it settled so he can move onto other things in his life

    interviewed by Thom Hartmann on Thom's Conversations with Great Minds series

    two segments about 12 min each

    Kennedy talks about environmental concern from early age and meeting Rachel Carson, etc.

    The CDC says thimerosal in vaccines is safe - but Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. disagrees - and says he has the science to back it up. The leading environmental activist will make his case for removing thimerosal from vaccines in tonight's special Thursday edition of Conversation With Great Minds.
    Conversations w/Great Minds P1 Robert Kennedy Jr. - Thimerosal: Let the Science Speak
    Activist Robert F. Kennedy talks about climate change.
    Conversations w/Great Minds P2 Robert Kennedy Jr. - Pollution is theft

    here is the link to the Conversations With Great Minds series

    the more I see Thom Hartmann, the more impressed I am

    http://conversationswithgreatminds.com/

  •  What do they get out of this? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank, catwho

    Is all this about donations to their "cause"?  Do they also sell anything?  I just keep wanting to find out what $$$ is coming in from pushing the anti-vacc crap.  There's always money.

    Manufacturing outrage; the only manufacturing jobs Republicans won't outsource.

    by get the red out on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 06:00:27 AM PDT

    •  Wakefield was cobbling together a class-action (6+ / 0-)

      lawsuit against the pharma companies, and made up his bullshit "scientific study" to bolster his case in court. He was caught faking his data, his "scientific study" was withdrawn, and his medical license was revoked. He SHOULD be in jail.

      I find it ironic that the crackpots all argue that the Big Pharma Corporations all lie about vaccines to make profit from it--when the ONLY demonstrated case of someone making up fake data to profit from it has been their own Fearless Leader.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 06:24:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I am going to assume you are ignorant (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        protectspice

        Tampering with data is endemic in Big Pharma's research

        http://www.nytimes.com/...

        The auditors said the results did not affect patient safety, but warned of the high stakes involved, saying participants could be exposed “to unnecessary risk or no benefit to the disease state.”

        Glaxo said that “when the full range of data from all the studies was reviewed, GSK determined that the efficacy would not be strong enough to continue,” and it terminated a trial of ozanezumab in multiple sclerosis patients. It is still studying the drug in people with Lou Gehrig’s disease, or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, according to the company.

        In the follow-up audit, auditors said senior managers at the Chinese research unit had “embedded a compliance culture that was not evident during the prior audit,” and did not find any issues of concern, according to an executive summary of the report that was provided by Glaxo.

        Outside ethics experts said the report raised questions about whether patient safety was adequately protected.

        •  and once more the crackpots screech their silly (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          T100R

          CT "it's all a corporate plot" silliness.

          (yawn)

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:26:59 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Sounds like someone FUBARed the animal part (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lenny Flank

          then when it was found they didn't want to report it and lose their job.

          Was it wrong? Absolutely.
          Is this an indictment of systemic actions with knowledge all the way to the tops of all Pharmas? Hardly.

          There is no "path" to choose. The path is what is behind you that led you to today. What lies in front of you is not a fork in the road - not a choice of paths to take, but rather an empty field for you to blaze your own direction.

          by cbabob on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:28:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Dubya and Cheney lied. repeatedly. about (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            cosette, T100R

            Virtually everything.

            Does that therefore mean that the 9-11 Truther crackpots are correct with their "Bush and Cheney planned the attacks!" horse shit? No, it does not. That is typical CT crackpot arm-waving.

            In the end, reality always wins.

            by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:44:25 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Oh, I can supply plenty more (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            melo, louisev

            http://www.forbes.com/...

            Last year Glaxo paid $3 billion to resolve civil and criminal allegations of, among other things, marketing widely used prescription drugs for unapproved treatments and using kickbacks to promote sales.

            And in 2009, Glaxo paid $750 million to resolve civil and criminal charges that quality failures led to serious contamination of drug products at its manufacturing operations in Puerto Rico.

            Glaxo is a leader in pharma fraud and wrongdoing, with other industry heavyweights close behind. Over the past decade, whistleblowers and government investigations in the US have exposed a never-ending series of problems by numerous pharma companies in all facets of the industry, starting with fraudulent “research” papers used to bolster marketing and continuing through to the manufacture of contaminated and defective products, the marketing of drugs for unapproved and life-threatening uses and the mispricing of prescription drugs.

      •  Thanks (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        T100R

        I have been having trouble figuring out why people would go to all this trouble to put doubt on life-saving vaccines.  It has never made sense to me.

        Manufacturing outrage; the only manufacturing jobs Republicans won't outsource.

        by get the red out on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:19:43 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      T100R

      These folks are charlatans making a buck off vulnerable people.  Makes me sick.

      The Cake is a lie. In Pie there is Truth. ~ Fordmandalay

      by catwho on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 06:36:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  dangerous fools (6+ / 0-)

    I'm immunosuppressed and now have to worry about the community making me ill due to the anti-science crowd. they are as bad as global warming deniers, but on our side of the isle too.

    Vote in every election. Don't let the Republicans ruin us.

    by owl06 on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 06:06:41 AM PDT

  •  PS--can one of the Admins at SciTech make (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    highacidity, T100R, mconvente, cosette

    Skeptical Raptor an Editor so he can put his diaries in the queue? I republish them whenever I see them, but it'd be a whole lot better if he could publish them to the Group himself. . .

    In the end, reality always wins.

    by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 07:00:43 AM PDT

  •  I just picked up on a word, here. (4+ / 0-)

    Diagnosis. Age at first exposure to MMR vs likelihood of DIANGOSIS of Autism. Interesting. Even if the data were supportive of a connection, one would have to figure out how to control for aggressiveness of parents in obtaining medical treatments and diagnoses. Goes something like this: The earlier the vaccine, the more likely it is that the parents are invested in their kids' health care. The earlier the diagnosis of autism, the more likely it is that the parents are invested in their kids' health care. Both stats could be results of the same thing - parental investment. If there were a correlation in the first place, of course.

  •  Quibble regarding different racial groups (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    melo, Ahianne

    There are tons of conditions that affect different groups at different rates, such as sickle-cell anemia.  This is believed to have undergone positive selection in parts of Africa because the heterozygous condition, "sickle cell trait," confers some protection against malaria. As a result sickle-cell disease exists primarily (or exclusively) in people of African descent.

    It is not sound to infer from the small proportion of genetic difference between racial/ancestral groups that there is no difference in expression of disease.

    Furthermore, we know Mendel's Second Law, the one gene-one trait hypothesis, is incorrect.  Genes commonly affect more than one trait (pleiotropy). Melanin, the pigment determining skin and hair color, has immune function, for example. I read one study of infection rates among GIs in Viet Nam that found significantly greater infection resistance in African-American GIs than in Caucasians.

    Others off the top of my head:
    sensitivity to alcohol in some Asian and Native American groups
    Tay-Sachs disease in one group of Jews
    Osteoporosis in Caucasians
    Abnormal response to anesthesia in redheads

    You don't help your argument by including this statement.

    FWIW I am certain I have Asperger's and don't consider it a disease--I believe what we need is greater social acceptance.  Judging from the prevalence in my family, I'd readily believe it to be genetic, not environmental.

  •  We need to go all in on opposing junk science (0+ / 0-)

    It isn't just climate change denial. Too many on the left promote the anti-vax nonsense, and the anti-GMO nonsense is mostly on the left.

  •  How in the hell did this get published anywhere?? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    T100R, otto, Ahianne

    Anyone who knows anything about epidemiology would shred this on arrival.

    I can't believe anyone actually published this drivel from Hooker.

    There is no "path" to choose. The path is what is behind you that led you to today. What lies in front of you is not a fork in the road - not a choice of paths to take, but rather an empty field for you to blaze your own direction.

    by cbabob on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 07:59:57 AM PDT

    •  It is a FOR-PROFIT journal!!!! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      T100R, otto

      This junk will probably get more citations than everything ever published in this journal put together. This means that the publishers will finally see a return on their investment.

      So how is it that for profit vaccine manufacters tainted but for profit journal publishers aren't?

      •  I love how capitalism cures everything. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        charliehall2

        /snark (as if the tag was needed)

        There is no "path" to choose. The path is what is behind you that led you to today. What lies in front of you is not a fork in the road - not a choice of paths to take, but rather an empty field for you to blaze your own direction.

        by cbabob on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:38:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Kinda unfortunate title (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ahianne

    as people might in passing see this on the rec list and reinforce that vaccines cause autism.

    Good analysis though, great diary.

    I wish these people like Wakefield could be prosecuted for the damage they are doing.

    It's difficult because although they really should have the right to free speech they are using that speech to hurt a lot of people. Isn't it kind of like yelling fire in a crowded theater?

    If there really is a fire, it's protected. If you think there's a fire but maybe the popcorn machine malfunctioned you're still probably in good shape. If you know there's no fire and you're doing it maliciously there should be some kind of repercussion.

    When we stop putting leaders from the past up on pedestals and ignoring their flaws, we can start seeing our present leaders for what they really are.

    by PhillyJeff on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:32:45 AM PDT

  •  However, vaccines MAY cause volcanic eruptions (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    charliehall2, T100R, raincrow

    Especially in Iceland.
    Or not.

  •  as an aside, i hope it is illuminating to the rest (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    charliehall2, T100R

    Of the DK community to see here in the comments just how many crackpots we actually have defending the anti-vax nuttiness.

    And most of our regular crackpots aren't even here yet . . .

    In the end, reality always wins.

    by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:48:36 AM PDT

  •  so... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ebohlman, otto

    I can probably find my immunization records somewhere and post them online.

    My caption will be: You said vaccines cause autism? I'm 25 and halfway to my Ph.D.

    My mom and dad believed in immunizations because they came from a country where things like measles and that claimed a lot of infant and small children's lives. Both of them have that smallpox immunization scar on their shoulder.

    And in their experience, some of their friends who didn't get immunized died from those childhood diseases.

    Yes, getting the shots sucked because I abhor needles and because I was so scrawny, they made my limbs/butt feel all swollen for a few hours.

    Why hello there reality, how are you doing?

    by Future Gazer on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 08:57:51 AM PDT

    •  That's what's missing in contemporary (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Future Gazer

      Western vaccine-refusing parents: no experience or knowledge of how bad things were before vaccines.

      On a smaller time scale, we're seeing an increase in the number of young gay men who think unprotected anal sex is low risk if the other guy "looks healthy". That's because unlike people of my generation, they haven't yet found themselves attending their peers' funerals in their twenties and thirties.

      Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

      by ebohlman on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 10:15:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  One quibble from a layman (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    raincrow, Ahianne

    You write that all these racial groups are nearly identical genetically and so there'd be no reason why autism could be more prevalent in one group or the other.

    But, there are myriad diseases/conditions that are more prevalent in one group or another. So much so that (closely intermarried) ethnic group or race. There are definite genetic markers for transmission of these diseases. To flip your point on its head, there'd be no reason not to think there's a determinative genetic factor if in fact some racial difference was observed. There is certainly some compelling evidence that autism -- or, at least a higher risk of autism -- is inherited...that it has a genetic base. If it does, then it's also possible that it might be more prevalent in one ethnic or racial group. Certainly, that's not unheard of.

    Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

    by FischFry on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 09:06:26 AM PDT

  •  grr angry nt (0+ / 0-)

    Streichholzschächtelchen

    by otto on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 09:56:34 AM PDT

  •  MMR and Polio (5+ / 0-)

    vaccines have been a huge step forward in medicine. The autism myth has been busted so many times its mind boggling that it still drags on.

    I am not convinced that flu vaccines are as good.

    A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

    by onionjim on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 10:15:54 AM PDT

  •  Granolas gone wild. (6+ / 0-)

    And there are a decent number of them here. Hate science. It's all a conspiracy. We were happier as cavemen, or at the very least, during the Middle Ages.

    Basically, they've always been comfortable—too comfortable. They have no idea what it means to suffer. They are so unaccustomed to "shit happens" that when a tiny bit of shit does, in fact, happen, they are desperate to blame it on anyone or anything that does not match their idealized version of nature, in which all animals and humans live forever, there is no predation (because lions and tigers are natural vegans, not killers—it's just humankind that made them so!) and so on.

    I cannot get over the mind-numbingly stupid memes that I have received in my inbox:

    - Predators are naturally vegans
    - Humans don't actually need food if they're loving enough
    - Microwaving food or drink causes it to "spell" Hitler (?!?)
    - Water has memory, so hold it near healthy plants before drinking
    - Meat and dairy have never been in any animal's natural diet
    - Cooking food sends its "souls" to dark places
    - Lemons and paprika are a cure for cancer
    - Cancer is a hoax
    - Ebola is a hoax
    - Ebola is caused by preservatives
    - Processed food is made out of advanced plastics
    - ALS researchers are growing babies and harvesting organs
    - [Insert fruit/vegetable here] cures [insert terminal disease here]
    - Science is a plot to reduce global population

    And so on. I dated one of these people once. We had endless fights over things like this. The one that broke us up was when I cooked some broccoli and she was mortified at the harm that I'd done to it, and to its soul—harm that would now enter me if I ate it, and thereby make it so she couldn't be around my "negative energy" until the harmed souls had left my body (a couple of days, apparently).

    She's still a vegan raw foodie working in some nonprofit or other and reads a lot of Zen books. She's convinced that Zen is actually some sort of mystical superscience that grants old Chinese and Japanese martial artists eternal life, and that it endorses these kinds of positions. Stuff to make any Asian snicker.

    I'm glad we've lost touch.

    -9.63, 0.00
    "Liberty" is deaf, dumb, and useless without life itself.

    by nobody at all on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 10:49:23 AM PDT

    •  If you haven't already, go listen to (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RunawayRose

      Tim Minchin's spoken poem "Storm".

      That bit about the broccoli makes it sound like her real fear was that it would make you fart.

      Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

      by ebohlman on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 02:23:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Forgot to mention (0+ / 0-)

        I think you're really on to something with that "being too comfortable". I think what we're seeing is a feeling that life today is too complicated (particularly a feeling of being overwhelmed by the number of choices available) and a desire to go back to simpler time, oblivious to the fact that those times were only "simpler" because everyone was completely preoccupied trying (not always successfully) to meet basic survival needs.

        People without a certain level of privilege tend not to have such yearnings because they really can't afford to indulge them.

        It's actually been found that improvements in a society's objective measures of health are usually accompanied by a decline in subjective perceptions of how healthy people are; it appears that a society's expectations of health rise faster than its actual health; when people no longer experience serious disease, they start to define everyday aches and pains and the normal process of aging as ill health.

        Unfortunately when smart and educated people get crazy ideas they can come up with plausibly truthy arguments. -- Andrew F Cockburn

        by ebohlman on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 02:38:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  You can be vegan or vegetarian (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RunawayRose

      And not be woo.  In fact, I am going to guess that most of them are.  

      Streichholzschächtelchen

      by otto on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 03:37:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  My cats would laugh about the vegan predators (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      RunawayRose

      ..if they could understand it. And then they'd loudly demand their share of the leftover chicken I was tearing up for enchiladas.

      There's a little kernel of truth in the dairy one. While I'm sure any predator bringing down a lactating female mammal would eat udder and all, milk was only a significant part of the diet of infant mammals until some weird bald primates figured out how to herd some ruminants rather than just hunting them, and some of them gave the stuff a try, and it turned out some of them were mutants who could still digest lactose as adults. Dairy products still don't figure too much in the diets of critters aside from infant mammals and some, not all, of those weirdo primates. Some of us weirdos eat hot peppers too. Sometimes with dairy products. Now I want some nachos.....

      Cogito, ergo Democrata.

      by Ahianne on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 06:00:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Do you remember that one Far Side comic? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ahianne

        About six cavemen waving their crude wood shovels as
        they carry a giant carrot on their shoulders.  "Primitive vegetarians returning from the hunt."

        C'est la vie, c'est la guerre, c'est la pomme de terre.

        by RunawayRose on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 10:32:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Holy shit! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ahianne

    I hate it when people misuse statistics to get the answer they want.  Pearson's is only used to model homogeneous data in a skewed distribution and is, as you say, overly sensitive for significance.

    Well, I can understand an engineer using that, but, in engineering the effect of a processes that creates a truncated or skewed distribution must be first understood before using a Pearson's distribution for process modeling.

    It is either done to deliberately mislead, or by a person ignorant of proper pre-analytical procedure.  Neither of which speaks well about Cooper.

    Alas, I've seen this all too frequently by people who are so devoutly searching for significance that they throw statistical tools around like ill-aimed daggers.

    •  I heartily endorse this point (0+ / 0-)

      Never publish a result from a method that you do not understand inside and out.

      Never apply a method to data that you do not understand fully.

      Start simple and build out.

      Make certain that you have an effect to explain before you go digging for explanations, lest you become wedded to those explanations and refuse to accept that your result was a fluke.

      Vai o tatu-bola escamoso encontrar-me onde estou escondendo? Lembro-me do caminho de ouro, uma pinga de mel, meu amado Parati (-8.75,-8.36)

      by tarkangi on Wed Aug 27, 2014 at 11:11:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Anti Vaxx woo woo cult of death and suffering (0+ / 0-)

    Fuck em....

    WTF!?!?!?! When did I move to the Republic of Gilead?!

    by IARXPHD on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 12:15:15 PM PDT

    •  the anti-vaxers KILL PEOPLE with their dumbfuckery (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Cassandra Waites

      Most other anti-science loons I cut at least some slack, since there's no law against being pig-ignorant. But by not vaccinating their kids (and by encouraging others not to), the kookers not only endanger that kid's life, but the life of every other member of society that kid is in contact with.

      They are a danger to society, literally, and deserve only to be treated as such.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 03:06:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  wow, getting on the Rec list lured ALL the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    otto, Cassandra Waites

    anti-science crackpots out today. We're still missing a few, but I assume they'll still show up later . . . . . . .

    In the end, reality always wins.

    by Lenny Flank on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 03:00:58 PM PDT

  •  The CDC conspiracy got brought up on my FB. (0+ / 0-)

    I'm doing my best to squash it like a bug.  Generally I make it a point to not get into politics on my FB, because that's not what I use it for.  However, I make an exception for anti-vaxers and climate change deniers.  Fortunately, this promoter of the anti-vax nonsense was a friend of a friend, so who cares if he gets upset.

  •  I posted a Diary a few weeks ago (0+ / 0-)

    on Cognitive Dissonance, which leads True Believers to deny the most obvious failures of their predictions, with the flimsiest excuses, and to go big in the media on their denials. Almost everything you hear from science deniers and extreme Republicans fits the theory.

    I have observed medical versions in many countries with cancer denial and quackery such as Laetrile; AIDS denial (widely supposed in Africa to be a CIA plot, and also not to exist); polio CT among oppressed peoples in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Nigeria, who believe that its purpose is to sterilize their children; and now Ebola denial and CT in Africa. In each case helplessness leads to grasping at quack remedies and conspiracy theories about who or what caused it in the first place. As soon as there is reasonable hope, both the quackery and the CT greatly abate. We will have to make a great deal of progress on autism to get rid of anti-vaxxerism.

    Back off, man. I'm a logician.—GOPBusters™

    by Mokurai on Tue Aug 26, 2014 at 11:26:30 PM PDT

monkey knife fight, Alumbrados, Phoenix Woman, drybones, Jeff Simpson, mem from somerville, madmsf, RunawayRose, Shockwave, ETinKC, maracucho, Wintermute, polecat, grover, Ahianne, davelf2, Heart of the Rockies, susans, BlackSheep1, Wee Mama, whenwego, highacidity, mikidee, Dburn, otto, roses, admiralh, hopeful, RLF, psnyder, HeyMikey, Black Maned Pensator, liberte, ybruti, mungley, vacantlook, realalaskan, Skennet Boch, G2geek, jrooth, jiffypop, sc kitty, vgranucci, kefauver, basquebob, terrypinder, ChemBob, EJP in Maine, Kevskos, Gary Norton, billybush, rb608, Blu Gal in DE, Shotput8, xaxnar, Nowhere Man, DeLabarre, WB Reeves, tommymet, myboo, Clytemnestra, smokeymonkey, KenBee, Naniboujou, raincrow, Marcus Tullius, Spock36, ER Doc, middleagedhousewife, gratis4, onionjim, CA Nana, doingbusinessas, AllanTBG, tgypsy, whl, ninkasi23, devis1, ColoTim, larmos, Stwriley, edsbrooklyn, Cofcos, Matt Z, GeorgeXVIII, Don midwest, keyscritter, gizmo59, Mike Williams, JDWolverton, mconvente, mamamedusa, skohayes, Lenny Flank, Brian A, Cassandra Waites, shigeru, Keninoakland, gsenski, oldliberal, legendmn, Fonsia, don mikulecky, Methinks They Lie, petral, TheOpinionGuy, MichiganChet, Tortmaster, davespicer, Railfan, Its the Supreme Court Stupid, smileycreek, mamamorgaine, p gorden lippy, TFinSF, The Jester, serendipityisabitch, gramofsam1, mookins, ATFILLINOIS, Eddie L, pixxer, DrTerwilliker, cocinero, Oh Mary Oh, progdog, kerflooey, ozsea1, Bob Duck, slowbutsure, FarWestGirl, Mr Raymond Luxury Yacht, Lorikeet, Carolyn in Oregon, bywaterbob, gnbhull, Be Skeptical, whaddaya, Joe Jackson, Dbug, Hayate Yagami, Miggles, T100R, allergywoman, No one gets out alive, Laurel in CA, anodnhajo, TheLizardKing, Chrislove, charliehall2, IndieGuy, David54, 420 forever, Trotskyrepublican, Proteus7, mapamp, MartyM, cryonaut, Most Awesome Nana, BobTheHappyDinosaur, lmcclatchie, Paul Rogers, SixSixSix, leeleedee, Aunt Pat, Jollie Ollie Orange, bob152, Smoh, nice marmot, ET3117, Mike Kahlow, duhban, mmcnary, Laura G, IrasburgEd, aimeehs, Ozy, alx9090, Will Stark, LilPeach, kfunk937, californiadave, IndyDemGirl, PurpleElectric

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site