|
Not to mention the sheer amount of pseudoscience spread in media and fear mongering which encourages adopting this crap. There is no legitimate reason for the anti-vaccine movement, its a bunch of 'New Age' thinking that is hurting people and children.
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
King of Hamas posted:I am 100% for vaccines that have proven medical value, and am concurrently against any that lack it, and as a result I am anti-flu vaccine. I'll just point out, that the flu vaccine still shows function and works with CHILDREN. The Cochran study was focused solely on adults. Please do not encourage this crap. Critical thinking is great, but the people who are NOT getting their vaccines (and as a result suffer or die) are the children who need it the most. I'll also point out that all medicine within the US borders is for profit, pretending that their drive for profit somehow invalidates the effect of the vaccine raises some questions about the validity of your argument. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flu_vaccine#Benefits_to_children quote:Vaccination of school-age children has a strong protective effect on the adults and elderly with whom the children are in contact.[30] Children born to mothers who received flu vaccination while pregnant are strongly protected from having to be hospitalized with the flu. "The effectiveness of influenza vaccine given to mothers during pregnancy in preventing hospitalization among their infants, adjusted for potential confounders, was 91.5% Mark Hyman is also basically a diet pusher and 'alternative medicine' advocate, I SINCERELY doubt he is qualified to be making calls on the effectiveness of the flu vaccines. Let's leave that to immunologists. Even better, Mark Hyman is already a known pusher of pseudoscience and woo: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/09/08/dr-mark-hyman-mangles-autism-science-on/ So basically, don't cite Dr. Hyman please. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Mar 25, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
tbp posted:I'm of the opinion that vaccinations are good, and that not getting them and encouraging other people to not get them is bad. Check out this stuff about Dr. Hyman (he is a real doctor, not a chiropractor, but he pushes a lot of woo) http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/09/08/dr-mark-hyman-mangles-autism-science-on/ quote:Well, actually, yes, this does sound very familiar. Woo-meisters the world over love “detoxification” of unknown and unnamed “toxins” that are supposedly the cause of all disease, all accompanied by a boatload of various supplements. http://americanloons.blogspot.com/2013/11/789-mark-hyman.html quote:Mark Hyman is a “pioneer of functional medicine,” i.e. altmed shill, author (his book Ultraprevention, co-authored with one Mark Liponis, made it to quackwatch), blogger (for Huffington Post), and creator of “Ultrawellness.” Hyman is particularly notable for his ability to mangle, misunderstand, and misrepresent research in service of his particular brand of woo, for instance by trying to argue that “conventional medicine” has lost its battle with cancer, thus paving the way for Hyman’s own questionable ideas instead. Functional medicine (a good introduction here and here), he claims, is a “systems-biology approach to personalized medicine that focuses on the underlying causes of disease.” Now, it is true that systems-biology is popular in medical research at the moment. But that, of course, does not mean that there is any support there for Hyman’s own crackpottery, functional medicine. And yes, functional medicine is pure woo, backed up, as expected, with a bit of anecdotal data.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2014 23:04
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I've observed this as well, and for me it really drives home that most people's conception of medicine is utterly pre-scientific. I'm almost afraid to google "naturopathy humorism" because I'm afraid of discovering one or both of two things: If it has the words 'Alternative' and 'Medicine' in the immediate vicinity of each other, run.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 01:45
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:It's a bad move to make bedfellows with a guy on the flu vaccine who is out on the lunatic/snake oil fringe on every other medical issue he talks about and is on Huffington Post, a news organization with the journalistic credibility to rival Buzzfeed. I think the deepest irony in these 'Naturopathy/Alternative Medicine' sites is that the people who support them scream about pharmaceutical companies being profit driven, despite the fact that sites like Natural News are literally ALL ABOUT selling your something. Dr Pepper posted:How in the world is this "movement" still alive? Because a lot of these 'movements' are backed by celebrities and political organizations that need to die in a fire.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
Paper Mac posted:That's not the argument. The argument is that studies conducted by groups with a material interest in the outcome systematically overstate the effects of the treatment, which is widely recognised within the immunological community and is a problem even with the data related to children. Hyman may be a kook but you should probably actually look at the Cochrane studies before you dismiss these concerns so flippantly. Either way, the Cochrane study shows that live nasal vaccinations are effective. And besides, his point of being anti-flu shot was exposed right away as worthless tripe mostly based on citing a woo spewing general practitioner who wants to sell diet books and alternative medicine. As for providing ammunition to the anti-vaxx crowd: The vast majority of the people in these groups make up whatever ammunition sounds plausible to them at that moment, its more of a 'religious' movement than a scientific or medical movement, as nearly everything they say has no evidence backing it, nor are they willing to accept evidence from the most unbiased source, because every possible degree of evidence that disagrees with their position must be a 'conspiracy' or 'planted' CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 04:00 on Mar 26, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Paper Mac posted:It also says that the conclusions the study makes have to be interpreted in light of the fact that much of the evidence used to draw those conclusions is demonstrably systematically manipulated to make vaccines appear more effective than they are. It's entirely legitimate to be concerned about the conclusions drawn from such a body of evidence. Being intellectually honest and scrupulous requires us to admit that there are significant, documented problems with this literature. We can then turn around and show that for other vaccines those problems don't exist, while demanding that the research into flu vaccine be held to the same standards. Ah, I see your point. True. I wondered how the got the idea that there is a lack of information on flu vaccine safety, despite the fact that flu vaccine safety has kind of been covered for some time now? It it not independent enough for the purposes of their study? If so, why not?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
Paper Mac posted:I'm not familiar enough with the literature to say, but I'm married to an immunologist and hang out with folks in the field from time to time and my impression is basically that it's just really difficult to get a proper RCT going because of the way the industry works. My understanding is that the immunologists and epidemiologists at Sanofi sit down and have a look at what flu subtypes were circulating last year and make a model-informed projection as to what subtypes are likely to crop up next year (they need to get their production lines going before flu season starts for obvious reasons). Sometimes they get it right, sometimes they don't, and the result is that it's really difficult to make year-to-year comparisons, to plan an RCT (expensive and if they got the subtype projection wrong you just flushed that study down the drain), etc. The selection criteria for the Cochrane reviews are pretty stringent- for that one I linked above you'll see they're only looking at RCTs, cohort studies, and case control studies- and so a lot of the literature that gets generated in the normal course of administering these things just doesn't meet those standards. A lot of the quoted 'risks' of vaccines according to the anti-vaxx crowd revolve around the used preservatives and a general misunderstanding of how bioaccumulation works and how the body gets rid of unwanted chemicals. It was almost the entire focal point of the 'Vaccines Cause Autism' crap.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
OneEightHundred posted:Even that's basically irrelevant at this point considering most important vaccines are available in thimerosal-free versions anyway. But MERCURY and ALUMINIUM and FORMALDEHYDE  These people bitch about chemicals they know nothing about beyond the fact that it sounds 'unnatural', yet at the same time they tell you to eat fresh fruits which contain more of the very chemicals they spread fears about.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 15:18
|
|
|
Cache Cab posted:The issue for me is the level of toxic substances they put in the vaccines.   There is no link to 'mental issues' from 'unregulated substances in vaccines'. You need to step away from the 'Organic' bullshit. Vaccinate your kids.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
Killer-of-Lawyers posted:Are there people seriously worried about aluminium? The stuff is everywhere and in everything. I've never heard of people being in arms about cans and such. Because people think metal is atomically inert, completely ignoring the fact that the metal atoms exist in their food from being stored in a can.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:God's choir needed another angel 'S/He's in a better place' 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea posted:Herd immunity is a myth, guys. Vaccines only last two to ten years so obviously vaccines can't confer herd immunity when so many of the vaccinated people aren't immune anymore. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Herd_immunity http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Mar 26, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 19:19
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:Read his next paragraph.  I'm an idiot.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Tasty_Crayon posted:Put these crystals between your toes and commune with your spirit guardian in the morning. Your chi is out of whack, better go visit your chiropractor.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 04:29
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Saw this yesterday. Makes me sort of sad, in that it's getting obvious that autism isn't going to be generally curable. Maybe we can get a prenatal test for it eventually like we have with Downs Syndrome, but with the way things are going in this country I doubt that would solve the problem. In the end, many autistic kids can lead fairly normal lives thought, given the right access to education resources and therapy.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
Lid posted:This is an Australian documentary regarding chiropractors and their move into wannabe doctors including their relationship to antivaccination. Chiropractors literally want to replace GPs as being the first port of call to illness. This is happening a lot in the US, one of the big pushers of Cannabis oil as a 'cure for cancer' in Canada is a chiropractor. I really REALLY wish the US Medical Board would step up and start squashing these idiots.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
ProfessorCurly posted:This story was in Kentucky, where I'm from, and from what I understand they didn't go to growers but to other states where medical marijuana has been legal. The child had lots of problems with seizures and the doctors in other states recommended this treatment as a possible solution. The oil reduced the number seizures by 80%, and there was enough evidence for the Kentucky assembly to vote in favor of legalizing it (I was very surprised by this). It may be one of the few legitimate cases where THC can be used to treat the siezures, but we also know that THC can inhibit brain development and cause other issues, so we'll see if it was worth it in the long run. Either way, further studies need to be published to fully vet this solution. mdemone posted:It's doubly lovely because cannabis has multiple legitimate medical uses (anti-cachexia, anti-emetic among several others), and that gets lumped in with the goofy "my child smoked pot and now he's not autistic anymore" trash. The problem is the pro-legalization crowd is too quick to take cases and use them as a progoganda tool, instead of using cautious optimism. They don't really hide the fact that they want it legalized no matter what, and use cases like this to make excuses versus 'We should legalize marijuana because its not a harmful drug, even less harmful that tobacco'
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
Silver Nitrate posted:Here's something to cheer everyone up: Melanie's slow and agonizing death. Seriously, how do people get around to praising diseases that our grandparents feared beyond all else?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 15:09
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:If only CPS tore apart families right away. It's like pulling teeth to get them to issue a pickup order. CPS failing to act has killed more children.... 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:Then I apologise and retract the insult, but now I'm not seeing an issue where Drs can't read papers properly at Ph.D level. Regulate clinicians better and let the med board deal with any nutjobs is surely the better solution than further barriers to entry for med students? Except the Med Board is increasingly having their hands tied by groups pushing for deregulation of the medical industry a'la chiropractors and natural health nuts that insist thr medical industry is a farce and they are just proped up by big pharma. These same groups have an ever increasing body count they leave in their wake.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 20:48
|
|
|
IAMNOTADOCTOR posted:Here's something you might not know about vaccines, they are the hidden reason babies die of shaken baby syndrome (abusive head trauma, the parents are all innocent martyrs! Yeah, no. This is probably one of the most disgusting claims of the anti vaccine movement.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
gabi posted:In theory, yes, but just about every state has exemptions for religious or philosophical reasons (hilariously, this doesn't include Mississippi or West Virginia). Here's the results from the CDC database on school vaccination requirements: Some states in places where flare ups have occurred are revoking exemptions if I recall, on a case by case basis.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2014 21:11
|
|
|
New Anti-Vaccine argument I heard made today: I have a "Jennerian Fetish" Apparently vaccines are just a fetish. Pack it up guys.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 21:50
|
|
|
The Mandingo posted:Turns out my sister is friends with a bunch of anti-vaxx nutjobs. This is bad, since she just announced that she's pregnant with my first nephew/niece. Here's two gems from some of her dumb friends: I'm so sorry
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2015 04:26
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Our pediatrician has a mandatory vaccination policy. He'll work with parents on staggered schedules if they want that, but bottom line, if you are anti-vaxx, you are free to get a new doctor. Our does that too, and we love him for it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:I could imagine compulsory vaccinations if there were a series of outbreaks of various diseases. http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/21/5329478/vaccine-preventable-disease-outbreaks-show-anti-vaccine-movement-influence
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:I think clearly not enough white people died for this to reach the policy tipping point. The problem being with diseases of this sort is they CAN reach a tipping point, and you kinda need to catch the outbreaks BEFORE the tipping point to be effective.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Oh, and baby leashes? No. Hell no. Yeah, that poo poo is crazy as hell. I'd rather just follow my kid and let him explore than strap him into a leash like a dog. pentyne posted:This Disneyland thing has spread like crazy. Its on track to be the worst outbreak in decades. loving morons are literally killing people with their pseudoscience beliefs.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
pentyne posted:Are the anti-vaxxers blaming immigrants or are they trying to pretend like measles is no big deal? They are pretending its no big deal. They argue that Measles and other diseases are 'Natural' and that you can gain a 'Natural Immunity' by being exposed to it. They literally have never seen the horrors of a pandemic, and make appeals to nature.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
RationalWiki has a fairly good write up on Dr. Sear's methods: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Attachment_therapy#Dr._Sears.27_principles
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:ahahahahahahahahahahahaha! There is some positives to getting rid of the idea of 'Crying it out' parenting and encouraging positivism, but yea, Dr. Sears is a quack.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:That depends entirely on how you define "cry it out." http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/moral-landscapes/201407/parents-misled-cry-it-out-sleep-training-reports No, I don't think its dangerous, but honestly I don't buy into the 'crying it out' method, and three years on, our child sleeps pretty well on his own despite not allowing him to cry it out at night. Anecdotal, I know, but still. The PROBLEM with the 'Cry-It-Out' crowd is the ones who decided to start this method right off the bat with a newborn infant, despite the fact that many doctors emphasize that even at night, a newborn needs to be fed and comforted for at least the first 6 months. Parents want to return to a 'normal' schedule too quickly, and assume that the crying is simply to be ignored. Infants cry for a reason, selfish or not. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:19 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:Babies are loving stupid and it's likely nothing you do to a pre-3 year old it's going to remember anyway. 'Remember', no, not vividly. But infants do develop reactions based on infant experiences. Good experiences as a baby have been shown to shape reactions later in life. ActusRhesus posted:What you just did is a classic trope of the anti "Cry it out" crowd...No one, not even "cry it out" patriarch Dr. Ferber, suggests leaving a newborn to cry it out, as newborns need food more often than 5 hours. No one advocating for sleep training recommends starting the practice until the child is able to go a prolonged period without food, usually starting at around 6 months. Except think about the crowd you are explaining this to. I KNOW it doesn't kill brain cells, nor is that what I implied. Remember: We're in the Anti-Vax thread, half these people ignore scientific studies and medical advice the vast majority of the time anyways. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:OK, then I'm a little confused. Why did you link to that article? Your comment seemed to endorse its content. She is a Developmental Psychologist she studies Child Development and Psychological affects. We're hitting two different fields: You are countering with with a Pediatrician, who is perfectly correct in saying it does not kill brain cells. She studies moral and mental development, while the health of your baby is certainly the expertise of your Pediatrician, child psychological development is more of a psychology field than a pediatrician field. Dr. Navarez is not considered a quack so far as I know... 
CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:but even that has been refuted. Again, these articles are scare tactics that push parents away from valid parenting options in an incredibly hostile and judgmental way. Can I get some links to refutations? She's considered a leading researcher on this front....kinda scary if its all bunk. I find a lot of MD's criticizing her, but do we have any Psychologists doing so?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 19:52
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:I think MD criticism is valid given some of her claims. Especially regarding formula feeding. Okay, I can buy that, and my child was formula fed, but how does that refute her studies on child development? It'd be a logical fallacy to throw ALL her research under the bus because of a single view or a couple minor views. I don't go to me GP for psychological help, I go to a therapist or a physiologist. While I can wholly depend upon the word of my GP and MD for my physical health, we can't throw the psychological under the bus because they are not all encompassing. Might it expose a bias? Sure, but how do we know that bias suddenly invalidates her data totally? CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:I'm not throwing all of her research out. I'm questioning conclusions she's drawn in two areas: formula feeding and sleep training. So highlight where she said sleep training actually damages brain cells, which is what the Pediatrician was correctly refuting? She simply said that CIO might have affects on brain development, not 'damage brain cells' which he is refuting. She is arguing that there is mental positives to your child's cognitive development by not practicing CIO as far as future brain psychological development due to positive reinforcement being the ones for infants to most likely carry on into cognitive development. I mean, I could be wrong and missing it, but I saw nothing in that article about 'brain cell damage' or 'Killing brain cells'. We're talking about psychological cognitive development, not physical damage. As far as the formula feeding: Yes, I agree, she is a little overdrawn on her credentials there, and I'd trust my pediatrician over my psychologist on my child's physical health any day. ActusRhesus posted:funny you should mention that. Featuring our very favorite Dr. Bob Sears: Or Dr. Sears....
CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:She actually did kind of say that. And even if she didn't and her claims are limited to behavioral issues unrelated to brain development (is that possible? I don't know, I'm not a neurologist) even that has been refuted. There is simply nothing to suggest any long term behavioral harm in using sleep training methods at an appropriate age. (Most say 6 months) I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I want to see other child development psychologists reign in on this instead of a bunch of pediatricians before I really call it 'refuted'I'd also point out that you should probably check out the 5 or 6 articles in response to that study at the bottom, even if you ignore the ones involving Dr. N CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 20:30 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 08:30 |
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:you can agree to disagree over whether you would use sleep training on your kid or not, but disagreeing with the statement that there is no credible evidence to suggest sleep training leads to behavioral issues is like disagreeing with the statement that vaccines don't cause autism. The study got called out because it reviewed mainly the physical health of the child and parent, and ignored what Dr. N's original study was about : Mental development. Its not a very good refutation, and is kind of the issue, the study focused on the PEDIATRIC points of interest (Physical health and wellness) and ignores what Dr. N is trying to imply towards mental and character development. quote:Overall it seems that the authors tried to make their data fit a pressing research question. Unfortunately, what has resulted is a study that has no bearing on the question of interest, and thus more research remains needed. Despite what the authors would like us to believe, we are no closer to knowing the long-term effects of sleep training than we were prior to the publication of this article. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Jan 22, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 20:33
|
|