I’ll give the Canary Party credit for one thing, if credit you can consider it. It’s persistent in its promotion of antivaccine pseudoscience.
Somehow, someone at Current TV decided that it would be a good idea to show an utterly unbalanced, utterly cranky, utterly propagandistic “documentary” (The Greater Good) that seeks to demonize vaccines as the cause of autism, neurodevelopmental disorders, autoimmune disease, and, apparently tooth decay, too. (I’m joking about the last one–but just barely.) I wrote about its misinformation, cherry picking, and relying on anecdotes rather than science in great depth.
In order to get parents in the San Ramon Valley Unified School District in California to watch, the Canary Party first trotted out the actual school board president, Greg Marvel, who wrote an utterly credulous letter touting the “balance” of the movie (balance that is utterly false balance). Next out of the box came a public health nurse by the name of Nancy Sheets, who wrote a similarly fawning letter about the movie. I still haven’t decided if she’s that credulous or whether she was sucking up to Marvel as the school board president. Maybe a little of both. So what’s next? Easy! Trot out a pediatrician!
The pediatrician the Canary Party trotted out is named Dr. Janet Levatin, and this is her letter:
Re: The film “The Greater Good”
3/22/2012
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Janet Levatin, MD, and I have been a board-certified pediatrician since 1989. I attended the George Washington University School of Medicine, graduating in 1982, and completed a pediatric residency at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey. I have been practicing pediatrics as an attending-level physician since 1986, and have been following the issues of vaccinations and parental consent for many years.
I had the opportunity to see the film “The Greater Good” several months ago. I found the film very informative and thought-provoking in its discussion of the development of vaccines and vaccine policy. The information is well presented, and offers a balanced discussion of the issues. The opinions of neuroscientists and physicians who raise pertinent questions about current vaccine policy are presented; additionally, time is given to medical professionals who strongly advocate for vaccine policy as it exists.
Parents are constantly making decisions that influence the health and safety of their children. As a pediatrician I encourage all parents to inform themselves fully and to discuss many issues with their children’s health care providers, especially elective procedures such as vaccination. “The greater Good” is an excellent educational resource that parents can use as they prepare to discuss immunization plans with their pediatricians.
Sincerely,
Janet Levatin, MD
Are these people like Fox News and the right wing media, all reading from the same talking points handed down periodically? Once again, we see a health care professional touting “balance” in the movie, when it’s the most wretched kind of false “balance,” in which pseudoscience is presented side-by-side with real science as though it were as credible as the real science, with the intent of–obviously–making the pseudoscience seem credible to people who aren’t familiar with the science behind the issues being discussed. As I pointed out at the time, The Greater Good is a lot like the anti-evolution movie Expelled! that way.
Of course, one thing that Dr. Levatin neglects to mention can be found on her website. Click on the link and you’ll see Dr. Levatin proclaim that her practice is “holistic pediatrics” and homeopathy for children and adults. Yes, Dr. Levatin is a physician who has gone over to the dark side in the worst way imaginable other than becoming a reiki master or a faith healer. She’s become a homeopath. But it’s even worse than that. Not only is she a homeopath, but she works with one of the leaders of the antivaccine movement at her “holistic” clinic in the Cleveland area. We’re talking Sherri Tenpenny, DO, baby and her Tenpenny Integrative Medical Center.
In fact, right there on Tenpenny’s website, I easily found an article by Levatin titled Why Do Doctors Push Vaccines? The article a veritable cornucopia of antivaccine tropes about pediatricians, including claims that they push vaccines because they’re too simple and lazy to learn anything but the very basics, leading the to “robotically” push vaccines. The, of course, Levatin thinks there’s a huge financial incentive. Then, of course, she can’t resist confusing correlation with causation:
Most physicians no doubt believe they are contributing to the health of vaccinated individuals and promoting the greater good of society. Few, if any, connect the deterioration of our nation’s health with the bloated vaccination schedule that now jabs 40 doses of 16 vaccines into tiny bodies by five years of age. Indeed, more recently trained doctors may look at a truly healthy child as an anomaly. Their only experience has been treating children with diseases that are vaccine-induced but somehow thought to be part of “normal development.” When did doctors start believing that speech delays, sensory-integration disorders, asthma and eczema are a normal part of childhood? Why have doctors – and parents – accepted that OT, PT and speech therapy are a “normal” part of growing up?
Or maybe, according to Levatin, it’s all fear:
Even if they are not fans of vaccines, many doctors give vaccines out of fear. They do not want to question authority or challenge professional organizations and licensing bodies, such as state medical boards. From the very beginning of medical education, bright, aspiring medical students, interns and residents are taught to do as they are told, follow orders and not confront the status quo. Doctors-in-training who challenge the system or dare to think independently are often punished with more work or publically humiliated in front of their peers. Early on, they get the message they better tow the Party Line if they want to survive. Later, when in their individual practices, doctors who buck the system and don’t vaccinate, or vaccinate less aggressively, often suffer penalties such as losing hospital privileges, being dropped from insurance company rosters or being ostracized by their peers.
Yep, according to Levitan, pediatricians push vaccines not because vaccines have arguably saved more lives than any other medical intervention–and not by a little. And it’s certainly not because vaccines are incredibly safe and effective. Oh no. Pediatricians push vaccines, according to Levitan, out of a combination of greed, blindness to The Truth, fear, adherence to the status quo, and a desire to dominate that leads them not to tolerate parents who question vaccines.
Like Marvel, Levitan is more than a little disingenuous in her letter, too. In it, she characterizes herself as “following the issues of vaccinations and parental consent for many years.” She also brags about how she “encourages all parents to inform themselves fully and to discuss many issues with their children’s health care providers.” Yet, a brief glance at her bio on Tenpenny’s website, we find that she has been a Homeopathic Master Clinician for over ten years and that she “regularly refers children for chiropractic, craniosacral therapy, allergy elimination, and other modalities.”
In other words, she’s a quack, in my not-so-humble “insolent” opinion.
More importantly, though, for purposes of this discussion, Levitan–shall we say?–understated her “skepticism” about vaccines. In fact, she didn’t mention it at all. But, right in her bio for Tenpenny’s clinic, we find:
Throughout her training Dr. Janet disagreed with much of what she observed in the conventional medical practice, including overuse of medications, unwholesome hospital nutrition, and virtually nonexistent methods for true prevention and health promotion. Since seeing more than one case of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome) after infant vaccination in the 1980s, she has been an outspoken physician against the over-vaccination of children.
Funny, but we didn’t see anything about this in her letter. I wonder why. Oh, I know. Could it be because she wanted to represent herself as a completely mainstream, science-based doctor, the better to make her praise of The Greater Good and its “balance” seem to be coming from your basic conventional pediatrician rather than from an antivaccine homeopath who does not practice science-based medicine. On second thought, pointing out that a homeopath is antivaccine and doesn’t practice science-based medicine is a bit redundant. Oh, well…
Levatin’s credulous and disingenuous letter appears to be strike three by the Canary Party in its attempt to persuade the parents of San Ramon Valley Unified School District to tune in to antivaccine propaganda. But they’re not doing just that. The Canary Party appears to be pulling out all the stops in that it’s now pushing what it calls The Greater Good Recommendation Kit. In it are a bunch of PDFs and Word documents full of promotion for the movie, faux “facts” about vaccination based on cherry picked studies, confusing correlation with causation, and other favorite antivaccine tropes.
Over the last three or four days, the Canary Party has been promoting The Greater Good with increasing intensity, all in an effort to try to sell it to the parents in the San Ramon Valley Unified School District. One wonders if Kent Heckenlively, who is a science teacher there, thinks the vaccination rates in his school district are too high and is actively trying to lower them by finding like-minded people in his district and pushing this movie. At least it’s only airing once.
121 replies on “The promotion of an antivaccine propaganda movie continues apace”
Sorry Orac, I’m in a silly mood now…
“Doctors-in-training who challenge the system or dare to think independently are often punished with more work or publically humiliated in front of their peers. Early on, they get the message they better tow the Party Line if they want to survive.”
I gotta see doctors who TOW the Party Line.
Orac you already mentioned Dr. Levitan and her penchant for telling parents to lie about their reasons for “opting out”
https://www.respectfulinsolence.com/2007/10/using_religion_to_avoid_vaccination_revi.php
Levitan’s parents in Boston must be devastated by her move. you know what they say whenever this *type of doctor* relocates…Boston’s gain is Cleveland’s loss.
Don’t worry about her Boston woo-loving clients being left in the lurch. She lists several other Boston-area “homeopathic doctors” and doctors who “don’t push vaccines” at the bottom of this page:
http://www.janetlevatin.com/
Levitan is also involved in some hooey called BodyTalk which involves tapping various parts of the body
“to determine the weakened or broken energy circuits in your bodymind complex that are being highlighted by your innate healing wisdom. Once an energy circuit is identified, any additional details that are relevant are determined. Your BodyTalk Practitioner will link these destination points in the sequence indicated, thereby constructing a “formula” that describes the energetic circuit that will be re-established.”
The stupid burns my eyeballs just reading it.
The BodyTalk website is full of some of the most nonsensical gibberish I’ve ever seen, it’s almost funny. Click on the “About BodyTalk” tab at the top of Levitan’s page:
http://www.janetlevatin.com/
I know that some individuals are distrustful of authority, which carries over into a distrust of doctors, but how can these individuals put their trust in so-called “doctors” that believe in “magic water?”
@lilady
D’oh! That’s what I get for not searching my own blog about Dr. Levitan before writing this…
Oh, well, Dr. Sears next (later today) and then I’ll move on to other topics. Vaccines have taken over again.
If anti-vaccine activists are honest, there are all sorts of better candidates for substances which might contribute, environmentally, to conditions such as asthma & eczema (indeed, our modern penchant in North America for daily bathing/showering might well contribute to the latter) beyond vaccines.
In addition, thanks to the extraordinarily low present-day child mortality rates, there are all sorts of children who might have weaker immune systems than others who might be vulnerable to developing such conditions who would have died from infectious diseases in the pre-vaccine era.
I would also conjecture that the near-universal demand that chldren learn to read as well as speak in contemporary society might have effects on cognitive development – since arguably learning to read is not “normal” in any reasonable anthropological/geological sense.
Conjectures all, I admit. I suggest they are more plausible than vaccines (which rely on a well-demonstrated phenomenon of immune system activity) as the cause of ill-health.
Bottom line: anti-vaccinationists would be better served determining if there really is an unprecedented degree of asthma in the United States and, if so, trying to trace its provenance through proper research, instead of simply blaming it on vaccines without further thought.
What parent would want to vaccinate their child with RotaTeq after reading this from
Merck’s own website:
https://www.merckvaccines.com/Products/Rotateq/Pages/rotateq.aspx?WT.mc_id=T0061
I suppose any sensible and responsible parent who would want to protect their child against rotavirus diarrhea, and who actually appreciates how dangerous it can be (it affects every child under 5 and causes 60,000 hospitalisations and 37 deaths each year in the US)?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17357047
@dt
“When the data were extrapolated to the US population, rotavirus was estimated to be the cause of approximately 60,000 hospitalizations and 37 deaths annually. ”
Notice the words “extrapolated and estimated” in the above.
The head tapping is classic! (Body talk cortices technique)
Balance the imbalanced cerebral cortices by tapping the skull and sternum with your fingers (which have opposing magnetic polarities). Yeah, right.
lurker @8 — To “extrapolate” and “estimate”, they have to use sophisticated technique like “multiplication”, and even “division”, so their conclusions can’t possibly be anything like the real numbers. /sarcasm
@Marc Stephens Is Insane: Body Talk? Did you read the testimonials…I gotta get a *body talk* practitioner.
Orac, Did you state we can expect another dose of Respectful Insolence today? Double scoops of Friday Woo…and it isn’t even my birthday.
Composer99: Whether or not there are increases in kids being diagnosed with eczema or asthma and the causes of those increases is being investigated by researchers and funded through the NIH.
Meta-analyses have shown that there are some small differences dependent on race (blacks have higher incidence of asthma) socio-economic status (higher reported incidences of eczema reported for kids whose parents are educated beyond high school…and who probably have private insurance resulting in access to dermatologists) and indoor pollution (second hand smoke increases risk of asthma, yet apparently does not increase risk of eczema). Living in substandard housing with roach and other pest infestations increases risk of asthma, as well.
There are so many confounding factors to analyze to determine why kids are diagnosed with eczema and asthma…but that does not prevent the anti-vaxers and their “political party* (Canary Party), from using and misusing ongoing research into these disorders to associate eczema and asthma with *teh dreaded vaccines*.
They call everything an “epidemic” including the *epidemic of Type II diabetes*…(conveniently forgetting the epidemic of childhood obesity that “might” be causing childhood-onset Type II diabetes)
The Canary Party whose founder is Mark Blaxill are trying to increase their base…looking to attract libertarians, **GOGs who do not want a national health care plan, parents of kids with eczema and asthma, conspiracists and other anti *Big Gubmint* malcontents.
**Greedy Old Geezers
lilady @11 — I still think that our Pharma Overlords should name a new, popular drug “Blaxill”.
Unless you have an actual reason to think that the largest US hospital discharge database available is not representative of the hospitalization experience of the general population, and specifically incorrect in the direction of being less dangerous in the general population than in the very large sample used, you have no argument.
Well?
Didn’t think so.
@ lurker: Still fixated on rotavirus and still libeling Dr. Offit, eh?
Why don’t you answer my questions and Chris’ questions?:
Which rotavirus vaccine was licensed in 1998…and which pharmaceutical company developed the vaccine?
Which rotavirus vaccines were licensed after 1998…and which pharmaceutical companies developed the vaccines?
Just answer the questions Troll…so we can dispense with your smearing of Dr. Offit…and his supposed COIs while serving on the ACIP.
This parent for one, Lurker.
Neither of my children exhibited any of the contra-indications (combined immunodeficiency, history of intersussception, etc.) and considering risk versus benefit is overwhelmingly in favor of immunizing.
Just look at the numbers:
There were 6 cases of Kawasaki’s reported during initial clinical testing, 5 out of the 36,150 subjects who received the vaccine, and one among the 32,536 subjects who received placebo instead. As of June 2008 6 million doses of RotaTeq had been distributed, with an additional 3 cases of Kawasaki’s syndrome reported.
Rotavirus infection, on the other, in the US causes ~400,000 doctor visits, ~200,000 emergency room visits, between 55,000 and 70,000 hospitalizations, and between 20 and 60 deaths among children less than 5 years of age each year. As expected things are far worse when we consider developing nations: worldwide rotatviruse is responsible for about 1,600 deaths daily among children less than 5 years of age.
So we have to weigh the vaccines extremely small risks of minor side effects–and the almost vanishingly small risk of something like Kawasaki’s disease (3 cases out of 6 million doses following approval)–against established risk of remaining vulnerable to the disease they protect against.
Can you do the math?
Why is Orac in a rush of creating another blog that contains the same $#!+? Now I have to dig up those pile of dung that he left stinking in the archives. Don’t worry I’m wearing PPE.
The “very large sample” Antaeus refers to @ 13 was actually about 50% of the entire US birth cohort. That’s got to be about as representative a sample as you can possibly get!
And what are you holding there in your hand, a Hemostat?
Thingy @ 18
Ah, but the haemostat is mightier than the sword!
I recommend that PPE include an orthopedic hat–perhaps one with an aluminum foil liner?
Yesterday, out of the blue, my Irish friend, derisively shaking her head, informed me: “People are so *f–king* STUPID!”
” I know. ” I said.
Dr L is a ‘signatory’ of an anti-vaxx declaration ( 2011) by the official-sounding International Medical Council on Vaccination- which reads like a Who’s Who of luminaries in the movement.
This reminds me of the infamous list of – what is it?- ‘over 2000 professionals’ who question the HIV/ AIDS hypothesis. Of course, this document has already been de-constructed by many HIV/AIDS realists but I bring it up because anti-vaxxers are doing much the same: they trot out people who have real credentials ( MD, RN, DO et al) and present them as though they were a representative sample of their colleagues. Which they are not in any shape, manner or form.
I notice that anti-vaxx activists sign on to several groups – Blaxill is the most obvious but there are many more. I’m sure that someone could do a graphic of the overlaps. Thus we have replication of concerned citizens and of concerned professionals rather than replication of studies. Why would they do this?
They want to create the appearance of more people being involved or concerned than really are: it’s an amateur version of data-fixing. There are truly only a few activists and proselytisers who show up multiple times in multiple outlets. Just like Jake.
I know our critics can hurl the same label at us but here’s one obvious difference: we represent consensus in the first place, we have no need of masquerading as such to a partially-informed public.
Th1th2 is so very obviously a failed med student or maybe a former lab tech with some kind of MCB undergraduate degree. He has decided his slight ability to use a handful of medical-sounding words makes him an expert. Embarassing.
Not everyone can be as ceaselessly innovative as you, I suppose, Schneck.
“Hundreds of medical doctors are here to tell you the truth about vaccination” from vaccinationcouncil.org (International Medical Council on Vaccination) I hereby rest my case.
Oh look here…a very recent (February 8, 2012) compilation of studies that looks at intussusception incidence using the VAERS data base, the Vaccine Safety Data Link and other studies conducted post marketing.
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/rotateq_intussusception.html
This is interesting…look at the immense numbers of vaccine doses that have been studied:
As of August 2010, the total number of vaccine doses that had been distributed in the U.S. since licensure was approximately 38 million for RotaTeq and approximately4.7 million for Rotarix.
The Trolls still have not answered my questions and Chris questions about Paul Offit and his supposed COIs, regarding licensing of the 1998 vaccine and the licensing of rotavirus vaccines developed more recently.
The Trolls need to get some basic knowledge about the incidence/baseline of intussusception and Kawasaki disease in an unimmunized population versus kids who have received the two rotavirus vaccines that are licensed now.
@ palindrom: Yes, we need to formulate a business plan to market Blaxill(TM) for our *Big Pharma* overlords.
I’ve been working on the “Physician’s Prescribing Information Sheet” for submission to the FDA:
Blaxill Liquid (TM) (Indications For Prescribing)
Infant Formulation: administered at 2-4-6 months of age for prevention of rotavirus infections.
Children Ages 1 year-12 years: for treatment of autistic enterocolitis
Blaxill Single Dose Injectable (TM) (Indications for Prescribing)
All-purpose multiple antigen vaccine-in lieu of all childhood and adult primary series and booster doses of vaccines.
Blaxill Nebulizer (TM) (Indications for Prescribing)
For prevention and treatment of childhood and adult-onset Asthma
Blaxill Salve (TM) (Indications for Prescribing)
For prevention and treatment of eczema; for topical chelation to prevent and treat heavy metal-associated-autism
And…
Blaxill Lypholized Powder Suitable For Reconstitution (TM) (Indications for Prescribing)
When reconstituted with sterile water and admixed in IV 0.09 N.S. solution, as a chelation agent for *curing* autism.
Denice @21 and 24 — The climate-change-denial movement uses EXACTLY the same tactic of (a) trotting out some credentialed cranks to deny the overwhelming scientific consensus and (b) compiling extremely dubious “petitions” of “scientists” who “question” the consensus.
In their case, the credentialed cranks are all some combination of old, out-of-touch, ideological, reflexively contrarian, or inexpert (like the 16 signatories to the Wall Street Journal Op-Ed piece a few months ago), and the lists include items like the infamous “Oregon Petition”, which purportedly has 31,000 signatures. The large number does not give it any weight, since it includes essentially any wingnut who claims to have had some scientific training.
The amount of crapola out there is staggering. If all of us give up, or don’t pay any attention, they win by default. The entire Republican Party — the new Trotskyites of the right — has adopted anti-science as doctrine. Let’s keep the flag flying …
lurker, for a man you has never changed a diaper, especially one of a toddler with rotavirus: you are quite glib about others who have suffered through it. Just like your experience with rubella. Did you ever figure out how many pregnant women you may have infected with rubella?
So, do tell us: which rotavirus vaccine was approved in the late 1990s: RotaShield or RotaTeq? What is the significance with Offit?
JGC @20: I think “PPE” is Thing-ese for “my underpants on my head”.
@ palindrom:
* If all of us give up…*
In the late 18th Century, coffeehouses sprung up where guys went and discussed new ideas… so welcome to Orac’s Cyber Cafe, have some scepticism with your cappuccino. Think I’ll go with Chai.
More research $ should go into finding the causes of the rise in childhood cancers-
http://www.jeffgordonchildrensfoundation.org/site/c.5oIDJRPyGfISF/b.6874173/k.4BBE/Childhood_Cancer_Stats.htm
lurker, which rotavirus vaccine was approved in the late 1990s: RotaShield or RotaTeq? How is that significant in the accusations against Offit?
Stop changing the subject, and answer the question.
@Chris-the question is irrelevant to the safety issue of RotaTeq
“@Chris-the question is irrelevant to the safety issue of RotaTeq”
Au contraire mon Troll…the questions that Chris and I have asked you, are relevant to the smear tactics and libelous statements that you and the other Troll have made about Dr. Offit.
Answer the questions or apologize to Dr. Offit, Troll.
No, lurker it is relevant to your previous statements supporting Proscientifica’s libelous and unsupported statements on Offit:
https://www.respectfulinsolence.com/2012/03/will_prevail_in_his_libel_suit.php#comment-6247292 :
Now, answer the question:
Which rotavirus vaccine was approved in the late 1990s: RotaShield or RotaTeq?
Also, I do not need a semi-literate man who has never changed a diaper trying to explain how RotaTeq is more dangerous than rotavirus. Trust me, I would have taken the tiny risk with RotaTeq over the week of hourly diaper changes, the massive seizure, the ambulance trip to the hospital and seeing the toddler hooked up to an IV.
lurker, answer the question.
He did have a financial interest in RotaTeq
http://lizditz.typepad.com/i_speak_of_dreams/2011/01/a-statement-from-paul-offit-md.html
So what? Of course, Offit is one of the developers of RotaTeq, which is why we are asking you answer this question:
Which rotavirus vaccine was approved in the late 1990s: RotaShield or RotaTeq?
@Lurker
Thanks for that link to Liz’s blog. I knew those AoA people were tricksters, but I didn’t know they continued to defame Dr. Offit even after presented with evidence he’d given up his stake in vaccine manufacturing. You’ve only proven everyone’s point but your own. Thank you for that.
And….another one
Thanks Liz for Tricia Selka’s letter, but she *inadvertently* omitted her *other* interest in this film:
http://blog.autismspeaks.org/2011/03/14/diet-and-autism/
Tricia Selka
March 15, 2011 at 10:47 pm | #83
Reply | Quote
Wow! Sounds like a lot of parents have great results with this diet! My 3 1/2 year old son is high functioning and in April of 2010, 3 months before his 3rd birthday, was diagnosed as being on the autistic spectrum. Around Motherâs Day, I put him on the GFCF diet and started the supplements as recommended by my DAN! doctor. The changes have been incredible. I think one supplement that has really helped are the B-12 shots. At that time, he was saying one or two words, not putting words together. Last week he said a six word sentence, âMama got a new purple balloon!â Read and research, parents. We would not all be testifying to the same types of things if this were not the truth!
If California’s AB 2109 turns into a real fight, I might be motivated to construct a social network analysis of the anti-vaccine movement….but I’d have to learn how. There are multiple layers of overlap (for example, Cliff Shoemaker, the vaccine-injury lawyer, is on NVIC’s board, Claire Dwoskin was on NVIC’s board as of 2009, and funded The Greater Good (the movie); Joe Mercola has interviewed Andy Wakefield and has donated to NVIC; etc etc etc.
@ Liz: Try to look at Jake Crosby’s spurious six, sixty, six hundred degrees of separation posts…to learn how NOT to do a spreadsheet to connect the dots.
@ Liz:
If you would intrepidly descend into the dark underside of pseudo-science itself, start at:
Progressive Radio Network: search out investigations, issues, guests archived ( everyone who is anyone in anti-vaxx has spewn their swill here since 2000), including show hosts ( doctors, lawyers** et al). A bit harder to search than it was a few weeks ago… I wonder why?
Gary Null.com- articles et al. However, the search box has just gone missing.
Don’t say I sent you.
** I did a bit about the legal eagle inter-connections at one of the RI posts involving David Lewis, I think. Off the top of my head: S.Kohn, R. Krackow, R. Fucetola, M. Holland, RFK jr …all there Barr none.
lilady – another very good explanation for the amount of children living with asthma is that, well, they’re living. They’re identified, treated, and given preventative medication and relieving medication that lets them live normal lives.
My mother, at ten years of age, watched her best friend die on the ground in their local park. Rose was cyanotic, gasping, and clawing at her throat. When I was diagnosed with asthma (at four) I can remember my mum screaming in abject terror, convinced that history would repeat itself.
Kids live with asthma because they’re not dying from their first attack of bronchospasm. It kills me to see woo-promoting fuckwits implying that’s a bad thing.
@Reuben-You’re welcome.Yes, I am not a fanatic and consider all viewpoints- but he did make millions withRotaTeq. Why should I listen to lilady, Chris et all who are not pediatricians- I would prefer the schedules of Dr. Sears and Gordon if I had to vaccinate my children all over again. They did just fine with the schedule before 1983 and are very healthy. They did not get RotaTeq-
@Chris- sorry if your children weren’t as healthy as mine. Not all Congressional hearings can be found at .gov
@ elburto: Your observations about kids surviving past infancy and early childhood, works for me.
Well stated elburto…including your last sentence:-)
You have still not answered the question.
Fine, listen to the AMA, CDC, and AAP. Do you really think that a couple fools who pull stuff out of their nether regions are more reliable than the entire collective body of the medical profession?
I’m glad they were lucky. Other children aren’t, and there is no way to predict who will and won’t be harmed by the disease – hence it’s just nonsensical to not vaccinate for it.
@lurker – you still haven’t figured out that Offit didn’t vote on his own vaccine, have you?
And actually, all Congressional hearings are available via the National Archives (at minimum) and the Congressional Record, so either put up or shut up.
lurker:
[sarcasm]Wow, aren’t you a giving guy.[/sarcasm] I bet you have nice things to say about the rest of our kids who are disabled, died and the many who have autism.
Seriously, you have not got a clue. The primary source of that quote is from whale.to, a place run by a guy whose bum was burned by satanic ley lines. It was most likely faked, like much of the anti-vax talking points: like Offit’s voting for a rotavirus vaccine in the late 1990s.
Stop being a heartless clueless jerk and answer the question: which rotavirus vaccine was approved in the late 1990s: RotaShield or RotaTeq? Tell us what it has to do with Offit’s rotavirus research.
When I wrote “our kids” I meant of all the people who comment here. Knowing that lurker is semi-literate, I figure I have to explain that.
I bet he has similar obnoxious things to say to the family of the little girl that Roald Dahl’s book, The BFG is dedicated to.
lurker, why are not answering the very simple question on what rotavirus vaccine was approved of in the 1990s? Does it do away with one of AoA’s big lies?
– and what’s wrong with that? Steve Jobs made multimillions marketing IPhones. Peyton Manning makes multimillions playing football. Are they bad guys, too?
What are you, a communist?
@Chris-I’m female-give it a rest.
@lurker – no excuse for your inability to answer simple questions (and certainly an insult to the other females here).
lurker:
1.Which pharmaceutical company developed RotaShield vaccine?
2.Which pharmaceutical company developed Rotarix vaccine?
3.Which pharmaceutical company developed RotaTeq vaccine?
4.Which rotavirus vaccine did Paul Offit and other researchers develop?
lurker, your smug referral to Chris’ child, has been duly noted; just another nasty ignorant citationless troll.
@ Lawrence-Who was the brilliant pediatrician who vaccinated Hannah Poling?
@lurker – I don’t answer questions from those that refuse to answer questions from others. Either man (or woman)-up and answer the questions posed to you or get out of dodge with your bag full of misinformation and outright lies.
Offit is lilady’s fantasy husband and Orac is her fantasy son.
Lawrence: lurker has been determined to be, a smug nasty ignorant citationless troll.
Troll, constantly changes the subject after it is caught in its many lies…totally clueless and totally classless.
“Me thinks you do slander too much” No fanaticism, no lies from me nor stupid
and irrelevant questions.
My heart goes out to those injured by vaccine preventable diseases and those
injured by vaccines.
All those chidren injured by vaccines did have parents who had faith in vaccines.
Blaxill Liquid (TM) (Indications For Prescribing)
Blaxill (TM) sounds promising. Can it prevent Citational Incontinence and the Gish Gallops?
TBruce,
@51
They are not infection promoters. Big difference.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-106hhrg73042/html/CHRG-106hhrg73042.htm At our April 6th autism hearing, Dr. Paul Offit disclosed that he holds a patent on a rotavirus vaccine and receives grant money from Merck to develop this vaccine. He also disclosed that he is paid by the pharmaceutical industry to travel around the country and teach doctors that vaccines are safe. Dr. Offit is a member of the CDC’sadvisory committee and voted on three rotavirus issues, including making the
recommendation of adding the rotavirus vaccine to the Vaccines for Children program.
Dr. Bimler: We at *Big Pharma* are working on other formulations for Blaxill (TM).
Blaxill Suppositories (TM)
Indications for Prescribing
Treatment of CID (Citationless Incontinence Disorder)
Blaxill Extended-Release Transdermal Patch (TM)
Indications for Prescribing
For prevention and treatment of GGD (Gish Gallop Disorder) or prn for intermittent treatment of episodes of GGD.
I *heard* that Lord Draconis is quite interested in our research.
Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Policy Making
Majority Staff Report Committee on Government Reform
U.S. House of Representatives June 15, 2000
The other .gov can’t be found at the moment. It is in the NVIC archives which is denigrated by Chris, lilady etc.
Here’s the link anyway
h ttp://www.nvic.org/nvic-archives/conflicts-of-interest.aspx
They deny this is a valid document.
Well, finally! Thank you. It means he honestly stated his conflicts of interest. But those words were uttered by Rep. Dan Burton, who is not exactly an honest or unbiased politician. He seems to be bashing Offit just because he is anti-science.
There is this comment from Rep. Waxman:
This is why we need the actual link to read the words in context. Now that we have them, it is not as much of a smoking gun as you think.
Now, lurker, answer which rotavirus vaccine was approved in the late 1990s: Rotashield or RotaTeq. Now which rotavirus vaccine is being discussed in that document?
Offit for Profit.
@lurker
Yawn, a tired old ad hominem, how utterly predictable by a troll like you.
Now, are you going to answer Chris’s question, or, by your childlike insults, admit that you have nothing to add to the conversation?
“Me thinks you do slander too much” No fanaticism, no lies from me nor stupid
and irrelevant questions.
My heart goes out to those injured by vaccine preventable diseases and those
injured by vaccines.
All those chidren injured by vaccines did have parents who had faith in vaccines.
@novalox- the truth is Offit had a major conflict of interest and made millions-
I read the Merck website about RotaTeq and wouldn’t have given my children that vaccine. You do what you want, that is your choice. My choice supports pediatricians like Dr. Gordon, Dr. Sears etc.
@lurker
And yet you still refuse to answer the question Chris posed to you.
Shows how much of a heartless coward you are.
lurker, which rotavirus vaccine was approved in the late 1990s? Your refusal to answer that question is quite telling.
In clinical trials, the most common adverse events included diarrhea, vomiting, irritability, otitis media, nasopharyngitis, and bronchospasm.
In post-marketing experience, intussusception (including death) and Kawasaki disease have been reported in infants who have received RotaTeq.
RotaTeq may not protect all vaccine recipients against rotavirus. https://www.merckvaccines.com/Products/Rotateq/Pages/rotateq.aspx?WT.mc_id=T0061
lurker, which rotavirus vaccine was approved in the late 1990s: RotaShield or RotaTeq?
Also, what are the levels of those adverse events compared to a child actually getting rotavirus? Provide the actual post-marketing studies, not the vaccine flyer.
@Chris @novalox The question is irrelevant
I’m more interested in vaccine safety than history of vaccine development.
@lurker
So you admit your cowardice and admit that you are wrong, as well as having absolutely nothing to add to the conversation.
Good to know that then.
lurker, it has already been considered relevant because you and Proscientifica claimed Offit had a conflict of interest, both you implying that he voted for RotaTeq. That is lying by omission.
The answer is RotaShield, not RotaTeq. He voted for a vaccine by a competing company. He obviously did this because he cared about children.
@lurker
Your totally lame and ultimately futile attempts to implicate Paul Offit in making money by voting for his own vaccine have backfired spectacularly.
Not only did he not vote for his own vaccine, he actually voted for a competing manufacturers rotavirus vaccine.
Now I can see why you don’t wish to apologise or even acknowledge this – that would merely expose your antivax agenda and anti-Offit bias, and exposes you as lacking all objectivity in the matter.
So now you try and switch the subject to “vaccine safety” and say this is your only concern. LOL. Nice swerve. But even then you have picked a loser. Compare if you will the numbers of expected deaths/cases of intussusception with rotavaccines compared to background incidence, and delight in the revelation that the vaccinated kids do not have an excess of complications/side effects. And on the plus side, the vaccine is brilliantly effective at eliminating rotavirus gastroenteritis.
That’s a win-win in anyone’s book.
(crocodile tears)
Yikes, Whale/NVIC really butchered that conversion. As I’m finding this a bit tedious, the nominal actual artifact is here (PDF). I have no opinion as to its authenticity. The PDF metadata state that it was created from a Word document on 2003 January 7 by “Dina.”
Eh, the Word document is successfully retrieved by the Wayback Machine from house.gov for 2003 April 30. I presume it hasn’t been modified.
From that Word document:
Also in that document:
@ lurker: Are you seriously deranged? You keep bringing up that cherry-picked paragraph from the Merck Physicians Prescribing Information Sheet. And, I keep telling you that the FDA requires reports of untoward reactions/deaths…even if they are reported on the VAERS database, by parents, nosy neighbors, a lawyer for a infant murderer or an anti-vaxer.
The same nonsense is reported on the VAERS database for teens who have received HPV vaccine, and then months or years later are killed in an automobile crash, or then drown or commit suicide.
Stop the crap, admit you are wrong and apologize to Dr. Offit for your scurrilous libelous statements about him.
Paul Offit is a Doctor? I thought he worked in PR and advertising.
John, that is the kind of bad information you get when you just hang around echo chambers like AoA. Perhaps you should try getting information elsewhere, like PubMed.
Are you serious guys? What idiot would vote against a vaccine from a competing
pharma for a disease that he is developing a vaccine for. When his comes on the market how would he explain it? @61
We are serious. All evidence points to the fact that he did something based on ethics rather than greed. If you consider the idea of acting in an ethical manner “stupid”, that casts serious doubt on your sense of right and wrong.
Also, Dr. Offit abstained from voting when it was decided to remove RotaShield because of his conflict of interest.
When you read the Word Document Narad found on the Wayback machine, you will find there are others with even more conflict of interest issues.
Plus, the quote was from Dan Burton, who we are glad to say is is leaving Congress. He was not unbiased, and tried to have things his way, even to the point of trying to influence the Autism Omnibus proceedings.
@ Gray F -“Conflict of interest was the correct term”- I was replying to Chris’s reasoning.
I am sure he cares for children but he might be wrong in his recommendation of
the current vaccine schedule and criticism of Dr. Sears.
Awww, you are a Dr. Bob fangirl. How sweet. Do hate him because he criticized Dr. Bob? Are you going to now hate Dr. John Snyder because he wrote Cashing In On Fear: The Danger of Dr. Sears?
lurker, are you aware we can simply scroll up and read your previous comments?
Snide does not convince nor does it educate- it’s a real turnoff. Grow up!
Isn’t Dr. Bob Sears the doctor whose unimmunized patient returned from France, and became the “index case” for a major measles outbreak in San Diego? Read the whole sordid details about how other children in his practice became infected in Sears’ office waiting room, including an infant who was hospitalized for rehydration, desperately ill with measles:
http://justthevax.blogspot.com/2011/04/2008-measles-in-dr-bob-sears-waiting.html
Hey Th1Th2!
Good to see you!
Still claiming to have worked in a hospital before dishing out ‘medical advice’?
What hospital, what job?
(The question Thing cannot ever answer. Watch and see.)
MMR II and Autism: Microcompetition the Missing Link?
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/3/prweb9268424.htm
lurker@89: Now, instead of addressing questions of honesty, you complain about tone. Would you prefer a polite con artist?
lurker…take a look at this:
https://www.respectfulinsolence.com/2012/02/microcompetition_with_antivaccinationist.php
lurker, are you still Dr. Sears’ biggest fan…after reading the link I provided at # 90 above?
You really are an ignorant odious troll…libeling Dr. Offit and promoting Sears who is a public health menace.
And to be fair -here is Orac’s blog.
respectfulinsolence.com/2012/02/microcompetition_with_antivaccinationist.php
I really do like to see both sides of the argument.
Thanks lilady-
Dr. Sears is not a public health menace and Dr. Offit may be wrong.
“Thanks lilady-
Dr. Sears is not a public health menace and Dr. Offit may be wrong.”
Sears is a public health menace, responsible for the San Diego measles outbreak; you haven’t provided one scintilla of research that indicates Dr. Offit is wrong.
Still an ignorant odious troll, our “lurker”.
lurker, who loves Dr Bob Sears, explain this to me. This week Dr Bob had an article on HuffPo: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-bob-sears/california-vaccination-bill_b_1355370.html
In it, he complains
How do we reconcile this complaint with his advocacy of an alternative, spaced out vaccination schedule for which he will charge insurance separately for each office visit?
Dr Bob is not only a public health menace, heâs also a hypocrite!
“Are you serious guys? What idiot would vote against a vaccine from a competing pharma for a disease that he is developing a vaccine for. When his comes on the market how would he explain it? @61”
I’m not sure I understand this.
Are you saying that you believed that there must have been a conflict of interest, that Offit would have concealed or otherwise violated COI ethics and that Offit would certainly have voted on his own product, just because that makes financial or business sense to you?
And, moreover, that anyone who behaved like this is an idiot. You used that particular word, not my choice.
I find this very odd.
I believe lurker’s position can be summarized as follows: if Dr. Offit had voted *for* the competing vaccine (i.e., to keep it on the market), he would have been callously indifferent to the suffering and death of little children; if he had voted *against* it, he would have been cynically abusing his power by removing a competitor; and if he had abstained, as he did, then he would merely have been acting cleverly by giving the appearance of right action while really counting on the rest of the pharma-shills to help him out.
Did I get that right, lurker?
So according to your double standards, Offit who is working on a completely separate rotavirus vaccine, if he votes to reject a vaccine by a “competititor” is clearly serving his own private interest over the public good. And if he does the exact opposite, approving a product that addresses a life-threatening public health problem and is available now instead of still in development, that too is clearly serving his private interest over the public good.
What a lucky man he is, that he can choose from two diametrically opposed options and they are both so wonderfully in his favor that they prove he is not choosing to serve the public interest!!
Here’s why no one can take you seriously, lurker: Your hypothesis is not falsifiable. That is, you keep pointing to Offit’s actions and saying “see! conflict of interest! siding with big pharma over the public good!!” But you clearly never ask yourself “If Paul Offit was actually a good man who produces vaccines and recommends the use of vaccines because they save children from misery and death, what action would he take then? What action could he take that I would accept as being motivated by the public good?” There are clearly actions he could take that would represent a selfless choice to put the public good above his own good – but there’s none that could convince you with your rigged process of judgment.
Go ahead, lurker! Tell us – if you thought there was a public health threat that needed to be stopped, and you had spent years trying to develop an invention that could stop it, and now you had a chance to see another invention that had a chance of stopping it go into widespread use, what action would you take? And how would you ever convince someone who had started out with the conviction “lurker is an evil, greedy, selfish exploiter” that whichever action you took was the result of trying to do the right thing?
Lurker: Simple, he had some doubts about the vaccine he was working on, and the vaccine that was developed by the competing company had less adverse effects. At least that’s my impression.
Gray Falcon:
Only a hypocrite would complain about tone when her first comment to me was to call me an idiot:
Of course, she claims to both be female and have had children, but does not have a clue that to cannot tell a woman is pregnant until a few weeks into the pregnancy. This is why she seems to be acting like a clueless guy who never changed a diaper in his life.
And she complains about tone when she keeps mentioning that her children were healthy, and the kids affected by diseases were just unhealthy. She is a jerk.
Eh, the Word document is successfully retrieved by the Wayback Machine from house.gov for 2003 April 30. I presume it hasn’t been modified.
The document’s properties describe the author as Toni Lightle, a legislative aide for Dan Burton. My understanding is that this “Conflicts of Interest in Vaccine Policy Making: Majority Staff Report” is a statement of Burton’s position — a description of the points he intended to make from a congressional hearing — prepared in advance of the hearing itself, and before he came into contact with facts. Presumably this is why it is hosted on whale.to and on NVIC, rather than on a .gov website… it has as much official standing as any other statement of a politician’s electioneering, i.e. none.
Despite lurker’s misapprehension @45, it is not the actual hearing.
Current TV…it spite of the fire it drew from the scientific community…plans to re-air the film on April 22nd.
http://current.com/bfd/93713862_why-does-the-vaccine-debate-continue-to-rage.htm#comments
@lurker: The post by herr doktor bimler *says it all*. Try again, troll.
Comments makes me think twice.
Commenter “Corporate Gifts” is a Spammer.
I am also outspoken against the over-vaccination of children. Just as soon as there’s any real evidence children are being overvaccinated, I’ll be sure to speak out.
Late to the party..again
(my excuse: I work away a lot.)
#22 Taylormattd
Nah… either of those would require entry level prerequisites in fields where this humpty Dumpty troll has proved itself totally ignorant. Although I suppose it’s possibly that it may have attempted, and failed spectacularly, high school level studies that would have enabled it to gain entry to a medical degree.
That also might explain its serial hate of science based medicine and of those who were capable of fulfilling the requirements to actually practice it in the real world.
You just have to look at the type of rhetoric it spits and sputters out at those here with genuine qualifications. Those particular responses alsways strike me as having an underlying “what about me…I’m just as good as you” whine to them.
It’s obviously just a wannabe without the mental fortitude to invest in the formal study so it has simply awarded itself a Google degree in medicine.
#61 Lurker
That would be the cult hero of the antivaxxers: Andrew Wakefield!
Do I get a cookie?
@ Sauceress: Name your poison (or cookie)…you deserve a whole box of yummy delectable cookies.
Genuine qualifications you mean? Like this guy holding a Hemostat?
Yeah right.
Thanks Lilady.
I’m rather partial to a choc-mint flavour.
Thingy, how can you even begin to call people out on their qualifications?
What job, what hospital?
re #112
I rest my case!
Thingy (SFB Troll), how can you even begin to call people out on their qualifications?
What job, what hospital?
Just as a matter of curiosity, has anyone figured out why Thingy is obsessing about hemostats?
“Just as a matter of curiosity, has anyone figured out why Thingy is obsessing about hemostats?”
I can only assume it is also germ-phobic. You would have to have access to *SFB* Troll’s medical records, that *SFB* Troll’s keepers have…as *SFB* Troll cycles in and out of mental hospitals…in between Its stints in a cave, or a sewer, or a cardboard box.
BTW *SFB* Troll…how can you even begin to call people out on their qualifications?
And,
What job, what hospital?
For those who don’t know, Orac is a breast cancer surgeon. That type of cancer is so rare in children he could easily go most of his life without encountering a case, much less treating one.
Can only guess that’s a stems from its unfamiliarity with the term. It has a tendency to ridicule the use any term when it is clueless as to the meaning of the reference.
Bah…typo demons
“that stems”