Morons debate MMR, Then sue Scientist for opposition.

[Damien]

This is a real problem these days, The second guessing of Science and Doctors without any evidence other than there own self-proclaimed wisdom, there mistaken insistence that all opinions are equal, and individual examples that "prove" they are right.

On LBC there was a chat show that basically went though all the above. The presenter Jeni Barrett stated that as a responsible parent she was not going to immunise her children. It's not necessary, and she then claimed that the fact that only 1 in 15 children die from measles means it's not necessary and instead we should look into why those children die.

Shes also states: Immunisations contain cancer causing components. Honestly!

A parent phones in and said she knows it's wrong to put diseases into somebody, but then claims it's great when there is a measles epidemic because she can send her children to catch it. Seems to have a serious problem with the science behind immunisations.

You can listen to all of this here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dRnk...eature=related

Now, Ben Goldsmith originally posted this audio on his website. Bad Science. Then LBC who broadcast the show issued a take-down notice to Goldsmith for breaching acceptable use of the copyright.

The level of ignorance is astounding, it's really scary. This country is obsessed with the rejection of authority, it seems healthy but it is not. It means people think they know more than doctors and scientists and use the fact they are a parent as an excuse.

[Maggy J]

What's worse Damien is that they think they are better parents because they put their ignorance before their children's health...

[Ramrod]

I'd dispute the 1 in 15 children die of measles statement......more like 1 in 5000 (and that 1 will already be in a vulnerable state due to some other illness).....

[Damien]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

I'd dispute the 1 in 15 children die of measles statement......more like 1 in 5000 (and that 1 will already be in a vulnerable state due to some other illness).....

Well it was her quote, I am not actually sure on the numbers. However a lot more than 1 in 5000 will develop serious complications.

[rogerdraig]

scientists started all the argument about this and funnily enough its the same scientists they are now quote to show it wasnt a problem

the really silly thing about all this was the insistence by the authorities that they wouldnt let the parents have the jabs as they were before in three separate jabs which the majority of those refusing were willing to do ( lots went private to do so )

condemning parents who often have no qualifications in science to decide who is telling the truth for picking a diferent side to us is silly in my view

[Damien]

Originally Posted by rogermevans

scientists started all the argument about this and funnily enough its the same scientists they are now quote to show it wasnt a problem

Scientists are not an hive mind or organisation with a consistent message. You say it was Scientists who started the argument but it wasn't, it was one scientist who has since been banned from practise and confessed there was no link. His views were shunned by the majority of scientific opinion and research.

It was in fact the Media who pushed the MMR story as far as it could. Even after the initial research, which didn't conclude what the media claimed it did, was debunked they continued to push the story. Since they could no longer find scientific evidence for their stories they resorted to emotional examples instead. A typical example could be a mother and her son, who developed autism a few months after the Jab. The paper and it's readers oblivious to the fact that Autism occurs during childhood and so does the administration of the jab. Correlation does not imply causation and incidents like that were a result of coincidence and nothing else.

You should always be very wary of 'Science' printed in newspapers, even the better ones, as these are often handled by journalists with no ability to draw conclusions from scientific papers. In fact, most of these papers are not even ready for public consumption and need further study. Hence they are published with scientists in mind who are aware of the dangers in reading too much into one study.

The Daily Mail has a particular habit of doing the above, and then pouring scorn upon the Scientists they have misrepresented. A common one is food, The Mail loves to publish results which are not certain nor accepted by the majority of scientists. They then complain about it, summarise that Scientists don't know everything, and feed the Middle-class delusion of their superiority over authority. They misrepresent the Science, and then attack it for their own ends.

Condemning parents who often have no qualifications in science to decide who is telling the truth for picking a diferent side to us is silly in my view

Which is why we have Doctors and medical professionals to advise parents in this regard. They have the medical expertise to make these decisions and the general public do not. I always defer to the medical advice of these people, because they have had countless years of medical training and I do not.

It is why the media's attempt to undermine them and the public's confidence in medicine and science is so repugnant and abhorrent. The public's limited knowledge should come from experts and not people trying to exploit them for a temporary increase in newspaper sales.

[Maggy J]

Originally Posted by Damien

Scientists are not an hive mind or organisation with a consistent message. You say it was Scientists who started the argument but it wasn't, it was one scientist who has since been banned from practise and confessed there was no link. His views were shunned by the majority of scientific opinion and research.

It was in fact the Media who pushed the MMR story as far as it could. Even after the initial research, which didn't conclude what the media claimed it did, was debunked they continued to push the story. Since they could no longer find scientific evidence for their stories they resorted to emotional examples instead. A typical example could be a mother and her son, who developed autism a few months after the Jab. The paper and it's readers oblivious to the fact that Autism occurs during childhood and so does the administration of the jab. Correlation does not imply causation and incidents like that were a result of coincidence and nothing else.

You should always be very wary of 'Science' printed in newspapers, even the better ones, as these are often handled by journalists with no ability to draw conclusions from scientific papers. In fact, most of these papers are not even ready for public consumption and need further study. Hence they are published with scientists in mind who are aware of the dangers in reading too much into one study.

The Daily Mail has a particular habit of doing the above, and then pouring scorn upon the Scientists they have misrepresented. A common one is food, The Mail loves to publish results which are not certain nor accepted by the majority of scientists. They then complain about it, summarise that Scientists don't know everything, and feed the Middle-class delusion of their superiority over authority. They misrepresent the Science, and then attack it for their own ends.



Which is why we have Doctors and medical professionals to advise parents in this regard. They have the medical expertise to make these decisions and the general public do not. I always defer to the medical advice of these people, because they have had countless years of medical training and I do not.

It is why the media's attempt to undermine them and the public's confidence in medicine and science is so repugnant and abhorrent. The public's limited knowledge should come from experts and not people trying to exploit them for a temporary increase in newspaper sales.

[rogerdraig]

yep your side is right imho

but thats not what i am on about


whether it was media led or not all parents see is two camps of scientists arguing and they decide not doing the new thing is the better course to tread for the time being

and just because the NHS here says its ticket boo means little to a lot of people who don't trust anyone anyway

there was a perfectly good way to provide cover to those not wanting the triple vaccine ( which my two kids had as i was not worried ) in three seperate jabs

the ones who have caused the current problems are those who decided to refuse to offer that

the way to get things done mostly in this country is to take it slow offer the service and once most get used to it then slowly make it easier to use the new one and harder to use the old one

telling young mother who see conflicting reports "We are right You are WRONG" is a sure way to ensure that what you want doesnt get done

as to letting doctors decide you haven't been under hospital or a doctors care often imho

they tell you two choices then even though they say which is thier preferred choice ask you to sign that's its not thier fault if it goes wrong ( that really inspires confidence !)

[downquark1]

A recurring theme in the MMR critics arguments, this was repeated in Peter Hitchen's column this week, is that a few autism cases is worse than a few deaths..... I thought these people were pro-life!

Its not too hard to imagine an alternative history where MMR is banned and their is moral outrage against NU Labour for failing to protect the children.

I thought they had dismissed the risk of Autism now?

My daughter is in the process of having the job against Cervical Cancer at the mo and I am all for it. As the title says they are morons also those parents who refuse the MMR are morons also.

[downquark1]

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

I thought they had dismissed the risk of Autism now?

The medical profession have. Churnalists and parents haven't.

Unfortunately a few support groups of parents with autistic children formed during the scare and have become locked in a conspiracy theory. Now whenever there is a story like this they leap into action either as a "spokesman for parent support group" or by leaving comments on the website telling the "truth" about MMR.

To give an example of how paranoid they are, they believe the reason why this story spread so fast is because the pharmaceutical companies paid all the bloggers.

[Hugh]

From yesterday's Sunday Times

"THE doctor who sparked the scare over the safety of the MMR vaccine for children changed and misreported results in his research, creating the appearance of a possible link with autism, a Sunday Times investigation has found.
Confidential medical documents and interviews with witnesses have established that Andrew Wakefield manipulated patients’ data, which triggered fears that the MMR triple vaccine to protect against measles, mumps and rubella was linked to the condition...

....However, our investigation, confirmed by evidence presented to the General Medical Council (GMC), reveals that: In most of the 12 cases, the children’s ailments as described in The Lancet were different from their hospital and GP records. Although the research paper claimed that problems came on within days of the jab, in only one case did medical records suggest this was true, and in many of the cases medical concerns had been raised before the children were vaccinated. Hospital pathologists, looking for inflammatory bowel disease, reported in the majority of cases that the gut was normal. This was then reviewed and the Lancet paper showed them as abnormal. "

[Chris]

Originally Posted by downquark1

The medical profession have. Churnalists and parents haven't.

Unfortunately a few support groups of parents with autistic children formed during the scare and have become locked in a conspiracy theory. Now whenever there is a story like this they leap into action either as a "spokesman for parent support group" or by leaving comments on the website telling the "truth" about MMR.

To give an example of how paranoid they are, they believe the reason why this story spread so fast is because the pharmaceutical companies paid all the bloggers.

So true. The JABS website is a classic example. I'm not going to link to it directly as I really don't want to improve their Google pagerank.

[etccarmageddon]

Originally Posted by Damien

This is a real problem these days, The second guessing of Science and Doctors without any evidence other than there own self-proclaimed wisdom, there mistaken insistence that all opinions are equal, and individual examples that "prove" they are right.

www.thalidomideuk.com - people don't want to blindly follow like sheep what the 'authorities' tell them what's right because history proves science isn't always reliable.

[demented]

The problem I have with the responsible parent line in not having the jab is well it's not actually responsible at all. If take up of the vaccine falls below a certain threshold - deemed to have been about 75% in an area in the past, there is a the risk of an outbreak of one of the diseases. People who have been vaccinated and not vaccinated then have much less protection than under the current normal circumstances we've enjoyed since the mass vaccination era. Children really will be injured and die. Even if MMR did cause autism in a very small number of children you have to weigh that up against outbreaks of upto 3 killer diseases of yesteryear being let loose on the population. Unfortunately the media doesn't give much time to this version of why the "choice" thing isn't quite as free as some people like to think.