Vaccines DO Cause Autism Shock!

Written By: - Date published: 7:29 pm, June 2nd, 2016 - 266 comments
Categories: health and safety, International, science, video, youtube - Tags: ,

266 comments on “Vaccines DO Cause Autism Shock! ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. ianmac 1
    2 June 2016 at 8:11 pm

    Phew! Out of the mouths of Babes.
    That phony English “doctor” has a lot to answer for. Wonder how many people became ill or died because of his bullshit?
    However Hoskings no doubt would dismiss the contrary evidence. He knows stuff.

    • te reo putake 1.1
      2 June 2016 at 8:23 pm

      Equally, you’ve got to wonder how many lives young Arturo will save with his post. If a kid this young has a bullshit detector this finely tuned, there’s definitely hope for this world.

    • Yuri 1.2
      2 June 2016 at 9:04 pm

      You wonder how many people died because of “his bullshit”?

      I’ll take a stab: how about zero.

      Yes, zero.

      Why should it be anything other than zero?

      You mindless dweebs see the whole “debate” as pro-vaccination vs. anti-vaccination, as portrayed by the media, who have a hugely vested interest in provoking the strongest possible reactions from all concerned.

      Reality is quite different.

      NZ MoH make a big deal of “hospitalised” measles cases, as if measles is this terrible disease, seemingly as deadly as cholera or ebola.

      Why don’t you do some homework and turn your bullshit detectors towards everything including the Ministry of Health, the drug sector and the politicians, all of whom have their own agenda (and it’s not necessarily always aligned with peoples’ health)?

      Simplistic reactionary garbage of either persuasion doesn’t contribute anything to wider understanding or knowledge.

      • stunned mullet 1.2.1
        2 June 2016 at 9:10 pm

        What is this agenda that the MoH, politicians and drug sector have in relation to MMR vaccine ?

        • Yuri 1.2.1.1
          2 June 2016 at 9:25 pm

          1. Maximise revenue for drug companies.
          2. Maximise perception that politicians actually give a fuck about health as opposed to their own popularity with the electorate.
          3. Perpetuating traditional, structural models of medicine that are highly hierarchical and populist in character.
          4. Scaring the hell out of everyone with misinformation and scaremongering concerning real risks, in order to achieve 1-3 above.

          You get the picture. You’re being played, but either can’t see it or don’t care (or both)

          Say you’re a parent who wishes your child to have the Rubella vaccine but for your own reasons don’t wish your child to have the Measles or Mumps vaccines. Your reasons might be health-based, economic, or ideological (for example). What is the system’s response? “Get fucked! You pay your tax, and we decide what’s good for your child”. It’s take it (three vaccines in one) or leave it (no vaccines).

          Take Measles as an example. Do you know how many deaths there have been from Measles in NZ in the last 100 years, compared to kids squashed in driveways? Do you know what YOUR risk of dying a Measles-related death is? How does it compare with driving a car, or riding a bicycle with/without a helmet (all choices). If you listened to Nicky Turner from the quasi-governmental “Immunisation Advisory Centre”, or any drug company, you’d think that Measles would creep up and kill your babies in the night.

          Before you ask, no, I’m not some crazy “anti-vaxxer”.

          • Colonial Viper 1.2.1.1.1
            2 June 2016 at 9:49 pm

            Some simpleton minds use vaccination as a morally religious symbol of responsible parenting.

            • Yuri 1.2.1.1.1.1
              2 June 2016 at 10:17 pm

              Indeed, but it goes deeper than that.

              All parents want what is best for their children. They would pretty much universally place themselves in harm’s way if their child(ren) could be safe as a result.

              Politicians and drug companies have long-identified this very basic protection instinct as a point of manipulation and control.

              In a sense, vaccination suggests to parents that by going along with what we are told by medical professionals, doctors, etc., IS the responsibility of a good parent (with the implication that the converse is also true).

            • b waghorn 1.2.1.1.1.2
              3 June 2016 at 7:03 am

              You got kids CV ? When you are faced the choice of getting you child a vaccine with a tiny risk factor compared with letting them run the gauntlet of some horrible viruses, its a no brainer in my view.

          • Chooky 1.2.1.1.2
            2 June 2016 at 10:11 pm

            +100 Yuri

          • Ovid 1.2.1.1.3
            2 June 2016 at 10:38 pm

            Do you know how many deaths there have been from Measles in NZ in the last 100 years, compared to kids squashed in driveways?

            The latest data we have is from the Ministry of Health’s mortality table for 2013 (excel spreadsheet)

            That year, 5 people died from “Viral infections characterized by skin and mucous membrane lesions”, which is a range of diseases listed here – including measles.

            646 died of influenza, so your annual flu jab is a higher priority in any one year, but if there was a “being hit by a bus” vaccine I’d have that too.

            I think a lot of people really have no understanding of the history of disease in New Zealand. In 1918, NZ failed to quarantine the Talune in Samoa – a ship carrying people infected with the Spanish Flu. 22% of the Samoan population died.

            NZ suffered polio epidemics roughly once a decade from 1916 to 1956. Depending on the outbreak, 2-10% of cases were fatal. Jonas Salk’s vaccine was introduced in the 1950s and now the world is very close to eliminating the disease as it did smallpox.

            More recently, the meningitis epidemic that flared between 1991 and 2007 was brought under control with an immuisation programme that began in 2004.

            Yes, I do affirm the human right to refuse medical treatment. But in terms of a simple risk assessment, I’m more than happy to roll up my sleeve and suffer that brief prick in the arm. Unless someone has an allergy to eggs or has some kind of immuno-suppressed disease like HIV, or even a simple fear of needles, I’m baffled why they would put themselves and their loved ones at risk in failing to follow the immunisation programme.

            • Colonial Viper 1.2.1.1.3.1
              2 June 2016 at 10:41 pm

              sorry mate where’s your evidence that the flu jab last year or the year before or even the year before that made one whit of difference to NZ mortality from the flu.

              Other studies done overseas show that the flu jab makes minor to fuck all difference to flu deaths, flu hospitalisations and time off work due to the flu.

              • Incognito …
                2 June 2016 at 10:59 pm

                Links please.

              • Ovid …
                2 June 2016 at 11:01 pm

                Some random peer-reviewed articles from the Public Library of Science, an open access scholarly publication

                https://www.plos.org/search?q=influenza+vaccination+efficacy

                Vaccination of approximately 45% of Knox school-aged children with influenza vaccine was associated with a 35% annual reduction (4.86 per 1000) in ED visit rates attributable to influenza

                http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0015097

                Influenza vaccination programs in the US produce a substantial health benefit in terms of averted cases, clinic visits and hospitalizations.

                http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0066312

                The split-influenza vaccine was effective in preventing influenza-associated hospitalizations in adults aged under 65. The intradermal vaccine was moderately effective in those aged 65 and over.

                http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0112294

                This analysis indicates that compared to a TIIP, Ontario’s UIIP reduces influenza illness attack rates, morbidity, and mortality at reasonable cost to the health care payer.

                http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000256

              • Colonial Viper …
                2 June 2016 at 11:10 pm

                In 2014 the Cochrane Collaboration released their latest update on the effective of the flu vaccination on healthy adults.

                http://www.cochrane.org/CD001269/ARI_vaccines-to-prevent-influenza-in-healthy-adults

                This update analysed reports involving over 100 separate studies. Their summary included the following:

                The preventive effect of parenteral inactivated influenza vaccine on healthy adults is small: at least 40 people would need vaccination to avoid one ILI case (95% confidence interval (CI) 26 to 128) and 71 people would need vaccination to prevent one case of influenza (95% CI 64 to 80). Vaccination shows no appreciable effect on working days lost or hospitalisation.

                (my bold)

                The protection against ILI that is given by the administration of inactivated influenza vaccine to pregnant women is uncertain or at least very limited; the effect on their newborns is not statistically significant.

                The effectiveness of live aerosol vaccines on healthy adults is similar to inactivated vaccines: 46 people (95% CI 29 to 115) would need immunisation to avoid one ILI case.

                • McFlock …
                  3 June 2016 at 11:53 am

                  From your link:

                  Authors’ conclusions:

                  Influenza vaccines have a very modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost in the general population, including pregnant women. No evidence of association between influenza vaccination and serious adverse events was found in the comparative studies considered in the review.

                  Modest benefit, no serious downside. Only a moron would turn that down.

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    3 June 2016 at 12:01 pm

                    Fuck putting shit into my body for fuck all benefit. NNT of 40 plus? That’s a smidgeon off statistical noise.

                    • McFlock …
                      3 June 2016 at 12:29 pm

                      Stop using words you don’t understand. Anything involving statistics or science would be a start.

                      A million people vaccinated at that rate means twenty five thousand fewer cases.

                      That’s 25k fewer people off work, or spreading it, or in the doctor’s waiting room, or giving it to old people who drop off sooner. Vaccination is a population-level intervention that saves lives directly and indirectly, as well as a personal protection that your own link says has no serious personal downside. It’s not funded by the government to suck up to “big pharma”, it’s because society is stronger and healthier when people take their shots.

                      But because you think the universe rotates around you, you know better. 🙄

              • Colonial Viper …
                2 June 2016 at 11:12 pm

                UK 2015 flu jab given to millions “useless”

                And what a waste of tax payers NHS money…

                http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11393560/Flu-jab-given-to-millions-is-useless.html

                • Phil …
                  3 June 2016 at 12:50 pm

                  The stupid, it burns.

                  The flu jab is a cocktail designed to protect you against the expected next versions of the myriad of mutating viruses we collectively identify by “flu-like symptoms”.

                  Sometimes, despite the best efforts of thousands of scientists and researchers, the virus mutates in unexpected ways and the vaccine cocktail is not able to protect you as well, or at all. That’s not a failure of a vaccine, or vaccines in general. It’s statistical inevitability that at some point in your lifetime you’re going to get a flu jab which isn’t able to protect you against that years version.

                  • The New Student …
                    3 June 2016 at 1:02 pm

                    +1. Biology 101, literally. Each to their own, you decide what you stick into yourself. Just be mindful?

                  • Don't worry. Be happy …
                    5 June 2016 at 6:20 pm

                    ……Or you could just wash your hands before you eat….there is a study done by US Defence that shows huge reduction of flu, colds and food poisoning cases if people can just wash their hands five times a day. Not really all that often. There is something about the bacterial and viral load on unwashed hands over the course of a day, gently stewing away at body heat that overwhelms your natural immunity and makes you sick if you stuff it all in your gob. Wish I could link to the study. Can’t. Sorry. Worth trying folks. All it takes is soap and water or hand sanitiser….if none available don’t eat.

            • John shears 1.2.1.1.3.2
              3 June 2016 at 2:32 pm

              @ OVID Now ain’t that the truth. Thanks

          • Whateva next? 1.2.1.1.4
            2 June 2016 at 11:21 pm

            I totally agree with you Yuri, the issue has become emotive and a big distraction.front page news when some one gets measles? Why so different from the last generation? It wasn’t as though we all caught the plague, it was almost a right of passage through childhood, along with rubella, mumps and chicken pox.
            Are children healthier now? I don’t think so.
            As you say, there needs to be a balanced discussion, but drug companies have successfully indoctrinated fear into the masses, there is little hope of any logic now.

          • Richardrawshark 1.2.1.1.5
            3 June 2016 at 9:32 am

            Yes you are Yuri.

            I just get the impression there’s a large group of society who deep down think they can argue any point and win with their oration skills regardless of facts.

            They often pick contentious issues and speak as if from a point of authority and knowledge about a subject. Truth being they are just arguing hoping to win a known wrong point of view for a boost to their ego’s.

            The tinfoil straw man argument you threw out was just proof of the lie of your last line.

            {Before you ask, no, I’m not some crazy “anti-vaxxer”.}

          • red-blooded 1.2.1.1.6
            4 June 2016 at 4:22 pm

            I’m coming onto this discussion really late, but speaking as the child of a person who went almost completely deaf because of measles when he was 5, I’d say it’s a pretty good disease to avoid if you can. There can be significant harm without fatality. This disease has done real harm to my father, and through him to my mother and the rest of our family. If he could go back and take the vaccine, I don’t think he’d think twice.

          • Tane Harre 1.2.1.1.7
            4 June 2016 at 4:38 pm

            Africa
            In 1990 with a 58% vaccination rate measles killed 395,000, in 2008 with a 70% (my est. relying on linear graph) it killed 28,000 people.

            Before anyone starts going, well that isn’t NZ…no it isn’t. But with high numbers you can expect our hospital system to collapse, secondary cause death rates should be better here though.

            http://mgafrica.com/article/2015-08-13-dr-congo-battles-measles-outbreak-but-africa-has-made-big-gains-in-beating-the-disease

          • Frank Macskasy 1.2.1.1.8
            8 June 2016 at 9:56 pm

            Yuri, vaccines aren’t simply a means for pharma corporations to maximise profits. (Though that is a prime motive in capitalist systems.)

            Vaccines were also used by the former Soviet Union, and I’m guessing their state-owned pharmacological companies weren’t beholding to any private or institutional shareholders.

      • joe90 1.2.2
        2 June 2016 at 9:49 pm

        NZ MoH make a big deal of “hospitalised” measles cases, as if measles is this terrible disease, seemingly as deadly as cholera or ebola.

        122k dead children say otherwise.
        /

        It has been estimated that 7–8 million children died each year due to measles virus infections in the pre-vaccine era. That there were 122 000 measles deaths globally in 2012, and that vaccination resulted in a 78% drop between 2000 and 2012 worldwide,

        http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/path.4457/full

        • Colonial Viper 1.2.2.1
          2 June 2016 at 9:59 pm

          Those deaths are of children in developing or third world countries who are immunosuppressed due to poor nutrition, insufficient clean water or other adverse factors.

          In other words your attempt to apply those statistics to the NZ context is highly unscientific.

          • joe90 1.2.2.1.1
            2 June 2016 at 10:16 pm

            highly unscientific.

            edit: fair enough, withdrawn and apologies

            • weka 1.2.2.1.1.1
              2 June 2016 at 10:19 pm

              Ad hominems?

              I can’t see how such scientific snobbery is going to help either.

            • Colonial Viper 1.2.2.1.1.2
              2 June 2016 at 10:22 pm

              Im just sayin’ thats all, nothing personal mate. A childs immune performance is directly related to how supportive their nutritional and environmental status is.

              Thought you should know that.

              • Yuri …
                2 June 2016 at 10:34 pm

                +1 Viper.

              • joe90 …
                2 June 2016 at 10:53 pm

                I’ve posted previously about my family’s experiences during the mid fifties polio epidemic in provincial NZ, but I can’t find it so –

                absolutely terrifying for a large extended clan with close to twenty children between them with two of those children contracting the disease and sixty years later both remain disabled, one seriously, the other not so bad.

                For several years following the epidemic myself and my siblings were almost completely isolated, so much so my parents upped stakes leaving house, family and a thriving business moving to an isolated rural community in Hawke bay.

                When we arrived we were again quarantined until it became apparent none of us carried the disease although it was during those years my brother contracted pertussis and to this day he suffers all manner of respiratory problems.

                The 1961 vaccination campaign changed everything and 55 years later we’re all still kicking.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  2 June 2016 at 10:58 pm

                  In 40’s 50’s 60’s and 70’s NZ I would have opted to take the polio vaccination myself.

                • Yuri …
                  3 June 2016 at 6:14 am

                  As I said, this isn’t a binary “vaccinate” or “no vaccinate” situation for everybody who questions vaccinations. There are many diseases, and vaccinations that are emerging over time. Also, our understanding of the human immune system also develops over time.

              • Whateva next? …
                2 June 2016 at 11:23 pm

                And previous exposure in the community, so measles may be more dangerous to a community not previously exposed to measles.

              • Sirenia …
                3 June 2016 at 8:19 am

                No, hundreds of thousands of healthy white middle class kids got polio and died, or had permanent paralysis. Anyone can get measles. Roald Dahl’s child died of it. Just as we will find that anyone, including healthy white people, will get zika as the epidemic spreads.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  3 June 2016 at 8:48 am

                  No, hundreds of thousands of healthy white middle class kids got polio and died, or had permanent paralysis.

                  Most serious cases were in working class or poor/deprived neighbourhoods. Of course some others were affected too.

                  But 96% or more of people who contracted polio naturally had immune systems capable of shrugging it off with no more than flu like symptoms.

                  HOWEVER as I have said before, I myself would have chosen to get the polio vaccination during the peak risk period of the 40s 50s or 60s or early 70s.

            • weka 1.2.2.1.1.3
              2 June 2016 at 10:43 pm

              Cheers joe.

          • Little Kiwi 1.2.2.1.3
            2 June 2016 at 10:44 pm

            It’s really good for promoting the vaccines here though.
            Sadly the diseases will never be eradicated for the reasons you mention.
            Then these poor kids are given vaccines they can’t respond to, in some cases perpetuating the very diseases the vaccines are supposed to prevent (if they are live attenuated). I have nothing against the concept of vaccines but the business motivation behind them is ruthless.

          • Incognito 1.2.2.1.4
            2 June 2016 at 11:10 pm

            You’re correct that the stats cannot and should not be applied to NZ ceteris paribus but the knowledge is not limited by any boundaries, geographical or otherwise. I think most doctors will agree that no patients and no two cases are the same. Very unscientific perhaps but very true nevertheless; science cannot and must not be the judge of all things.

          • Cricklewood 1.2.2.1.5
            3 June 2016 at 10:34 am

            I’d wager given the current housing issues that there are now large numbers of kids in nz that are ‘immunosuppressed due to poor nutrition, insufficient clean water or other adverse factors’

            • Little Kiwi 1.2.2.1.5.1
              3 June 2016 at 2:18 pm

              Exactly Cricklewood. Without adequate protein and nutrients, it’s not possible to launch immune response to infections, let alone vaccines.

              Too many people are living in crowded, damp, cold conditions which encourage disease. Many can’t afford decent food on top of the rent. Working class kiwis can’t compete in a global housing market that thrives on a supply shortage. We need to turn things around and turn houses back into homes. The future of New Zealand’s children is not looking bright under the current regime.

            • whateva next? 1.2.2.1.5.2
              3 June 2016 at 5:25 pm

              and should the government spend the money on a quick fix vaccine or ensuring nutritious food, warmth, shelter etc?

        • Yuri 1.2.2.2
          2 June 2016 at 10:32 pm

          That isn’t a serious response or comment is it?

          You can’t possibly compare Measles with Cholera or Ebola.

          Do you know what a normal, healthy person’s chance of dying from Measles is, compared with really dangerous diseases, or diabetes- or smoking-related deaths?

          How many people in NZ (use a percentage if you wish) who contract Measles die from this disease?

          Are you know this with certainty (as opposed to estimates)?

          Are you able to establish how many vaccination-related adverse reactions (whatever they may be) there are in NZ for any given period? (I know the answer, I just want to know if you know).

          • Incognito 1.2.2.2.1
            2 June 2016 at 11:21 pm

            I don’t get your comment but since this post is about vaccination I think pulling in diabetes or smoking-related diseases is somewhat disingenuous.

            Although there is always an attempt to write a cause of death of the death certificate this means very little in the sense that you require or ask for. In any case, medical science deals with probabilities (yes, stats!) not (absolute) certainties.

            Do you work for MoH by any chance?

        • Bill 1.2.2.3
          2 June 2016 at 10:56 pm

          I’m kind of curious as to the proportions of people who are against vaccination period, versus those who are enthusiasts for all possible vaccinations, versus those who would be selective. (eg – fuck off with that flu vaccination)

          • weka 1.2.2.3.1
            2 June 2016 at 10:59 pm

            Yep, and it can be broken down further into people who are against vaccination for themselves/their kids (i.e. it’s a personal choice issue) vs people who are against vaccination for all people (people who think vaccination is bad full stop), etc. Which is why these very polarised arguments don’t serve us very well.

            • Bill 1.2.2.3.1.1
              2 June 2016 at 11:24 pm

              And those who think that particular personal choice should be rightly circumscribed by society.

              Welcome to the blue btw 😉

              • weka …
                3 June 2016 at 12:04 am

                oh yeah just noticed that!

                The rightly is a matter of perspective that we don’t get to talk about because of the extreme polarisation. I think there’s been one mention so far in this thread on the humans rights in refusing or determining medical treatment. So we can talk about libertarian vs collective ethics, and probably authoritarian ones too, and that brings up the whole statist nature of how you coerce people to have medical treatment in a democracy ;-), but it misses out the politics around medical ethics, patient rights, and some pretty core principles around body self-determination.

                I just saw a pro-vaccination tweet that presented itself as factual but wasn’t (in a mere 140 characters). I was going to say something, but it’s twitter so best not, which got me to thinking about how many voices are missing from teh conversation because to put your head above the parapet is risky. So we get left with the voices of the extremes, and both sides are spouting bullshit alongside the good stuff.

            • Incognito 1.2.2.3.1.2
              2 June 2016 at 11:29 pm

              Once you come to a certain age the range of vaccinations become limited except for some booster shots possibly (e.g. tetanus).

          • ropata 1.2.2.3.2
            2 June 2016 at 11:15 pm

            I shoulda taken that flu jab, spent Sunday spewing and Monday delirious in bed

            • Whateva next? 1.2.2.3.2.1
              2 June 2016 at 11:28 pm

              I have never had the flu jab and watch my colleagues drop like flies around me every winter, having proudly marched off to get theirs. I have about 2 days a year sick, and get flu about every 5-6 years. I would love to see some honest research into the true impact of the flu jab, but I know I never will

              • Colonial Viper …
                2 June 2016 at 11:56 pm

                It’s easy to understand mate: flu symptoms are not a result of the flu virus, they are a result of the correct (or not so correct) immune response to the flu.

                If you’ve sat around with these colleagues while they have been suffering from the flu, you have definitely been exposed to the flu viruses they had, and your immune system has successfully managed a detente with them.

                While theirs did not.

                • Richardrawshark …
                  3 June 2016 at 9:36 am

                  WHAT?

                  So without the flu virus your bodies immune system would spontaneously react like that.

                  Gawd man, it’s the virus that causes any symptoms of having said virus.

                • whateva next? …
                  3 June 2016 at 11:45 am

                  oh, so are suggesting that understanding our immune systems, and enhancing them maybe more fruitful than just throwing shit at them?

                  • Little Kiwi …
                    3 June 2016 at 2:24 pm

                    On his deathbed, Pasteur recanted, saying that Bernard was right; the Terrain is everything, the Germ is nothing.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      3 June 2016 at 2:34 pm

                      Or as is said in chiropractic: health is about the soil, not the seed

              • Phil …
                3 June 2016 at 12:57 pm

                I have never had the flu jab and watch my colleagues drop like flies around me every winter, having proudly marched off to get theirs.

                I’ve got a 90 year old great uncle who smokes a packet a day. So I guess we can throw out all the research showing smoking kills, eh?

                FFS…

          • Incognito 1.2.2.3.3
            2 June 2016 at 11:27 pm

            Selective.

            • Whateva next? 1.2.2.3.3.1
              3 June 2016 at 7:39 am

              So is the research produced by drug companies unfortunately.

          • joe90 1.2.2.3.4
            2 June 2016 at 11:31 pm

            In my youth I was vaccinated up the wazoo against most anything a fella on the road could catch – TB smallpox, cholera, yellow fever, typhoid, encephalitis, plus a couple I can’t recall.

            More recently I’ve spent time in Asia so I’ve been vaccinated against pneumococcal infections, hepatitis A and B and rabies.

            But despite exhortations from my mate the ICU nurse I’ve never had a flu shot although when he regales me with tales of the god awful flu’s* contracted by some of the folk he looks after I do have second thoughts.

            (birds he reckons – half a dozen or so every year with three or four dying)*

            • Richardrawshark 1.2.2.3.4.1
              3 June 2016 at 9:43 am

              On a humorous note on vaccines.

              I fell off a trail bike in Rhodes Isl, Greece. I went to hospital, drunk tourist/worker, 🙂

              A HUGE Greek nurse came in. In a gestapo way indicated I was to pull my pants down and lay over the hospital bed.
              Where she suddenly produced the biggest syringe she had(honestly a VETS Horse syringe) to stab me as hard as she could in the ass with a Tetanus shot.

              I will not repeat the Greek I suddenly fluently spoke at that moment.

      • Chooky 1.2.3
        2 June 2016 at 10:15 pm

        +100 Yuri

    • Whateva next? 1.3
      3 June 2016 at 7:00 am

      I found it scary that a child believes he understands such a complex subject and that the world is so black and white! I am sure he will go far.

  2. tony 2
    2 June 2016 at 8:11 pm

    Pure propaganda .. insulting to intelligent thinking observation consideration and totally lacking in any proof that putting Mercury, formaldehyde, monosodium glutimate, bovine extract, acetone, aluminim potassium sulfate, fetal bovine serum, meullers growth medium, calf serum, phenol, detergent, inorganic salts and sugars among many other foreign bodies to be injected into a childs body, to do what ….

    • Hanswurst 2.1
      2 June 2016 at 8:27 pm

      Apparently, if you remove most of the words in the above comment and rearrange the others, it forms a sentence.

      Having said that, I think the video is insulting to anyone’s intelligence, regardless of their stance on vaccines. Nothing against the kid, of course. He’s a kid after all.

    • Colonial Viper 2.2
      2 June 2016 at 9:55 pm

      Did any of you receive the polio vaccination in the 1950s or 1960s? You might be one of 98M people who received monkey virus SV40 contaminated vaccinations.

      If so, you are at higher risk of many different malignancies/tumours.

      Trust the authorities.

      • Little Kiwi 2.2.1
        2 June 2016 at 10:24 pm

        I had the Sabin vaccine in the early 70’s. After that, there were issues with my development (it seemed to go backwards) and I had trouble walking until the age of about 6.

        The doctors wondered if I might have developed autism. An immunologist told me that the vaccine was contaminated at that time. I was later diagnosed with common variable immune deficiency. He believes the attenuated virus in the live vaccine became active because of the defects in my immune system.

        • Colonial Viper 2.2.1.1
          2 June 2016 at 10:32 pm

          Thanks for your comment Little Kiwi.

          As you probably know, the wide range of interconnections between immune system activity and central nervous system (brain and spinal cord) activity are just being understood now (neuroimmunology).

          As per the standard laws of nature, effects flow both ways. Change the nervous system and you will change the immune system. Change the immune system and you will change the nervous system.

          It sounds like you made it through without the most severe effects. Someone else may not have been as lucky – and their case may not have been recognised by professionals.

      • Incognito 2.2.2
        2 June 2016 at 10:51 pm

        [links required]

        Polio has been largely eradicated in Western countries as a result of the vaccination campaign.

        Who are the “authorities” you should or should not trust?

        Whom can you trust if any?

        The road to Hell is paved with good intentions so we should just give up trying to improve things because the outcome will be the same regardless?

        Did you know that viruses are being used to combat cancer?

        Did you know that the polio virus is being trialled as an anti-cancer treatment?

        Did you know that vaccines are the new rage in novel cancer treatments?

        • Colonial Viper 2.2.2.1
          2 June 2016 at 11:01 pm

          Mate not much of that shit works in the real world, but it all costs a massive amount of money.

          And if authorities were serious about massively reducing the rates of cancer they easily could, and it wouldn’t involve pie in the sky technology.

          • Incognito 2.2.2.1.1
            2 June 2016 at 11:45 pm

            Actually, it does work and yes, it does cost. Do you want a free lunch and fries with that? Expect more of those personalised treatments to become available; how society deals with the costs is an entirely different question and you’re muddying the waters again by pulling in issues unrelated to the question at hand. BTW, the market model of developing life-saving drugs, for example, must change but that’s easier said than done.

            Your second sentence makes no sense because it would mean trusting the “authorities”, whoever they are (which you haven’t answered).

            Lastly, WTF is “pie in the sky technology”? Are you some kind of regressive Luddite? Maybe you should read that piece by Kompridis that got Bill going not so long ago (although he refused to read it …). I have a feeling that I feel now like you often (?) feel about the state of NZ politics and Labour/left in particular.

            • Colonial Viper 2.2.2.1.1.1
              2 June 2016 at 11:52 pm

              Hey mate you swallow all the pie in the sky corporate technology that you want, this country will never be able to afford it, our DHBs can’t even afford to pay for carers to look after the old.

              • Incognito …
                3 June 2016 at 12:18 am

                I see, now it is corporate technology, the fastest way to lose one’s Soul. What makes you think that I’m happy with the current situation of Big Pharma ruling the roost? For reasons I won’t divulge I’m very keen to change the current model and so are many others.

                How we as a nation can afford medical care is a very necessary and very difficult debate that we must have, just like other nations have to; NZ is by no means unique.

                Ever heard of moving goal posts? The OP was and still is about vaccinations. Please try to stay on topic and don’t not divert away to your hobby horses, no matter how important they are (they are!).

                • weka …
                  3 June 2016 at 12:25 am

                  The OP isn’t really about vaccinations. It’s simply ridicule instead of informed debate and it doesn’t do much to help us work through the issues. People have legitimate concerns about vaccination. Misusing autism* to attack those people to basically tell them they’re fucking stupid and should shut up and do what they are told just retrenches people even further into their positions and shut the conversation down (although I am pleased that the Standardistas have been restrained and managed to a decent level of civility).

                  *ditto the anti-vaxxers.

                  • Incognito …
                    3 June 2016 at 1:04 am

                    Fair enough, but this is not OM and CV is dragging all sorts of things into it without actually addressing or answering anything, which is becoming increasingly annoying and frustrating. As far as I’m concerned he reaches troll-nuisance level at times and he can do so much better so why is he playing these silly ‘games’? He hates it when others (e.g. Labour?) play silly games that lead to nothing. Bugger it, I’m tired and need to go to bed. Good night and till next time.

                • Colonial Viper …
                  3 June 2016 at 12:27 am

                  *Shrug*.

                  The allopathic medical model is good for some things, and shit at other things. That’s all I’m saying. And I ain’t stopping you from injecting anything you want to into your body.

                  • Incognito …
                    3 June 2016 at 12:54 am

                    I raise & see your *Shrug* with a *Deep Sigh*.

                    None of that addresses anything that has been raised in the previous comments (talking of moving and inventing new goal posts) and seems a feeble attempt to portray me as some kind of ‘junky’ injecting myself (or others) with all sorts.

                    If you keep going down this path you will end up a politician like John Key and I like to think this is not your desire.

                    • Whateva Next …
                      3 June 2016 at 10:03 am

                      I note that those who do believe vaccines are the answer to so much, also presume their initial premises are correct, so the rest of the conversation/debate is meaningless.
                      Immune system is immensely complex (and incredible), so why do we think that the answer to everything is a “vaccine”?
                      I don’t think it’s that simple, and being patronised by people who like simple answers does not reassure me.

        • weka 2.2.2.2
          3 June 2016 at 12:10 am

          Trust has to be earned. While medical science has done many good things it has also done a lot of damage and isn’t in great shape at the moment in terms of trustworthiness. This is a very large part of the culture of people who choose to not vaccinate. It’s not an ignorant rebellion as some like to frame it, it’s based on real experience of people having their health and lives damaged. Until those people can be part of the conversation and have their concerns worked on there will always be the mistrust and the divide.

          Pie in the sky? How’s this,

          http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/12/obama-state-of-the-union-address-2016-cancer-cure-initiative

          • Incognito 2.2.2.2.1
            3 June 2016 at 12:43 am

            O.k. weka, thank you for your comment, but I’m going to be ‘thick’.

            Who or what is “medical science”? Is this the “authorities” that CV was referring to? Who are they and why is it that they cannot be trusted?

            The “rebellion” that you mention, is that a consequence of the “damage” (?) that medical science has done or could it be that there are competing interests at play that have deliberately spread misinformation, just like with CC? For example, the anti-vaccination ‘movement’ have some interesting roots, don’t you think? People don’t rebel just like that, especially not when their health or their childrens’ health is at stake.

            Not sure why you linked to that article. This is politicians (in the US) speaking. Didn’t John Key recently claim that agricultural greenhouse gas emissions will be solved in 3 to 4 years? Do you believe him? When politicians make these far-reaching promises why do you think they will succeed or fail? Does it require “pie in the sky” stuff, AKA rocket science, or shitloads of money, or political will, or something else?

            • weka 2.2.2.2.1.1
              3 June 2016 at 3:22 pm

              These are good questions Incognito, thanks. I won’t speak for CV (would be interested in his perspective if he as more time to explain). I’d use the term medical science to cover the whole gamut from research scientists and their work, to public health officials, and big pharma. It’s just a short hand. And yes, there are major trust issues.

              A few things to clarify. The people that I know who haven’t vaccinated their kids are largely my generation who made those decisions in an informed way before the MMR/autism mess arrived ie people who had their kids before the late 90s. That was pre-internet too, and the information came via books and grassroots groups often associated with things like homebirth and breastfeeding etc. It wasn’t the rapid controversy it is today. It was actually pretty normal for a certain percentage of the population to do that.

              That included people who chose which vaccines they were ok with and which they weren’t, so for some it wasn’t blanket anti-vax position. In fact I don’t remember the term ‘anti-vaxxer’ from back then.

              So when you talk about the roots of people who don’t vaccinate, that’s where I come from. I don’t think I’ve ever read the anti-vax woman who is often cited as an ignoramus (I can’t even remember her name). I find much of the loud and vociferous anti-vax campaigning a waste of my time, in part because I feel like I already have a good grasp of the basic issues and because I don’t have kids, but also because they have bad PR and too often poor scientific literacy. However it’s interesting for me because a lot has changed in that time, including the fact that most kids now don’t get measles, so the chances of getting these diseases as a teen or adult is much higher. We didn’t have that issue back in the day.

              The “rebellion” that you mention, is that a consequence of the “damage” (?) that medical science has done or could it be that there are competing interests at play that have deliberately spread misinformation, just like with CC?

              I don’t know about that in terms of the MMR debate. But in general I would say that there are several things going on. There are informed people with good critical brains who are aware of serious problems caused directly by medical science and how it is applied. There are also many people who read things on the internet and who don’t have any scientific literacy and often don’t have critical thinking skills. They tend to pick up memes and pass them around, and some of that is coming straight out of manipulation by commercial interests. Too often it’s inaccurate and bullshit. But they do have some cause for concern, and the other group of people is able to explain what those are. There is definitely a massive issue of medical science mistakes, and both groups know that. It’s just that one is better at explaining it in rational terms.

              I can give you a long list of the damages done. And many people have direct experience of that, or know people who have had that. So I would never characterise the problem as being vested interests (although that exists too).

              The other factor is that very large numbers of people want their health care to include thing that are outside of the medical model. The medical model is great at some things but crap at lots of others. Those other health care models are very important to people, and I’d say that nearly all people I know who have chosen to not vaccinate use multiple models not just the medical one. Until those models are understood by medical people (including public health) we are at an impasse.

              For example, the anti-vaccination ‘movement’ have some interesting roots, don’t you think? People don’t rebel just like that, especially not when their health or their childrens’ health is at stake.

              The people who make an informed choice to not vaccinate are doing so out of concern for their children. For me the MMR thing is not that important (although I definitely think it’s not ok the amount of misinformation that’s been spread about), because I can think of good reasons other than concern about autism for not using that vaccine. Ditto the older generation who chose to not vaccinate.

              That’s the people who don’t vaccinate. The people who insist that those people are stupid and dangerous, are IMO just as ignorant and illogical as many of the people reacting against medical science. It’s actually gobsmacking how irrational the vax-insisters can be, considering their claim is to be the rational ones. I find it hugely concerning that someone like me who is well informed, reasonably scientifically literate at a lay person level and has good critical thinking skills, won’t debate with them. They’re just as rabid and anti-social as the hard core anti-vaxxers. And ignorant. (TRP’s post being an example). I’d do a post on the more general issues of culture and working with other models but I can’t be bothered with the aggro or the stupid. That’s why I appreciated your questions, because they’re going to open up the discussion and take us somewhere useful rather than just retrenching everyone into battle lines.

              Sorry for such a long comment 😳

              • Molly …
                5 June 2016 at 10:34 am

                The name of the woman in NZ who started the vaccination debate is perhaps, Hilary Butler.

                She did so because of her own personal adverse reaction to a vaccination that she took as part of a work requirement.

                I visited her when researching a project with the kids regarding the use of intravenous Vitamin C as a treatment for sepsis and/or infection. She spent a couple of hours with us talking about how Vitamin C works in the body to assist in the removal of toxins, and stayed off the topic of vaccinations, but her study and her organisation of research materials was impressive.

            • weka 2.2.2.2.1.2
              3 June 2016 at 3:31 pm

              The Obama link was a cheap shot, sorry. I rewatched reruns of The West Wing a few months back and there is the story line where the President does the same thing, says we’re going to cure cancer in 10 years etc. He comes to the idea from having dinner with a bunch of his doctor wife’s friends. It’s a good illustration of how medical science is applied.

  3. stunned mullet 3
    2 June 2016 at 8:21 pm

    The more real and compelling evidence that is presented that vaccines don’t cause autism the more push back you’ll get back from those who have convinced themselves that it does despite all the evidence to the contrary.

    However I suspect this was posted to try and bait one of the other authors so TRP could have a bit of biffo.

    Nowt as strange as folk.

    [C’mon, SM. I’m happy to bait anyone dumb enough to push the anti-vaxxer bollocks. I’m very generous like that 😉 But that wasn’t my motivation; it’s just an excellent video from an inspirational young man that’s well worth watching. TRP]

  4. KJT 4
    2 June 2016 at 8:34 pm

    [Deleted. Author abuse is not welcome. Only warning. TRP]

  5. weka 5
    2 June 2016 at 9:00 pm

    Meanwhile, people with autism are politicising around getting to define what autism is and means. For the people that want to use autism as a stick to beat up the anti-vaxxers on a political blog, perhaps you’d like to educate yourselves on the politics of autistic people.

  7. Ad 7
    2 June 2016 at 9:37 pm

    Awesome budding activist there.

    Hope he posts regularly.

  8. Dale 8
    2 June 2016 at 10:03 pm

    Love that clip!
    My wife works a government run child vaccine clinic and with the new policy of “no jab no pay” suddenly many antivaccirs changed their minds. Funny that.

    • Whateva next? 8.1
      2 June 2016 at 11:33 pm

      So you mean “no pay” for what exactly? Sounds more like control than informed choice, not strange at all they resigned themselves to being powerless.

  9. Sirenia 9
    2 June 2016 at 10:24 pm

    So autism is worse than dying from measles?

  10. One Two 10
    2 June 2016 at 10:31 pm

    This author clearly has a problem which he is externalising with yet another article clearly designed to antagonise, while trying to deceive himself

    Nobody could be stupid enough to take the video seriously. Its another sign of defeat

    Fortunately the pharma lies are being exposed around the world and the only outcome from this point is complete & total exposure

    It can’t, and won’t be stopped

    • ropata 10.1
      2 June 2016 at 11:27 pm

      let’s forget about tax havens, dirty politics, money laundering, fish dumping, and economic sabotage by the 1%

      which is all backed by loads of evidence and has been heavily reported in the MSM.

      instead we should be worried about vaccines, contrails, and the Archons coming to eat our souls!!!1! yep, because the other stuff is boring

      🙄🙄🙄
      FFS

      .

  11. Dale 11
    2 June 2016 at 11:27 pm

    The antivaccirs are right up there with vapour trails.
    If it’s such a great conspiracy then why would they themselves be affiliated with such poison.
    Look after your children and you take care of the community.

  12. RedLogix 12
    2 June 2016 at 11:53 pm

    Many decades past my partner did a three year course in naturopathy, and along the way I got to absorb by osmosis – and being the guinea pig for a lot of her experiments – a fair bit of it.

    What strikes me in hindsight is how very many of the ideas that I encountered back then have been subsequently validated by ‘science’ in the years since. What was scoffed at as ‘woo woo’ nuttery has become almost mainstream since. In particular it turns out that most of their ideas on nutrition, based on generations of observation and practise, are confirmed as spot on. By contrast it’s now plain that ‘science’ got in badly wrong for more than 40 years.

    From this I’ve learnt to be respectful of observational practioners, especially those who are part of a long-standing community or tradition. Often their mental models and pedagogy can be downright quirky or weird, but usually there is a foundation of truth underlying it.

    And eventually the scientific method guys plodding along behind eventually catch up – their models usually brings a valuable predictive and practical power that can be rolled out in a standardised, stable and repeatable manner.

    Taking positions in this debate between the ‘observational’ practitioners and the ‘deductive’ scientists is immature and childish. Both have their domains of strength and both would benefit humanity far better if they worked together instead of sneering at each other.

    • ropata 12.1
      3 June 2016 at 12:13 am

      I think the anti vaxxer movement only has legs because the USA is massively over medicated and the corporations really are sociopathic. And there have been some awful blunders by authorities in the past (245-T, thalidomide)

      However all fearmongering aside, the evidence (per Ovid, joe90, incognito above) has proven the worth of public vaccination programmes time and time again.

      • weka 12.1.1
        3 June 2016 at 12:19 am

        We’re still making major blunders, that hasn’t changed or decreased. It’s not fearmongering to be concerned about those things. And where fearmongering does happen, it happens on both sides.

        If the anti-vaxxers are the public face activists, most people who choose not to vaccinate aren’t in that group. And they predate the whole ‘movement’.

      • Colonial Viper 12.1.2
        3 June 2016 at 12:33 am

        Hey ropata how about you quit considering all vaccinations as being equal, and start to look at vaccinations like any other drug – to be considered on each ones merits, risks and benefits.

        And there are lots of examples where western governments or authorities have knowingly or unknowingly misled the public (and sometimes professionals) re: specific vaccinations, sometimes ending up in public harm, so I wouldn’t be so trusting if I were you.

        • ropata 12.1.2.1
          3 June 2016 at 12:43 am

          So you admit that some vaccines *are* worthwhile then?
          Did you see this piece on Story?

          On the West Coast, for example, the vaccination rate is 81 percent. Should measles take hold, it would sweep the population.

          This is serious — and it’s happening now. Already, the latest outbreak has spread to five regions, and closed three schools. Almost a quarter of cases in Waikato have required hospitalisation.

          The MMR shot doesn’t provide 100 percent protection from measles, but, if you’ve had the correct shots, you’ll likely be fine. If you were born in the years before 1969, when measles was rampant, you’ll have natural immunity, so you’ll also be fine.

          The same can’t be said for newborn babies, those undergoing chemotherapy, or those whose immune systems are compromised.

          They are at huge risk. But, so are teenagers and young adults — otherwise fit and healthy individuals.

          Measles is more contagious than the common cold, the flu and Ebola.

          Fatalities do happen — in 1991, seven New Zealanders died.

          I’ve made this argument before. I know that I’ll once again be criticised by anti-vaxxers for pointing out the idiocy of their position. I don’t care. These people are dangerous idiots.

          They live in a fantasy world of twisted arguments, and irrelevant anecdotes.

          • Whateva next? 12.1.2.1.1
            3 June 2016 at 7:11 am

            Measles has been ” sweeping “the planet for generations and the population was not declining, herd immunity? Was death rate declining anyway? so how can you know that it is immunisation that has saves the children?
            We were not crying out for an answer to measles in the 80’s , it was not a big problem, but it would be great to help all these very young children with life threatening allergic responses to so many common food items, and ADHD etc

          • One Two 12.1.2.1.2
            3 June 2016 at 10:08 am

            Ropata you continue publish juvenile nonsense on this subject which indicates you are incapable of expanding your understanding around this topic

            What does the article written by Lachlan Forsyth contribute to meaningful discussion, in your opinion ?

            Legally in the USA, Vaccines are Unavoidably Unsafe. Do you understand what that means, and the mechanism which exist as a mitigation to the legal consequence of it?

            How do you think a medical procedure can be Unavoidably Unsafe, while at the same time referred to as Safe and Effective

            If the article you linked to is what you choose to engage with for your learning, then you should find a less complex topic to engage yourself in

          • Colonial Viper 12.1.2.1.3
            3 June 2016 at 10:45 am

            Almost a quarter of cases in Waikato have required hospitalisation.

            Now this is very interesting.

            I was a kid in the 1980s.

            Quite a lot of children at school got the measles.

            Almost none of them were hospitalised AFAIK and were back at school a week or so later.

            What’s changed to make measles a far more consequential disease today requiring hospitalisation?

            • Yuri 12.1.2.1.3.1
              4 June 2016 at 8:27 am

              Yes, the MoH in NZ make a huge deal of Measles “outbreaks” and take every opportunity to spin these events in the media to scare the heck out of people.

              If you actually call the MoH and ask them for hard data you will firstly find there is huge push-back to providing this info and when you get it, you find few people go to hospital and those who do are quickly examined and sent home.

              The phrases “hospitalisation” and “admission” are routinely used incorrectly when they should be saying “examined at hospital as a precaution because it was outside doctor’s hours”.

              What is amusing is that people who should know better suspend their better judgment when reading the news or watching TV and are suddenly shocked by the impact of these devastating diseases rolling through the country like tornados or hurricanes.

              • Stunned mullet …
                4 June 2016 at 8:37 am

                Why do you think a person with measles would be examined and then sent home……

    • weka 12.2
      3 June 2016 at 12:14 am

      That’s a very good description Red.

  13. Drowsy M. Kram 13
    3 June 2016 at 1:14 am

    “Taking positions in this debate between the ‘observational’ practitioners and the ‘deductive’ scientists is immature and childish. Both have their domains of strength and both would benefit humanity far better if they worked together instead of sneering at each other.”

    Absolutely agree, although describing the “scientific method guys” as “plodding along behind” is perhaps slightly unfair. Progress based on the scientific method (which begins with observation) is increasingly rapid (and yes, faster isn’t always better), and continues to reveal truths not available to traditional ‘observational’ practitioners. Ideally each group should be willing to learn from and serve the other whenever possible, or at the very least keep an open mind.

    The human immune system is an extraordinarily effective, albeit finely balanced, molecular search-and-destroy network; a natural outcome of genetic evolution. The recent invention of vaccinations, i.e. the injection of antigens (derived from pathogens or mimicking pathogen molecules) to stimulate the immune system, has been OVERWHELMINGLY successful and profoundly beneficial to humankind.
    Measles vaccination has saved an estimated 17.1 million lives since 2000.

    Individual immune systems are complex and unique, so even if healthcare professionals (including ‘observational’ practitioners) and pharmaceutical companies and were infallible and completely ethical (Ben Goldacre’s ‘Bad Pharma’ is scary), there would still be risks associated with vaccination, or any other treatment that interacts with the immune system. But without the invention of vaccination, the planet would now be a less crowded (hooray?), and a greater proportion of the surviving population would be suffering unnecessarily.

    Many medical researchers, including a number of NZ scientists and clinicians, continue to investigate the potential of harnessing the immune system to combat an increasingly wide range of illnesses from new viral threats (Zika) to specific cancers.

    Ending on a personal anecdote, three years ago the acute and long-term effects of influenza-associated inflammation finally prompted me to start annual ‘flu’ vaccinations. So far there are only benefits to report – just lucky I guess.

    • Stunned mullet 13.1
      3 June 2016 at 6:55 am

      At least the thread ended in a reasoned comment as above.

    • Yuri 13.2
      3 June 2016 at 9:50 am

      Lots of “estimated” this and that in drag dressed up as some sort of factual evidence. Every government writes (funds the writing) their own history of how their policies avoid or mitigate epidemics, etc., yet very little work is done to establish the facts. Where there have been miscalculations or negative consequences, these are forgotten or glossed over. How much do you know about whooping cough and the lack of ability of mothers who were vaccinated against whooping cough to protect their newborn children from that disease? Ask NZ’s Ministry of Health!

      Let’s take a step back.

      We are in New Zealand. How many deaths have there been in NZ from Measles, and what percentage of them were fully vaccinated? Also, how many adverse affects have there been from Measles vaccinations?

      Any decent statistician will tell you that you also need to consider contextual factors to get an accurate picture i.e. higher levels of general health (care techniques, diet, general information, etc.) have a positive impact on general health of a population. When there are other background factors that are concurrent with the introduction of vaccines, it becomes a very murky world indeed and those who have the data tend to present (spin) the picture to suit their purposes.

      Nobody appears to be arguing that all risks that can be mitigated should be mitigated, so it’s a matter of cost, philosophy, and individual risk.

      I also note that nobody here is arguing that NZ should roll out compulsory, expensive, life-long anti-Malarial courses of treatment for everyone on the basis that worldwide, millions of lives have been saved by anti-Malaria drugs. Our hospitals are not set up to cope with mass incidence of Ebola.

      Life is complicated. Statistics are misleading. If you don’t understand how they can be distorted (spun), your are a perfect target for manipulation.

  14. tangled_up 14
    3 June 2016 at 7:16 am

    That’s a good vid, though I do like Penn and Teller on Vaccinations better,

    • Puckish Rogue 14.1
      3 June 2016 at 8:24 am

      As an avowed right-winger I’m sure my coming out in support of vaccination will be the “proof” needed that the vaccination industry is evil…

      However I don’t mind stating that the Penn and Teller Bullshit series was really excellent viewing and anyone who disagrees with me is, quite clearly, wrong 🙂

  15. Your Average Voter 15
    3 June 2016 at 9:45 am

    The anti vaccination lobby is up there with Scientology. Andrew Wakefield has as much credibility as Ron L Hubbard. Both fiction writers.

    In post 1.2.1.1 the 4 points given is nothing more than conspiracy theory political clap trap and point number 3 is a meaningless piece of gobbledygook nonsense.

    God save us from dozey parents. How quickly society forgets why vaccinations were created in the first place.

    There are legitimate concerns around people allergic to eggs and anaphylactic shock. That is why you are supposed to be monitored a minimum of 20 minutes after the injection.

    And I think that a lot of people are confusing the flu with having a having a cold. They are two different animals. If you have ever had the flu you would know the difference and you certainly won’t be turning up for work if you’ve got it. The flu will drop you like a ton of bricks and it is a killer.

    • Yuri 15.1
      3 June 2016 at 10:06 am

      Your Average Voter is clearly a confused person who either intentionally or inadvertently appears to be spreading their own confusion.

      Forget Andrew Wakefield. That’s a Straw Man issue. There are many anti-vaccination people who are fully rational/scientific in their approach and have a high bar when it comes to research and medical claims. That’s probably why they are cynical about the claimed benefits of vaccinations in the first place.

      Flu is a catch-all name for a huge range of (generally) viral diseases. The impact of flu on people varies hugely. At its extreme, it is most certainly a serious disease. However, so is Staphylococcus, and that is everywhere. Do you spend all day washing your hands and body in alcohol in order to mitigate the risk of Staphylococcal infection?

      The main thing about influenza that politicians have discovered is that it has an economic cost that exceeds the cost of giving people the flu jab. No brainer for them! Too bad the benefits don’t meet the claims! (don’t ask politicians to be knowledgeable because they will always sound plausibly well-informed but will fully qualify everything they say).

      • Your Average Voter 15.1.1
        3 June 2016 at 10:36 am

        Scientology would make the same claims.

        And washing your hands regularly is a damn good way to prevent bugs from spreading or contracting them. Florence Nightingale figured that one out.

        Why does all of this have to get down to some sort of conspiracy theory involving politicians. They are not that clever!

        • Yuri 15.1.1.1
          3 June 2016 at 3:56 pm

          The ridiculous comparison with Scientology is laughable.

          Washing your hands and body (all your skin) continually to eliminate Staphylococcus? Oh come on.

          Yes, wash your hands. Nobody here is suggesting that simple hygiene isn’t a good idea.

          Hey, we agree on politicians not being clever. You are happy to entrust your and (possibly if you have a family) your childrens’ health to politicians whereas I do not.

          Thanks for your vote of confidence in my lack of confidence in politicians, but you’re arguing against your own position.

      • joe90 15.1.2
        3 June 2016 at 1:06 pm

        Do you spend all day washing your hands and body in alcohol in order to mitigate the risk of Staphylococcal infection?

        Daily, because following minor surgery in a public hospital I’ve spent years struggling with persistent staphylococcus aureus infections so I take particular care.

        • Colonial Viper 15.1.2.1
          3 June 2016 at 1:22 pm

          Do you know why your immune system was able to manage staph aureus successfully before the surgery, but not afterwards?

        • joe90 15.1.2.2
          3 June 2016 at 1:31 pm

          The infections first manifested themselves on the arthroscopy incision sites slowly spreading over the years.

          • Colonial Viper 15.1.2.2.1
            3 June 2016 at 4:44 pm

            Topical colloidal silver preparations? There are some excellent NZ ones. Just a thought.

          • Colonial Viper 15.1.2.2.2
            3 June 2016 at 4:53 pm

            There is a very good NZ aloe Vera with colloidal silver preparation available in a squeeze tube that I have always found excellent for persistent skin issues.

        • Yuri 15.1.2.3
          3 June 2016 at 3:58 pm

          Well that’s fine. Just don’t expect everyone to do the same.

          The point is just because you can mitigate risk doesn’t mean you should.

          Do you bath several times daily in alcohol? No.

    • Colonial Viper 15.2
      3 June 2016 at 10:39 am

      God save us from dozey parents. How quickly society forgets why vaccinations were created in the first place.

      Hmmmmm maybe the prevalent socioeconomic conditions of the 1900s and 1910s which led to high rates of fatal infectious disease are no longer the norm in the western world (although we sem to be going back there).

      The flu will drop you like a ton of bricks and it is a killer.

      That’s just fearmongering now. Most people exposed to the flu virus manage the virus quite successfully and with minimal issues. As the Cochrane report summarised – for healthy adults the benefits of the flu vaccination are very slim. 40 or more people need to get the vaccination before a single person gets any benefit. Margin of error stuff.

      However if you are in some sort of high risk group then maybe the calculus would change.

      • Your Average Voter 15.2.1
        3 June 2016 at 11:12 am

        No, not scaremongering. Both my wife and I have had the flu on separate occasions and I can see how it kills. It dropped us both like a ton of bricks.

        The very young, old and infirm are particularly susceptible to it.

        • Colonial Viper 15.2.1.1
          3 June 2016 at 1:24 pm

          If you’ve proven susceptible in the past go get your jabs.

          Then hope they get the mix of viruses right for the season. Or you get zero protection.

      • Your Average Voter 15.2.2
        3 June 2016 at 11:18 am

        All the bugs, viruses etc are still out there and waiting to nail us. The main reason they aren’t the norm is because of vaccinations.
        If we were to stop vaccinating they would become the norm. We are having outbreaks of whooping cough now because of dozey parents not vaccinating their kids.

        • Puckish Rogue 15.2.2.1
          3 June 2016 at 12:46 pm

          Basically anti-vaxxers are selfish and rely on herd immunity

          • Colonial Viper 15.2.2.1.1
            3 June 2016 at 1:19 pm

            Don’t fucking flatter yourself. I have no idea how your mis-tuned mis-trained mis-developed immune system is going to help me, mate.

            • Puckish Rogue 15.2.2.1.1.1
              3 June 2016 at 1:26 pm

              Yeah sure CV keep telling yourself that

              • Colonial Viper …
                3 June 2016 at 1:37 pm

                With a partially dysfunctional immune system you’ll probably end up an asymptomatic carrier of the future zombie wasting disease, your stumbling immune system never able to fully clear the pathogen from your body like it would under normal circumstances, and hence become an ongoing threat to the destiny of humanity.

                • stunned mullet …
                  3 June 2016 at 2:18 pm

                  So in your opinion your own whizz bang immune system would prevent you from contracting Measles, influenza etc etc.

                  Can you share your secret…

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  3 June 2016 at 3:21 pm

                  While part of me thinks that being patient zero for the zombie apocalypse or something would be awesome I’m afraid I’m going to have to decline that honour.

                  Since I was immunised against what ever it was that Plunket suggested I should be (thanks mom) and further injections due to deployment in less then ideal locations I’d say its more likely you’ll succumb to something before I do

                • One Two …
                  3 June 2016 at 4:13 pm

                  CV why are you continuing to engage with those types?

                  Its patently clear they have not even elementary understandings of the subjects which you do, nor are they interested in anything other than agitating

                  What is undeniable is that the vaneer under which vaccines have been protected ,has been torn off. You already know this

                  The immune system , especially of new born and infant babies has been wrecked by poisons in the modern environment , including through the placenta via the mother

                  The excuses for the accelerating levels of physical and mental illness can no longer be ignored, and they aren’t being ignored

                  The chemical destruction of oganic beings, is over

                  Let the story play out and keep your energy. Don’t waste it!

                  • stunned mullet …
                    3 June 2016 at 4:22 pm

                    And yet the average lifespan continues to increase in most countries and deaths and illness due to vaccine preventable illnesses are in decline where ever vaccines and modern medical care utilised.

                    • Colonial Viper …
                      3 June 2016 at 4:35 pm

                      Nah by far most of the effect comes from potable water, sewerage systems, satisfactory nutrition and rising socio-economic status.

                    • Lanthanide …
                      3 June 2016 at 5:13 pm

                      @CV
                      That’s like being happy that your TV can display blue and green pixels. Who needs red?

                  • Colonial Viper …
                    3 June 2016 at 4:33 pm

                    Hearing you mate, thank you.

          • McFlock 15.2.2.1.2
            3 June 2016 at 3:06 pm

            I wouldn’t mind it if they were simply selfish and relied on herd immunity, or even particularly care if they did a steve jobs and refused actual medical treatment in favour of hokum remedies until it was too late.

            What pisses me off about antivaxxers is that their decision endangers other people by reducing that herd immunity, and their deranged rantings might be treated as legitimate medical advice by others.

            CV’s sermons from the mount are a case in point – he doesn’t know the slightest thing about vaccines, immunology, or population health that he didn’t get from hyperlinks that cater to his brand of egotistical paranoia. But there’s always a heightened risk that if someone believes his pseudoliterate bullshit, it could kill them.

            • Puckish Rogue 15.2.2.1.2.1
              3 June 2016 at 3:30 pm

              Agreed, for me when you have Jenny McCarthy on one side and, probably, the vast majority and doctors and nurses on the other I’ll go with the doctors and nurses

              but yes it is dangerous when people who don’t know and have a following wade into areas they really shouldn’t:

              http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/parenting/baby/caring-for-baby/69900014/comedian-jemaine-clement-criticised-for-tweeting-nonsense-in-antivaccination-rant

            • Yuri 15.2.2.1.2.2
              3 June 2016 at 10:13 pm

              I tried hard but couldn’t find anything here that is correct apart from McFlock’s spelling, which is pretty good on the whole.

              How do you know that Viper knows nothing about vaccines?

              Are you making a claim to actually know something the rest of us don’t? If so, what might that be, and seeing as you’re making the claim, it follows that you will be substantiating it (and your claim about Viper’s extent of knowledge).

              • McFlock …
                3 June 2016 at 10:17 pm

                Because CV and I have had this argument repeatedly, ad nauseum. He’s made repeated elementary mistakes in population health, physiology, how vaccines work, what’s in them, what his occasional links to peer-reviewed research actually mean, and even basic math.

                Feel free to use the search engine.

          • Yuri 15.2.2.1.3
            3 June 2016 at 4:07 pm

            If people believe in vaccination they can vaccinate themselves and their kids. Then they will be protected against all of these diseases (apparently) and won’t need to lose any sleep about getting them from, say, unvaccinated people.

            Follow the logic? Great, thanks for that.

            • stunned mullet 15.2.2.1.3.1
              3 June 2016 at 4:23 pm

              Vaccines are not 100% effective and their are many who are unable to be vaccinated hence your logic fails.

            • McFlock 15.2.2.1.3.2
              3 June 2016 at 4:25 pm

              That would be true if vaccines were 100% effective and had no contra-indications (such as allergies in some people).

              But they’re not, so it’s not, and your comment is plain stupidity.

            • Colonial Viper 15.2.2.1.3.3
              3 June 2016 at 4:32 pm

              It seems that they want us to change our behaviour to take into account their deficient technology, and their unreliable knowledge.

        • Yuri 15.2.2.2
          3 June 2016 at 4:05 pm

          No, you are very, very confused about whooping cough.

          You need to speak to the MoH about this.

          A generation back, the WC vaccine was added to the NZ vaccination schedule, and now the MoH realises that this has put the newborn children of those women vaccinated with the WC vaccine at risk. They recently introduced a special programme to address this fuckup.

          It’s an excellent example of how little we know about consequences of mucking around with immune systems. It’s not a benign activity.

          You clearly need to gen up before wading into this with the opposite perception of reality.

        • Yuri 15.2.2.3
          3 June 2016 at 10:16 pm

          “All the bugs, viruses etc are still out there and waiting to nail us.”

          Many of them are not “out there” but “in there”. Without them you would likely die or live a very compromised life.

          You make bacteria and viruses seem like calculating, sentient beings that are planning world domination. Reality is (broadly) that they need us to survive.

    • John shears 15.3
      3 June 2016 at 2:55 pm

      YAV Well said I also suspect that many of the comments about flu being nothing to bother about are being made by people who have never had it.
      I had one bout in about 1957 and get a shot every year.
      Once bitten Twice shy.

      • Yuri 15.3.1
        3 June 2016 at 4:41 pm

        I’ve had the flu. Not a nice experience (felt like somebody had beaten me about the head with a piece of 100×50) and certainly debilitating, but plenty of rest and time out made for a solid recovery.

        You can see why this isn’t an attractive option for politicians. Not back to work fast enough for them!

        • McFlock 15.3.1.1
          3 June 2016 at 4:45 pm

          that and, like, people die from it.

          • Yuri 15.3.1.1.1
            3 June 2016 at 10:08 pm

            Texting while driving kills many people. We can easily prevent this happening by either taking away peoples’ cellphones and/or getting rid of cars altogether. Either, or both, are mitigations that will fully mitigate the underlying risk.

            Somehow I don’t think you’d consider either a good idea, let alone both. Me neither!

            • McFlock 15.3.1.1.1.1
              3 June 2016 at 10:13 pm

              How many?

              No, in that case we can prevent it the same way we treat making phone calls while driving – ticketing people caught doing it.

              I’d never really considered ticketinng unvaccinatted people. It’s an interesting idea…

  16. Jay 16
    3 June 2016 at 12:15 pm

    Any of you anti-vaxxers prepared to head to the Congo without your vaccine for yellow fever, typhoid fever or meningitis?

    Anyone caught polio lately? Or smallpox? Could that have anything to do with vaccination do you think?

    If it truly were an individual choice I wouldn’t care what you do, but we require a vast majority of people to be vaccinated to make vaccination effective.

    Kids doing chemo have basically zero immunity, and a little dose of measles will easily kill them.

    The selfishness and stupidity of not getting vaccines based on a lot of bogus science never fails to astonish and anger me. To think your own GP or anybody else is part of some international money-making conspiracy is just ludicrous.

    And before anyone spouts off about big-pharma let’s not forget that “alternative” medicine is a multi billion dollar industry as well. The main difference is the medications prescribed by your doctor are scientifically proven to be safe and effective, not just endorsed by a bunch of fraudsters and quacks.

    • Colonial Viper 16.1
      3 June 2016 at 12:34 pm

      Firstly, your attempt to approximate the magnitude of money behind big pharma to that of alternative practitioners, is totally bogus.

      What percentage of last years Health vote went to traditional chinese medicine, traditional Maori healers or naturopaths? How about two tenths of nothing?

      Secondly, your environmental example is absolutely correct. If you are entering a dangerous high risk health environment like the Belgian Congo then yeah, you should get vaccinated. But even then you should use caution in picking and choosing what protection you really require.

      Thirdly, I hope you keep calling people who have a preference not to be vaccinated where possible, “selfish and stupid.” It’s really a great strategy and the kind of old fashioned medical arrogance you display does wonders to win over hearts and minds.

      Keep it up.

      Anyone caught polio lately? Or smallpox? Could that have anything to do with vaccination do you think?

      No one is questioning the historical importance of those vaccines. I’m just tired of every new flash vaccination being sold to us based on 40 year old wins which happened in a totally different world.

    • Yuri 16.2
      3 June 2016 at 4:55 pm

      What is an anti-vaxxer anyway and why the double X?

      Anyone travelling to places where serious diseases such as Cholera, Smallpox, Ebola, etc. present a high risk would be well-advised (in my opinion) to get vaccinated (depending on the vaccine). Makes perfect sense to establish the risks and mitigate accordingly. But you certainly wouldn’t vaccinate against Measles if you were travelling to the Congo – don’t be silly!

      People whose immune systems are compromised, or on some basis are at higher risk, would be well-advised to consider isolation to assist with mitigating this risk.

      Who is suggesting placing any trust in fraudsters and quacks? I’m suggesting the opposite: I take a rational, evidence-based approach to these matters, which pretty much excludes drug companies/pharma as a source of accurate/balanced information.

      • stunned mullet 16.2.1
        3 June 2016 at 8:00 pm

        “But you certainly wouldn’t vaccinate against Measles if you were travelling to the Congo – don’t be silly!”

        You most certainly wold be advised to be vaccinated against Measles if you were travelling to the Congo.

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 16.3
      3 June 2016 at 9:14 pm

      Completely agree!

  17. travellerev 17
    3 June 2016 at 12:33 pm

    It’s a shame TRP tries to make his point (but not surprising knowing his track record) with a video of a kid. I would have loved to have seen a link to say, Vaxxed which by the way I have not seen yet. You know something serious, to start a REAL debate based on some serious research.

    I don’t have children so I have not had to make this call and as a result have not spend much time on it and don’t really have an opinion on the subject as a result but if you want to start a real debate start with a serious documentary. Or better still two serious documentaries with both supporting either side of the debate.

    If you don’t TRP, you are just baiting and patronising.

    Here is a link to a little item about Vaxxed

    Maybe when Robert de Niro has finished his doco you can give a link to that TRP, now that would be interesting!

    • Te Reo Putake 17.1
      3 June 2016 at 2:44 pm

      You should watch the video in the post, Ev. All the ‘research’ is included in it. All of it, bar none. And no, I don’t want to start a debate on it. Like climate change, the debate is over.

      • Yuri 17.1.1
        3 June 2016 at 4:57 pm

        Climate change has nothing to do with vaccination.

        Debates over? In your head maybe.

      • Fran 17.1.2
        3 June 2016 at 6:50 pm

        TRP your comment here is really offensive to all those families whose children have reacted, including those whose children have been diagnosed with autism post vaccination. ACC has covered a number of those children here in NZ, the Vaccine Compensation Table in the USA has paid out on post vaccine-autism, the courts in Italy and Britain have recently ruled in favour of parents who sued the vaccine manufacturers for causing their children’s autism.
        It is hard enough to have a child react when the whole medical system is geared to refute this but when the kind of thoughtless memes such as your cute video, keep cropping up it makes life even harder. It is even harder on those children as they reach adulthood, most never talk about their lives for this reason.
        I recognise that this unthinking cruelty is because of an entrenched belief but to publically ridicule and try to negate the life experience of a whole group of people because of it is nasty and very wrong.
        For some people, this debate is not academic and smart alecy memes are not helpful.

        • te reo putake 17.1.2.1
          3 June 2016 at 7:03 pm

          It’s not the least bit offensive, Fran, because it’s true. And the ‘debate’ actually is academic; all those academics saying there is no link, versus a fraudster saying there is.

          • Fran 17.1.2.1.1
            3 June 2016 at 7:55 pm

            TRP, it is offensive. Blatant, overweening arrogance which works to disempower people always is.

            • te reo putake 17.1.2.1.1.1
              3 June 2016 at 8:00 pm

              Facts are arrogant! That’s a new twist, Fran. Watch the video in the post. If you can refute it, by all means do so. But please don’t waste my time with pseudo outrage.

              • Fran …
                3 June 2016 at 8:22 pm

                Not pseudo. Plenty of facts out in the world to contradict your stupid little video but why bother. You already think you know everything.

        • Andre 17.1.2.2
          3 June 2016 at 8:14 pm

          Fran, one of my sons has some autistic spectrum behaviours, and one of my nephews is overtly obviously autistic.

          It seems outrageously cruel to me to tell parents a lie that they could have prevented their child’s autism by refusing a vaccination. When mountains of careful research has proven there is no connection. Furthermore, that lie was started by a proven fraudster apparently looking to profit from distressed parents.

          That lie seems much crueler to me than the simple truth that the causes of autism are not yet understood, but that there is almost certainly no action or inaction by the parents that causes it. Furthermore, that lie causes increased risk of harm to children whose parents decline vaccinations because of the lie.

          Please, do some research on Andrew Wakefield. The link I put up below is a reasonable start.

          • Fran 17.1.2.2.1
            3 June 2016 at 8:38 pm

            Autism has many causes, genetic and from brain injury to name a couple. For some parents, the case that their child’s brain injury, resulting in a diagnosis of autism, was caused by a reaction to one of the vaccines is irrefutable which is why they have had ACC claims accepted here and are covered by either the courts or compensation schemes elsewhere. Not every child on the spectrum is there because of vaccines but some definitely are. I can say this categorically because I have seen the medical records of some of these children.

            I am not sure what Andrew Wakefield has to with this. He spoke out about MMR and the children whose records I have seen reacted to other vaccines. It was DPT for some, the single measles vaccine for others and DT for another.

            I seems outrageously cruel to me to deny some parents the right to be truthful about what caused their children’s issues because of the strident beliefs of others.

            • Andre 17.1.2.2.1.1
              3 June 2016 at 8:52 pm

              You got any links to credible studies linking any of these other vaccinations to autism? Because everything linking autism and vaccinations I’ve ever seen eventually traces back to Wakefield’s fraudulent paper. A few anecdotes won’t cut it. There’s enough vaccinations on the routine schedule that any change in a child will almost certainly happen “shortly after” a vaccination. The studies I find most convincing are the ones comparing rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated children.

              I’m unimpressed by court and ACC findings. The legal system seems incapable of finding any kind of truth in complex technical matters.

              • Fran …
                3 June 2016 at 9:30 pm

                Interesting Andre, given that the biggest study looking at the link between MMR and autism has just been outed as fraudulent by one of its authors. I would love links to the studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children as I am aware that ethics committees worldwide have refused permission to do such studies on the basis that they believe it would be unethical to not vaccinate.

                It might be a good idea to look at the package inserts from these vaccines. The manufacturers acknowledge brain injury in a variety of forms as a possible side effect in most of them.

                • stunned mullet …
                  3 June 2016 at 9:51 pm

                  “I would love links to the studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children as I am aware that ethics committees worldwide have refused permission to do such studies on the basis that they believe it would be unethical to not vaccinate.”

                  http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=2275444

                  “In all, the researchers analyzed the health records of 95,727 children, including more than 15,000 children unvaccinated at age 2 and more than 8,000 still unvaccinated at age 5.”

                  “In this large sample of privately insured children with older siblings, receipt of the MMR vaccine was not associated with increased risk of ASD, regardless of whether older siblings had ASD. These findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD.In this large sample of privately insured children with older siblings, receipt of the MMR vaccine was not associated with increased risk of ASD, regardless of whether older siblings had ASD. These findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD.”

    • Andre 17.2
      3 June 2016 at 4:15 pm

      Have I got this straight, travellerev? You’re promoting a movie you haven’t even seen? Produced by the fraudster that started the whole fraudulent vaccine-autism scare by falsifying data? Apparently because he planned to profit from “new medical tests” and “litigation driven testing”?

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield

      • travellerev 17.2.1
        3 June 2016 at 5:56 pm

        The debate is over! Boom! TRP at his patronizing best! I don’t want to start a debate. Boom. Why am I not surprised.

        I know what we’ve been told about the good doctor but I don’t think Robert de Niro is stupid and he has a dog in the race. So if it was good enough for him, I can at least be polite and take notice of what is being said in that movie.

        I promote every film I want to watch not because it is true but if the MSM and TRP go ape over it it must be worth watching! If somebody here has a link to it I’d love to see it. Apparently I am not alone and the rejection from the NY film festival has opened plenty of peoples mind and curiosity.

        Unlike TRP, I try to keep an open mind. Something TRP has some problems with on occasion!

        • te reo putake 17.2.1.1
          3 June 2016 at 6:24 pm

          Ev, there is no debate. There is no proven link between vaccination and autism. I have sympathy for the misguided parents who want to believe it, particularly those with autistic children. However, unlike your narrow perspective, I mind is both open and, importantly, critical. The fraudster Wakefield and the fraudster Monckton have a lot in common.

          There’s also a freedom of choice issue. Why should the vast majority of parents have their choice overruled by the minority?

          • Yuri 17.2.1.1.1
            3 June 2016 at 9:48 pm

            You are correct when you say there is no proven link between vaccination and Autism.

            Somebody observed, concerning open minds, that they are well and good up to a point but beyond that you start to believe any old thing you’re told.

            My experience in life is often that things people like to make out to be most complex are often quite simple, and those issues seen as very simple, very frequently transpire are actually relatively complicated, and quite challenging to get a handle on.

        • Andre 17.2.1.2
          3 June 2016 at 6:24 pm

          He’s not a good doctor. His license to practice was stripped because of his proven medical fraud. So he’s neither “good” nor a “doctor”. As far as I’m concerned he’s as evil as Martin Shkreli since it appears he deliberately set out to profit by preying on the fears of a vulnerable group of parents. So I’m outraged that he’s still at it, in the same way that I get outraged when any other evil predator gets released to find new victims.

          A mind so open it whistles in the breeze is not a good thing. A skeptical inquiring mind develops the ability to reject bullshit. Since propagating bullshit causes real harm.

  18. riffer 18
    3 June 2016 at 2:41 pm

    I’m autistic (Asperger syndrome). I wasn’t vaccinated with the MMR (I’m nearly 50).

    I have four vaccinated children. 1 also has Asperger syndrome. How come the other four didn’t get it. And how come his Asperger syndrome was extant before vaccination?

    I’m also Type I diabetic. I qualify for a free flu jab. I used to get the flu every year. Dropped me for about a week. But not since I’ve had the jab. With one exception. Swine flu. No vaccine. That was a doozy.

    • Yuri 18.1
      3 June 2016 at 4:58 pm

      Good for you. Somehow you should make sure that your single data point is recorded in somebody’s research.

  19. Your Average Voter 19
    3 June 2016 at 3:27 pm

    And don’t forget, just because you have had the immunisation shot doesn’t mean you won’t get it.
    What it does mean is that you shouldn’t get the worst of it. You may become unwell but not deathly sick. The vaccine strengthens your immune system. (Or whatever the correct medical terminology is )

  20. McFlock 20
    3 June 2016 at 3:52 pm

    General question to everyone: has any commenter here ever had their opinion on vaccination actually change as a result of these periodic outbreaks of vax-v-antvax arguments?

    Or does everyone just end up with their original position being reinforced by the stupidity of the other side?

    btw, yes I do think it is that binary: if you accept that some vaccines are good to take then you also need to accept the analyses done by hundreds of people into determining the vaccination schedule most suited to people living in New Zealand today. Pretending that you have enough information (and understanding) to know which ones to pick and choose for yourself is a mere vanity.

    • Colonial Viper 20.1
      3 June 2016 at 4:22 pm

      I don’t delegate my healthcare decisions to people with substantially different values and priorities to myself.

    • stunned mullet 20.2
      3 June 2016 at 4:30 pm

      1. No
      2. Yes, hence my comment way up thread suggesting that TRP just posted this to shit stir.

    • One Two 20.3
      3 June 2016 at 4:32 pm

      Binary thinker seeks endorsement

      • McFlock 20.3.1
        3 June 2016 at 4:44 pm

        The problem is binary: you’re either fully vaccinated or you’re not.

        But I don’t give a shit about “endorsement”. I just suspect that while these posts and discussions get many comments from largely the same people (myself included), in the end nobody changes their perspective. The only value is practise at bickering and the occasional bout of levity at the stupidity of someone who puts and extended but invisible monologue between what is written and their eventual response.

        BTW, if you want to mock someone for seeking endorsement, try to do it before getting into a circle jerk with someone simply because they share your delusions.

        • Yuri 20.3.1.1
          3 June 2016 at 9:41 pm

          I see where you’re going wrong.

          Measles is nothing to do with Cholera. You can be fully vaccinated against Measles but not against Cholera.

          Your binary problem is the issue. You’re asking the wrong question.

          • McFlock 20.3.1.1.1
            3 June 2016 at 10:10 pm

            Nope.

            You’re either meeting the guideline on vaccination from MoH, or you’re not. Sure, what you’re at risk from might vary, but whether you’re short on one measle jab or three, you’re still contrary to the same guideline that said you need one or three cholera jabs or a tetanus booster if you go to country X. It’s all based on the same methodology.

    • Andre 20.4
      3 June 2016 at 7:42 pm

      My position on vaccinations hasn’t substantially changed. But a couple of years ago, before starting to loiter here, I was of the view it was plausible that a few “treatments” such as chiropractic, acupuncture etc might in fact give benefits beyond placebo, through some so far undetermined mechanism such as releasing endorphins. Statements made by some of the obvious woo merchants here provoked me to look further into them, and I’m now of the view that those treatments are pure placebo, at best.

      I’m not quite pure binary on vaccinations. My mother refused the BCG for tuberculosis on my behalf, on the grounds that it was low efficacy, high risk of side effects, and forever after I would not be able to be tested for TB by a simple antibody test. As an adult, I fully agree with that. 20 years ago when getting ready for an extended trip through Africa, the travel doctor gave us a huge list of recommended vaxes, along with info sheets on each one. There was one I declined (one of the Heps, I think), on the grounds of low risk of getting the disease, low efficacy, and high risk of side effects. Had pretty much everything else, though.

    • Yuri 20.5
      3 June 2016 at 8:56 pm

      Sounds as if you have a very “Western” yes/no true/false thing going on and you’re happy to defer to the (better, as you perceive it) judgment of others. Concerning information/knowledge, your position may vary depending on whether or not you know anyone who works in the medical system and for drug companies.

      The more I learn, the less binary it gets. Yes, the concept of vaccination is interesting and not without value, but one can pick and choose theoretically and practically. It’s not all or nothing, despite how it is presented as such by the media and others who love a “us vs them” scrap.

      For example, I would personally get vaccinated against Cholera or similar if I were at significant risk, yet other vaccinations I personally would not choose to have for myself or my children. Chicken pox, for example.

      • McFlock 20.5.1
        3 June 2016 at 9:08 pm

        If you were at “significant risk”.

        That just demonstrates that you have no idea about that matter that you are literally making life and death decisions on.

        I don’t know whether the preservation of the lives and minimising the suffering of others is a “western” perspective or not. Death is binary. The existence of pain is binary. “Other perspectives” are fine, but do they save as many lives as vaccinations?

        • Yuri 20.5.1.1
          3 June 2016 at 9:26 pm

          Excuse me! What basis do you make this claim on?

          What demonstrates what?

          You are conflating issues and seem altogether as confused as a dog with rabies.

          Well done and all that having such consideration for everyone and their suffering. Jolly good show.

          Just don’t speak for me or my family or remove my freedom to make choices about our health.

          The existence of pain isn’t binary by the way unless you’re talking about the most simplistic does it hurt? yes/no (which in itself is a massive over simplification of pain).

          • McFlock 20.5.1.1.1
            3 June 2016 at 9:58 pm

            Let’s take it slowly, then.

            You said your decision to vaccinate was based on whether the risk to you met your personal threshold of “significant”.

            While I doubt that your risk assessment is based on any actual research into whole-life risk of pox, shingles etc, what really gives the game away is that vaccination isn’t just about you. It’s also about the risk that you choose to be to the people around you.

            You’re either incredibly selfish or (more likely) basing your decision on woefully inadequate information.

            As for the “oversimplaification of pain” bullshit… yeah, it would give a mugger an interesting defense in court, but get real.

  21. Colonial Viper 21
    3 June 2016 at 4:37 pm

    As One Two suggested, I’m bugging out of this shite fight. Cheers.

  22. Paul Campbell 22
    3 June 2016 at 6:48 pm

    My grandmother wore a leg brace her whole life from polio as a child, at almost 60 I’ve never met anyone in NZ my age or younger who has contracted it – it wasn’t due to prayer or due to ‘polio parties’ or any other such silliness – it was due to a well organised public health system and informed parents who made sure everyone was vaccinated.

    I think part of the problem is that younger parents haven’t experienced what past generations have suffered through, we’ve kind of lost the institutional memory of why we need to vaccinate. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it …. And in this case take the rest of us down with them

  23. travellerev 23
    3 June 2016 at 6:54 pm

    For those of you interested in the 1:30 minutes of propaganda vilification and what the producer Del Bigtree of Vaxxed actually said, here is a 12:50 minute recording of the whole interview he did with the ABC because he recorded it himself too just to be on the safe side:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvcdh7KlgPI

    Here is the man who brought all this about. Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Vilified, destroyed and probably one of the best researchers this planet has ever seen. But don’t take my word for it, watch it yourself and make up your own mind!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8EtfkAngKw

    Robert de Niro has committed to making a new Documentary on the issue of Vaccination. I can’t wait to see what he can dig up with his kind of cloud and money!

    • stunned mullet 23.1
      3 June 2016 at 7:49 pm

      ”Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Vilified, destroyed and probably one of the best researchers this planet has ever seen. ”

      Um no he is a proven fraud.

      • travellerev 23.1.1
        3 June 2016 at 8:16 pm

        Really? They called Galileo a heretic for pointing out that there may be a problem with the Earth centered theory and the fact that maybe the sun was more likely to be the center of our solar system. He spend his old years in jail and died there. Part of his problem was not science but politics.

        Somehow I think that it was very timely for all those huge pharmaceutical companies selling their vaccines, to find Dr. Alan Wakefield to be of questionable morals but you know what? We all know how easy it is to destroy a reputation. Been there had it done to me by non other than TRP so I think I’m going to reserve judgement

        • Andre 23.1.1.1
          3 June 2016 at 8:24 pm

          The difference is Galileo looked at the evidence, and deduced from the evidence what the factual state of affairs was.

          Wakefield had a story he wanted to tell, and falsified evidence to make his story seem plausible.

          • travellerev 23.1.1.1.1
            3 June 2016 at 8:26 pm

            That is not what the people around him said at the time!

            • Andre 23.1.1.1.1.1
              3 June 2016 at 8:31 pm

              Yeah, when it was first published, Wakefield’s paper was considered quite a breakthrough. It took a lot of wasted effort before other researchers started to realise something wasn’t quite right with it. The a lot more wasted effort to demonstrate that Wakefield’s paper was factually incorrect. Then a lot more wasted effort to drag out the fact that Wakefield had in fact falsified his data. Meanwhile, Wakefield’s lie was out in the public field doing damage, and is still doing damage.

              • travellerev …
                3 June 2016 at 8:33 pm

                I was talking about Galileo. They arrested him 40 years after his initial publications and he died in prison. They said the same things about Galileo!

                • Andre …
                  3 June 2016 at 8:40 pm

                  Other active evidence-driven researchers of the time, such as Kepler, and some of his predecessors such as Copernicus, were saying much the same things as Galileo. It was those who refused to consider the actual evidence who disputed Galileo (or simply didn’t want to hear it).

                  • travellerev …
                    3 June 2016 at 8:51 pm

                    Yep, You got it in one! And most people didn’t want to hear it because the pope told them not too. Now it’s a Pharmaceutical company called Merck with financial ties to the Lancet and other medical publications. Did you hear about the 40% of NZ scientists who feel gagged?

                    I’m tired now. Off to bed. Have a nice evening!

                    • travellerev …
                      3 June 2016 at 9:02 pm

                      Now I am really going to bed but I thought I’d share one last link here: http://www.wesupportandywakefield.com/ Seems he is not alone!

                    • Paul Campbell …
                      3 June 2016 at 10:22 pm

                      You seem to not understand how science works – someone does some research, publishes the results, other try and reproduce the first researcher’s results – just stating something and publishing it is not enough.

                      When others looked at Wakefield’s claims it turned out that not only was the data falsified, but even if they were correct the sample sizes were too small to be statistically significant.

                      Trying to reproduce Wakefield’s word and discovering it’s not reproducible, is not significant, or just plain false data is science, good science – remember ‘cold fusion’ all the people who tried to reproduce the results but couldn’t did good work. It’s the part that doesn’t get your name in the paper, but it’s how scientists come to a consensus of reality.

                      If you still think that Wakefield was correct you can go out and do the science, collect the data, verify the stats, publish the results, make sure describe what you’ve done well enough that others can reproduce your work – that’s science! anyone can do it.

                      Claiming there’s some great conspiracy when all that’s happening is that important part of science where people try and reproduce your results to confirm their reality is a basic misunderstand of how science works.

              • Molly …
                5 June 2016 at 10:57 am

                Here is the link to the retracted Lancet paper.

                I had done research on vaccinations in the past, and had not really looked at the Wakefield issue, but he came up during later research on autism. At the time, I was more interested in diagnosis and alternative methods of parenting and learning, so did not spend a lot of time on this as it was not a debate I was interested in.

                However, IIRC, the retracted article was about the incidence of gastro problems with children who had experienced neuro-atypical changes. This is a common ailment for children who are on the Aspergers spectrum. Many of them have very limited dietary intakes in terms of nutrition and acceptable food. (Interestingly, during later involvement with a family who has a child that has FASD, the gastro-intestinal problems and some of the traits are also very similar).

                I also seem to recollect, that he also conducted a research project on the changes some vaccines made to the gastro-intestinal tract, but as far as I know he only proposed a study that linked the two. He never conducted one along those lines.

                Would be happy to correct this recollection if anyone has any links to his study that was designed to link autism to vaccines.

                • travellerev …
                  5 June 2016 at 11:07 am

                  Hi Molly, from what I have read he was never against vaccinations as such. He only thought a combination of a certain three at once was a bad idea and thought that should be researched more! That was enough for Merck, the producer of this combo to come down on him like a ton of bricks.

                • Andre …
                  5 June 2016 at 1:34 pm

                  Molly, have you ever looked into Wakefield? Here’s the wikipedia (again) as a starting point (with the usual wikipedia caveats). I’d really encourage reading the whole thing as a case study in how misinformation gets created and spread.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield

                  The important point about the original Lancet paper is the lead researcher (Wakefield) falsified the data. In lay terms, he made shit up. That makes the content of the paper utterly meaningless from a scientific point of view, even putting aside the MMR-autism issue and purely looking at the gastro-intestinal aspects. It’s only value is a permanent record of Wakefield’s fraudulence.

                  Regardless of the content of the paper, Wakefield publicly claimed the MMR vaccine and autism were linked. And continues to do so, despite the overwhelming evidence there is no link between MMR vaccination and autism.

                  From wikipedia, “Although the paper said that no causal connection had been proven, before it was published, Wakefield made statements at a press conference and in a video news release issued by the hospital, calling for suspension of the triple MMR vaccine until more research could be done.[55] This was later criticized as ‘science by press conference’.[56] According to BBC News, it was this press conference, rather than the paper in The Lancet, that fuelled the MMR vaccination scare”

                  I’m utterly astonished that it has been clearly established that Wakefield indulged in the very worst kind of misuse-of-science deceit (apparently for profit, read the wikipedia for details) that big pharma apparently sometimes still indulges in, yet somehow Wakefield still retains folk hero status among some people that (fairly) cite this kind of misbehaviour for their opposition to big pharma. For instance, Vioxx was a truly shameful episode for Merck, and they were rightly beaten up for it.

                  • Molly …
                    5 June 2016 at 4:32 pm

                    People say that Wakefield published a paper saying that autism and vaccines were linked. But AFAIK – he didn’t. He just proposed a study to look for links.

                    You say that his public statements made the initial study invalid, even though the published paper – which I linked to – was about gastro-intestinal changes in children on the autistic spectrum. As part of it’s research it identified parents who related that the children seemed to undergo regressive behaviour and development after receiving their vaccincations.

                    Those are two separate issues that have been dealt with as if they are one and the same.

                    It is well known that austistic children (and those with FASD)
                    have issues with bowel complaints and absorbing nutrients. This will be familiar to anyone who has austistic or asperger’s family members or friends. So I can see that his initial paper may well have valid information.

                    You have not provided a link to a study that Wakefield did on autism and vaccinations because I don’t think it exists. But find it and link and I’ll change that statement.

                    Brian Deer who “exposed” Wakefield, does not act in an uncritical manner either. His posts, which I read at the time seemed amateurish and sensational, but as I mentioned before I was looking more for assistance in dealing with Asperger’s traits rather than wasting energy and time on a debate that I had no power to influence. My concerns were domestic.

                    However, a quick Google pulls up an article that raises questions about the funding Deer received in order to make the first complaints about the study.

                    These complaints were lodged before the public statements you mention were broadcast to the public.

                    • Andre …
                      5 June 2016 at 8:07 pm

                      Ok Molly, I’ll try again. It was proven, yes proven, that Wakefield falsified patient records. Are you OK with that? Straight yes or no, please.

                      By the way, as I understand it, the alterations of the records extended to the gastro aspects as well as the autism aspects.

                      In considering Wakefield’s integrity and credibility, the only things that matter are Wakefield’s actions.

                      It doesn’t matter who exposed Wakefield’s fraud, or what their motivations were. In the same way that when considering a big pharma company’s misconduct, it doesn’t matter whether the exposer is a commercial rival or an independent researcher. What matters is the misconduct.

                      As far as I know Wakefield has never published peer-reviewed research showing a link between autism and MMR vaccination, and if you carefully re-read what I wrote you’ll see I never claimed he did (though I could have made that clearer). Which makes his continued public claims that there is a link even more egregious since he has absolutely nothing to back it with.

                      Your link to the extended ad-hom attack on Deer didn’t actually address any of the points Deer proved about Wakefield’s fraud.

                    • Molly …
                      6 June 2016 at 8:57 am

                      Reply to Andre above.

                      If you had bothered reading, Deer used private patient records that were not available to the study (conducted by 12 researchers) to say that the dx given by the researchers was in contradiction to the previous patient records.

                      To my mind, this whole fixation on Wakefield is a diversion away from the fundamental topic of choice regarding vaccination. I have vaccinated my children with some, and avoided others.

                      But this distinction eludes many, who scream Wakefield – autism – proven – you anti-vaxxer.

                      I have friends that have been harmed by proven medical procedures, and a child that after vaccination returned to pre-verbal for six months. This was not recorded by the GP at the time, which was the procedure for adverse reaction reporting.

                      My interest, while captured in some part by the Wakefield case happened long after any of my children required vaccination and was purely – as I mention – due to a personal interest in autism practicalities.

                      There were some good answers to the questions you asked in the link provided.

                      But you want me to give a straight Yes or No on a topic that you have provided the most superficial and prominent discussion on that I could have found on any internet board.

                      My life is not black and white: I do believe that Brian Deer should have disclosed his income source while he was working on this case, and advised how he managed to lay complaints about public statements that had not been broadcast. He requires censure (and so does the Sunday Times) for publishing personal details of the childrens patient records without permission. As mentioned before, his quality of writing is very poor and does not indicate a high level of critical thinking and integrity.

                      So, sorry Andre. Don’t know. Happy to leave it at that. Have other areas that are more relevant and important to me at the moment.

                      But I also do think that systems can be flawed – which includes research papers along with BMC procedures. This requires much more research and understanding of motivations than either you or I have provided.

                      I also know that the initial paper was research on a well-known trait of autism, that their gastro-intestinal tracts are not functioning as they should be.

                      At the time, this was relevant information to me, and it is still relevant to many families dealing with the dietary restrictions and dislikes of their aspergers/autistic family members.

      • Yuri 23.1.2
        3 June 2016 at 9:33 pm

        Hello Mullet

        Just in case you’re not aware (apologies if you are) even if somebody is found to be a “proven fraud” or “liar” does not necessarily mean that everything they say/write/do is factually incorrect, wrong, misleading, etc.

        This is a basic logical idea. Think on it some more if you don’t understand.

        An example you might be able to fathom is a criminal who has proved herself untrustworthy in the past, yet you cannot dismiss what they say as incorrect simply on the basis of their past. Sure, you can use this knowledge to alert you to possible fraud or misleading activity, but ultimately you should always require factual evidence of anyone making claims irrespective of the subject. Just because somebody hasn’t been proven wrong or fraudulent doesn’t mean their claims are any more correct, either.

        • stunned mullet 23.1.2.1
          3 June 2016 at 9:44 pm

          His fraud was directly related to his paper on autism.

          http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c7452

          The man is a tool. [Disparaging word replaced. TRP]

          • Yuri 23.1.2.1.1
            4 June 2016 at 5:06 pm

            You are referred to my post you responded to.

            Just because somebody is in your view a “tool” doesn’t mean, per se, that everything they say is wrong.

            [Disparaging word replaced. TRP]

            • One Anonymous Bloke 23.1.2.1.1.1
              4 June 2016 at 5:49 pm

              *whoosh*

              Watch those goal-posts move. It’s his narrative about vaccines that is a proven deliberate lie, not his opinion about the weather.

    • te reo putake 23.2
      3 June 2016 at 8:18 pm

      ” … because he recorded it himself too just to be on the safe side”

      So he inoculated himself against possible harm?

  24. Huginn 24
    4 June 2016 at 3:50 am

    Good job TRP.
    Measles is highly contagious. It puts 3 out of 10 kids who get it in hospital. A few of these never recover their health & some die.
    The others get very, very sick.
    I can’t understand how anyone can think that’s OK.

    Chicken pox – also highly contagious. Kids get it and it makes them miserable. They recover and build some immunity from further infection, but the virus is lodged in the fluid of the spine. Decades later, when the immunity has worn down, it re-emerges as shingles.

    Flu – some years you don’t get 100% protection, but most of the time it works very well.

    There’s nothing that gives protection against the common cold, and I’ve been told that rabies shots aren’t very good – but measles, chicken pox and flu vaccines save people a lot of misery.

    • dv 24.1
      4 June 2016 at 8:12 am

      a friend of ours had a baby that was measles damaged.

      All she had done was had coffee with a friend who’s child was developing measles. No symptoms.

      This was 40 to 50 year ago>

      • Yuri 24.1.1
        4 June 2016 at 8:16 am

        Sorry to hear about your friend’s child. I can only hope that they lived as positive and healthy a life as possible given their experience.

        • dv 24.1.1.1
          4 June 2016 at 8:37 am

          Thanks. We moved away and lost contact about 25 years ago.

          I put it up to show how casual the contact can be to cause damage and I don’t think that measles vaccinations were common then as they were only developed in the late 60’s early 70’s

          From wiki

          Peebles.[31] In the late 1950s and early 1960s, nearly twice as many children died from measles as from polio

          So measles hardly benign.

          • Yuri 24.1.1.1.1
            4 June 2016 at 11:12 am

            Thanks I appreciate your good intentions.

            New Zealanders who get Measles overwhelmingly will recover well, as they would from simple skin infections (from cuts, splinters and the like). However, in very, very few cases, Measles can result in complications that if not treated can be very serious. The same is true of simple cuts and splinters.

    • Yuri 24.2
      4 June 2016 at 8:13 am

      You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about or are disingenuous.

      “Measles is highly contagious. It puts 3 out of 10 kids who get it in hospital. A few of these never recover their health & some die.”

      The only correct part of this is that Measles is contagious and most 8 year-old kids could tell you this.

      Where is this information from? It sounds like it could be a non-representative population of highly immune-compromised of malnourished children in sub-Saharan Africa, but we have no way of knowing.

      Are you cutting and pasting random bits and pieces from the internet? Your post appears to be a discontiguous assembly of misinformation.

      Chicken Pox. Not fun, but you get through it pretty quickly. You suggest that everybody who has CP gets Shingles. Not true (get informed!), and you’re not considering the alternative of the cost of vaccination, considering vaccine efficacy, the overhead of ongoing booster vaccinations, risk of reaction, risk of unforeseen side-effects, etc.

      Ultimately, if you see considering not vaccination as misery, that’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it. Further, go ahead and vaccinate yourself and your family as you see fit. If the efficacy of the vaccines you elect to use is high enough you will (hopefully) have a non-miserable life. Good luck.

      Just don’t expect everyone to follow you.

      • Little Kiwi 24.2.1
        4 June 2016 at 6:51 pm

        Hi Yuri,

        Back in my day all the kids got measles at some point and you never saw a school closed over it. Many of them had been vaccinated with MMR prior to getting measles. I remember I had measles and mumps after the vaccine and was vaccinated again with MMR at the age of 12. Measles was one of the mildest diseases we had as kids, and as kids we were never too freaked out by having a rash. Getting the chicken pox scared us more because of the sores. The type of measles going around these days must be quite brutal for everyone to be that worried about it and closing schools.

        The aborted human fetal cell lines in some vaccines had me very concerned after I did some research into that area. The human protein in MMR is RA 27/3 because the rubella virus was isolated from the 27th aborted fetus. 27 mentally ill women were forced or convinced to abort their babies to get this.

        Article about measles below is interesting:

        http://www.westonaprice.org/press/studies-show-that-vaccinated-individuals-spread-disease/

  25. stunned mullet 25
    4 June 2016 at 12:01 pm

    A non emotive peer reviewed overview of measles, its potential side effects and public health efforts to eliminate it.

    http://jid.oxfordjournals.org/content/189/Supplement_1/S4.full.pdf+html