As an aside, repeating the words of parents is not how science is done; science uses anecdotes as a starting point to coin hypotheses, and that’s where the relationship ends. Anti-vaxxers cannot have it both ways: either Wakefield was only repeating parent’s words, or he was doing a proper scientific investigation of the parent’s concerns.This is exactly how I feel so make sure you read the article over at JREF.
Next, McCarthy completes the circle: after the incorrect factual statements, and the hint to conspiracy, comes the irate-mom-who-won’t-take-no-for-an-answer act:I know children regress after vaccination because it happened to my own son. Why aren't there any tests out there on the safety of how vaccines are administered in the real world, six at a time? Why have only 2 of the 36 shots our kids receive been looked at for their relationship to autism? Why hasn't anyone ever studied completely non-vaccinated children to understand their autism rate?Please pay special attention to this paragraph. This seems to be the new direction the anti-vaccination movement is moving in, the new position of the goal post. What is so great about this line of thinking however is that it proves what we in the pro-health camp have known for a while: the anti-vaccine proponents know vaccines cause autism. No amount of contradictory evidence will ever be enough, because they will always fantasize something else about vaccines that they can demand to be studied, but that is OK. Our educational efforts are not aimed at the McCarthys, or Meryl Doreys, of the world, but to the parents who are on the fence and about to make a very important decision about their children’s health. We fight for them, and even more importantly for their children, which is why correcting the anti-vaccination misinformation is of paramount importance to the pro-health community
Monday, March 28, 2011
Another Response to McCarthy
In January I wrote a post about an opinion piece by Jenny McCarthy on the problems with vaccines. In that post I explained how several of the comments that she wrote were wrong on several factual layers. Well on Saturday the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) published an article that included some of what I pointed out but also included more as well as more references, and who are we kidding it was much more professional. One of the things I really wanted to point out was something that they said at the end.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment