Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Anti Vaxxers

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Anti Vaxxers

Old 24th Feb 2019, 10:34
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 671
Originally Posted by tescoapp View Post
Well I didn't

Corbett report is listed as

Just because some idiot puts something on youtube doesn't make it fact.
“Idiot.”
Yes, that’s another of the names you can get called by those certain of everything, but happy to accept things written on the internet as fact, as long as it confirms their viewpoint.

“Well I didn’t”
Your balanced approach is noted.
Stan Woolley is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 10:41
  #62 (permalink)  
Gnome de PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 55
Posts: 5,301
Originally Posted by Clare Prop View Post
Poor little pup got parvo. .
Never heard of that virus before; apart from getting the vax, sounds another damn good reason for dog-owners to clear up after their pets (and thank you to those who do!)...
treadigraph is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 10:44
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 54
Posts: 0
“Well I didn’t”
Your balanced approach is noted.
So I checked to see what it was I was going to watch. Then from multiple places came up with the same thing that its pseudo science and conspiracy theory stuff with low factual content

Why bother watching it? Its pretty certain to be nonsense.
tescoapp is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 11:20
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 671
Originally Posted by tescoapp View Post
So I checked to see what it was I was going to watch. Then from multiple places came up with the same thing that its pseudo science and conspiracy theory stuff with low factual content

Why bother watching it? Its pretty certain to be nonsense.


If you have time, why not see for yourself? We can learn from everyone, even ‘idiots’.
Stan Woolley is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 11:29
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 9,921
Originally Posted by Stan Woolley View Post
Sorry Dave, I don’t get this?

Did you watch the video?

Yes.

I was referring to Gove's infamous comment that "People in this country have had enough of experts", echoing the sentiments expressed in the comments.
DaveReidUK is online now  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 11:35
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: yes
Posts: 144
Boofhead? Well named. To answer one question; 'Why worry about anti vaxxers when most people are vaccinated?'

Two reasons, one is that they're putting their children at risk. More risk than any so called side effects. The irony of course is that many of these anti vaxxers were vaccinated as children. Thus are protected.
Secondly the very real risk that this nonsense gains traction and sufficient people stop vaccination and there is a real threat of an epidemic.

The anti vaxxers in their stupidity are mostly protected by herd immunity. If that breaks down their children die.

The problem is that people forget just how recently infant mortality was far more common even in the West. In the sixties, two of my wife's sisters died as babies. She herself spent six months in hospital as a baby and was close to death several times.
​She is now a medical scientist so very aware of the importance of vaccination.

That's forgotten now. Combine that with pure stupidity and ignorance and we have a problem.
Steepclimb is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 11:37
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: mids
Age: 54
Posts: 0
If you have time, why not see for yourself? We can learn from everyone, even ‘idiots’.
There is nothing to learn from pseudo science conspiracy theory. If there was something to learn it would be call science.

they are being nice calling it pseudo..... bollocks would be more technically correct
tescoapp is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 11:42
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 671
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
Yes.

I was referring to Gove's infamous comment that "People in this country have had enough of experts", echoing the sentiments expressed in the comments.
Thanks, that’s all I ask.

I pay little attention to what most politicians say, as none of it seems to matter that much to what actually happens. I think Gove would say anything if he thought it would help him personally.
Stan Woolley is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 12:15
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: In the air
Posts: 237
Originally Posted by Stan Woolley View Post
Anyway, I think this is an interesting video about Science and Scientists. I don’t think I’m anti-science btw.

https://youtu.be/LfHEuWaPh9Q

My day job is 'science'. That video starts of by raising some real issues, although gives some misleading stats, and I think misses some really important issues especially around funding; eg they focus on the 'conspire with your funder' issue which I think is minor, but miss the reluctance to fund 'novel' science which is crucial. There is no doubt that the science system today is far from perfect. There is no evidence that overt fraud is widespread or distorting science progress. But there is certainly a big problem of confirmation bias and also around the post-hoc hypothesis or P-hacking which works at many levels. As a joke we often say never repeat a succcessful experiment !! Clearly some scientists are a little lax about convincing themselves that a result is real and the video does cover some of the drivers behind that, but misses the biggest.

P-hacking has definitely been an issue in pharmaceutical testing, and regulations now require prior deposit of the hypothesis to prevent this for a trial to be acceptable evidence. To explain what P-hacking is - imagine a trial of a drug intended to reduce blood pressure. You give the drug to 1,000 people and see no overall effect. But then you say, OK, let's see if there is an effect in males, or females, or African Amerians, or people over 50, or people under 50, or people with starting bp above a certain threshold, or below....you can see that eventually one is going to be significant by chance. And that can be a legitimate thing to do provided you then refine the hypothesis and repeat the experiment.

Anyway, I could go on for hours about these issues. Today's science process is far from perfect. But it definitely DOES, eventually, through various deviations, reversals and perturbations improve our understanding of the world.


The trouble is that the video then drifts off into confusing, unsupported nonsense. It extrapolates from the truism that science is not perfect, to utter nonsense such as the autism-MMR link for which there is zero evidence.
double_barrel is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 12:53
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 671
Originally Posted by double_barrel View Post
My day job is 'science'. That video starts of by raising some real issues, although gives some misleading stats, and I think misses some really important issues especially around funding; eg they focus on the 'conspire with your funder' issue which I think is minor, but miss the reluctance to fund 'novel' science which is crucial. There is no doubt that the science system today is far from perfect. There is no evidence that overt fraud is widespread or distorting science progress. But there is certainly a big problem of confirmation bias and also around the post-hoc hypothesis or P-hacking which works at many levels. As a joke we often say never repeat a succcessful experiment !! Clearly some scientists are a little lax about convincing themselves that a result is real and the video does cover some of the drivers behind that, but misses the biggest.

P-hacking has definitely been an issue in pharmaceutical testing, and regulations now require prior deposit of the hypothesis to prevent this for a trial to be acceptable evidence. To explain what P-hacking is - imagine a trial of a drug intended to reduce blood pressure. You give the drug to 1,000 people and see no overall effect. But then you say, OK, let's see if there is an effect in males, or females, or African Amerians, or people over 50, or people under 50, or people with starting bp above a certain threshold, or below....you can see that eventually one is going to be significant by chance. And that can be a legitimate thing to do provided you then refine the hypothesis and repeat the experiment.

Anyway, I could go on for hours about these issues. Today's science process is far from perfect. But it definitely DOES, eventually, through various deviations, reversals and perturbations improve our understanding of the world.


The trouble is that the video then drifts off into confusing, unsupported nonsense. It extrapolates from science is not perfect, to utter nonsense such as the autism-MMR link for which there is zero evidence.


Are you certain that it’s ‘utter-nonsense’? How can you be so sure?

Zero evidence? Trying to find any evidence that contradicts your opinion and that of the mainstream is not easy nowadays. More and more, anyone holding a contrary opinion is censored and rubbished. Articles are removed from google or placed so far from the top that you have to be quite determined to find them, if that’s actually possible. Have you ever wondered why the infamous Dr Wakefield was a well respected academic until he started voicing opinions that weren’t mainstream endorsed?

https://www.activistpost.com/2019/01...mediately.html
Stan Woolley is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 13:02
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 362
Originally Posted by double_barrel View Post

My day job is 'science'. That video starts of by raising some real issues, although gives some misleading stats, and I think misses some really important issues especially around funding; eg they focus on the 'conspire with your funder' issue which I think is minor, but miss the reluctance to fund 'novel' science which is crucial. There is no doubt that the science system today is far from perfect. There is no evidence that overt fraud is widespread or distorting science progress. But there is certainly a big problem of confirmation bias and also around the post-hoc hypothesis or P-hacking which works at many levels. As a joke we often say never repeat a succcessful experiment !! Clearly some scientists are a little lax about convincing themselves that a result is real and the video does cover some of the drivers behind that, but misses the biggest.

P-hacking has definitely been an issue in pharmaceutical testing, and regulations now require prior deposit of the hypothesis to prevent this for a trial to be acceptable evidence. To explain what P-hacking is - imagine a trial of a drug intended to reduce blood pressure. You give the drug to 1,000 people and see no overall effect. But then you say, OK, let's see if there is an effect in males, or females, or African Amerians, or people over 50, or people under 50, or people with starting bp above a certain threshold, or below....you can see that eventually one is going to be significant by chance. And that can be a legitimate thing to do provided you then refine the hypothesis and repeat the experiment.

Anyway, I could go on for hours about these issues. Today's science process is far from perfect. But it definitely DOES, eventually, through various deviations, reversals and perturbations improve our understanding of the world.


The trouble is that the video then drifts off into confusing, unsupported nonsense. It extrapolates from the truism that science is not perfect, to utter nonsense such as the autism-MMR link for which there is zero evidence.

Great post DB, thank you. Agree completely.

I also think the issue raised in the video of peer review and objectivity is a good one; unaccountable journals counting as „scientific publications“ is another. From a few reasonable departure points, it then journies into the vague and unsubstantiated. But isn‘t that they way in our world of easy persuasion through misinformation?

Stan, I think you have fallen for an “all or some” error. Yes, some science is erroneous and many theories gets overhauled with time as new and more robust theories get developed. But the scientific method is still by a generous mile the most robust and accepted means of establishing and testing knowledge.

Experts are by definition just that. That some are sometimes wrong doesn’t mean all experts are to be distrusted. Especially when a lot of people presented as experts for discoursive effect aren’t what they claim to be. The doctor (but poor scientist) who spread doubt about the MMR vaccine being the obvious case in point.

I think your post has had the interesting effect of bringing arch-rivals in the Brexit debate to a common position of agreement.
Torquetalk is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 13:34
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: In the air
Posts: 237
Originally Posted by Stan Woolley View Post


Are you certain that it’s ‘utter-nonsense’? How can you be so sure?

Yes I am. Because there is zero evidence. And I mean that in a strict sense of experiments designed to address that very question failing to find a statistically significant effect. There may be effects too small to be detected. So what? There may be an infinite number of unknown effects that were not detectable by a given study.

And I don't mean anecdotal stories about Joe Blow's kid. I don't mean one-off observations about something or other. They are not evidence. I mean precisely, properly designed experiments with the null hypothesis that there is a link, consistently failing to find an effect.

That tells me that one one hand we have a total absence of evidence of any link between autism and MMR and on the other hand a clear health benefit from protection from 3 nasty infectious diseases. So it is a no brainer what to do when faced with that 'choice'.
double_barrel is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 13:45
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 671
The doctor (but poor scientist) who spread doubt about the MMR vaccine being the obvious case in point.
Thanks for the post, Torquetalk.

I think you have fallen for a similar error. All or nothing. I don’t ‘100% believe’ much, I tend to favour or not favour things. When it comes to subjective topics, I leave things open. Where I think I’m different to many others, is that I probably put more things in the ‘subjective’ set than most. I think many topics should be allowed to be discussed openly, sadly that’s becoming increasingly difficult to do without people having such strong opinions about things. I really think it’s arguably more dangerous shutting topics down as having any ‘anti-vaxxer’ being allowed to express their honest opinion.

I don’t consider myself an anti-vaxxer, my daughter has had her vaccinations as I had. However, I became interested in this topic when our neighbours in Brunei and still close friends had a son that they strongly suspect became autistic shortly after having the MMR vaccine. It certainly made us think very carefully about how, where and when we had our own daughter vaccinated when the time came.

Lets take Wakefield as an example. As of this moment, how much time have you spent looking into his case? Either reading books or watching videos. What have you read/seen that makes you so sure of Wakefield’s guilt?
Stan Woolley is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 16:52
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Pacific
Posts: 713
Here in the US and also, I have been told, in the EU, the government is permitting, even encouraging, the illegal invasion of our borders. Those invaders come from countries with low personal and public sanitation or public health programs and are naturally protected against the diseases they live with their entire lives. When caught (IF they are caught) crossing the border the new policy is to transport them to "sanctuary" cities where they live amongst us. We, and our kids, have no natural immunity to these diseases because our sanitation and health standards are way higher. Pockets of disease are being created and our people are falling ill.

But the useful idiots have been told it is OUR fault and to label those who disagree in any way with this great, beneficent government control of our lives as Anti-Vaxxers.

Proof, if you needed it, that 1984 is alive and well.
boofhead is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 17:06
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Oxfordshire
Posts: 594
Wakefield was struck off the medical register by the UK General Medical Council (GMC) after an inquiry found accusations proven of deliberate falsification of data in his research paper (among many other also proven allegations) concerning a link between autism and the MMR vaccine, for those who didn't know.
Blues&twos is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 17:33
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Oxfordshire
Posts: 594
Boofhead, which diseases specifically are you talking about being brought in by invaders? How many of your citizens have fallen ill as a direct result of an invader-borne disease?
Who told you this was happening in the US and EU?
This sounds pretty serious.
Blues&twos is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 17:34
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 362
Originally Posted by Stan Woolley View Post


Thanks for the post, Torquetalk.

I think you have fallen for a similar error. All or nothing. I don’t ‘100% believe’ much, I tend to favour or not favour things. When it comes to subjective topics, I leave things open. Where I think I’m different to many others, is that I probably put more things in the ‘subjective’ set than most. I think many topics should be allowed to be discussed openly, sadly that’s becoming increasingly difficult to do without people having such strong opinions about things. I really think it’s arguably more dangerous shutting topics down as having any ‘anti-vaxxer’ being allowed to express their honest opinion.

I don’t consider myself an anti-vaxxer, my daughter has had her vaccinations as I had. However, I became interested in this topic when our neighbours in Brunei and still close friends had a son that they strongly suspect became autistic shortly after having the MMR vaccine. It certainly made us think very carefully about how, where and when we had our own daughter vaccinated when the time came.

Lets take Wakefield as an example. As of this moment, how much time have you spent looking into his case? Either reading books or watching videos. What have you read/seen that makes you so sure of Wakefield’s guilt?

We could type about this issue until the cows come home, but the BBC did an excellent review of the matter in the following programme:

In The Wake of Wakefield

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b09rwgcg

I’ll take a manifestly well-researched review from a trusted journalistic source involving people who clearly know what they are talking about, over a hotch-potch of vague associations and claims backed by no one of any credibility any day.


Boofhead

Do try and rejoin reality.
Torquetalk is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 18:41
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 671
Originally Posted by Torquetalk View Post



We could type about this issue until the cows come home, but the BBC did an excellent review of the matter in the following programme:

In The Wake of Wakefield

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b09rwgcg

I’ll take a manifestly well-researched review from a trusted journalistic source involving people who clearly know what they are talking about, over a hotch-potch of vague associations and claims backed by no one of any credibility any day.
If you really think the BBC is a ‘trusted journalistic source’, then I agree, there’s really no point in further discussion.
Stan Woolley is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 19:06
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: South Oxfordshire
Posts: 594
https://www.nhs.uk/news/medical-prac...-in-mmr-scare/

How about the General Medical Council?
There is a link in the webpage above, in the section entitled "What was its verdict?", to a pdf download of the GMC's full ruling concerning Wakefield and two of his colleagues.
It runs to 143 pages, so quite detailed.

Last edited by Blues&twos; 24th Feb 2019 at 19:40.
Blues&twos is offline  
Old 24th Feb 2019, 19:38
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: EU
Posts: 362
Originally Posted by Stan Woolley View Post


If you really think the BBC is a ‘trusted journalistic source’, then I agree, there’s really no point in further discussion.
Ah Stan, why am I not surprised that you felt cued to give that response?

​​​​​​Yes it is my opinion th​at the BBC is an outstanding public broadcasting institution, which does Britain proud.

I’m sure you made the right decision in not actually listening to the hour-long programme. I don’t think it would have been a convenient fit for your pseudo scepticism.
Torquetalk is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.