Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Autism Clinical trials

Yet more evidence that vaccines are safe and do not cause autism

Can we just say that vaccines are safe, already? Can we just say that, of all the medical interventions ever conceived by the minds of humans, vaccines have almost certainly saved more lives and prevented more illness? Can we finally say that vaccines do not cause autism?

Of course not, unfortunately. I ask the same question about whether we can finally say that the earth isn’t 6,000 years old, but rather billions of years old, and there are still people out there who believe that evolution is a sham and the earth really is only 6,000 years old. Truly, the irrationality of humans is without bounds. So it is with vaccines, where, despite mountains of evidence testifying to their efficacy and safety and large studies failing to find even the whiff of a hint of a link between vaccines and autism that, for all intents and purposes, it is reasonable to conclude that there is no such link. None of this stops antivaccinationists from demonizing vaccines as a major cause of the “autism epidemic,” sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), asthma, cancer, and just about every disease you can think of.

That’s why it always warms the cockles of my heart (if a Plexiglass box of blinky lights has a heart) to see yet another study trying to drive a stake in the heart of the vampire that is the myth that vaccines cause autism. In any rational world, the myth would have exploded into a pile of red goo and blood, like the vampires in True Blood when they’re staked, but, again, this is not a rational world. Still, it’s always worth reviewing more evidence that vaccines are safe, and yesterday there was a doozy of a summation of that evidence published in Pediatrics in the form of a massive review of the evidence regarding vaccine safety carried out by investigators from the RAND Corporation, UCLA, and Boston Children’s Hospital.

This study came about because the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) requested an evidence report on the safety of vaccines recommended for routine immunization of adults, children, and adolescents. in order to identify gaps in evidence. This review article therefore reviews the safety of vaccines recommended for routine use in children aged 6 years and younger and presents the results of a comprehensive and systematic review of scientific evidence, describes statistical associations between vaccines and adverse events (AEs), and reports on any risk factors identified. And, boy, was that review big:

As presented in Fig 1, 20,478 titles were identified through electronic literature searches; review of product inserts; review of Food and Drug Administration, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, and other Web sites; reference mining; and requests for Scientific Information Packets from drug manufacturers. Of those, 17 270 were excluded on review of abstract or title for reasons such as “not about a vaccine,” “vaccine not within the scope of this project” (formulations never available in the United States, recommended only for travel), or because they were animal studies. Upon full text review of the remaining 3208 articles, 392 were identified as relevant background/theoretical materials and set aside as potential references for the Introduction; 2749 other articles were excluded. The most common reason for exclusion was lack of suitable study design (1549): individual case reports, nonsystematic reviews, and studies using passive surveillance were excluded. Many publications (458) discussed vaccines on the recommended schedule but did not report or assess AEs. Eighty-eight studies on adults or adolescents were excluded for this article, as were 11 studies of children with preexisting conditions such as HIV, juvenile arthritis, or cancer, which left 67 studies. These studies are in addition to those included in the 2011 IOM consensus report Adverse Effects of Vaccines: Evidence and Causality, which were not abstracted.

The schema is illustrated below:

Fig1vacc

People often wonder why such a large collection of references is routinely winnowed down so much in these review articles, it’s because the initial search is designed to find as many articles as possible, and the subsequent culling is designed to get rid of irrelevant articles, articles thad don’t meet the predefined quality criteria, and the like. For instance, in this case, articles that dealt with vaccines that are no longer used would not be relevant to the specific question the investigators were interested in, namely the safety of the current vaccine schedule. I’m sure this will be something that antivaccinationists attack, saying that their children were “vaccine injured” even though the vaccine that “injured them” aren’t used anymore.

Another important aspect of such a study is to evaluate the quality of adverse events (AE) reporting. In this case, the authors used the McHarm scale, which is the name for the McMaster Quality Assessment Scale of Harms. It’s a scale that requires yes/no answers (or whether it’s unsure) to questions like:

  • Were the harms PRE-DEFINED using standardized or precise definitions?
  • Were SERIOUS events precisely defined?
  • Were SEVERE events precisely defined?
  • Were the number of DEATHS in each study group specified OR were the reason(s) for not specifying them given?
  • Was the mode of harms collection specified as ACTIVE?
  • Was the mode of harms collection specified as PASSIVE?
  • Did the study specify WHO collected the harms?
  • Did the study specify the TRAINING or BACKGROUND of who ascertained the harms?
  • Did the study specify the TIMING and FREQUENCY of collection of the harms?

There are more questions, but you get the idea. Here’s a sample analysis for a series of studies used in a systematic review and meta-analysis of cognitive enhancers for patients with mild cognitive impairment.

Next, the authors basically listed their findings for each vaccine that is used. For example, for the DTaP (Diptheria-Tetanus-acellular Pertussis) vaccine, they found:

The IOM studied diphtheria toxoid, tetanus toxoid, and acellular pertussiscontaining vaccines alone and in combination in both children andadults. The IOM committee did not find evidence that “favors acceptance” of causal relationships for any conditions. They found the evidence “favors rejection” of a causal relationship between type 1 diabetes and vaccines containing diphtheria toxoid, tetanus toxoid, and acellular pertussis antigens. We found no additional studies in children published after the IOM search date; our review of their assessment supports their conclusions.

In other words, the authors found no good evidence suggesting that DTaP causes diabetes or any other condition.

And so it goes. For example, the Hib vaccine was associated with redness at the injection site and swelling, but not with hospitalizations, nor was it associated with fever or any other serious AEs. A summary of the findings by the authors includes:

  • Support for the IOM results that the vaccine against hepatitis B is not associated with an long or short term AEs.
  • Support for the IOM results that the MMR vaccine is associated with febrile seizures.
  • Moderate evidence linking influenza vaccines with mild gastrointestinal events
  • Support for an association between the trivalent influenza vaccine with febrile seizures.
  • Moderate evidence of an association between the MMR vaccine and thrombocytopenic purpura; similar associations were found for the varicella and hepatitis A vaccines.
  • Moderate evidence of an association between the varicella vaccine and thrombocytopenic purpura in children aged 11 to 17 years
  • No evidence of an association between vaccines and leukemia or lymphoma.
  • Support for the IOM results of no evidence of an association between MMR and autism; indeed, the authors characterized this as “strong evidence that the MMR vaccine is not associated with autism.”
  • High level evidence for an association between the varicella vaccine and anaphylaxis
  • High level evidence for an association between the varicella vaccine and disseminated varicella infection in the immunosuppressed

There are a bunch of others, mostly with moderate to weak evidence of associations with a few rare AEs and associations with more common but minor AEs. There’s no such thing as a highly effective medical intervention that never causes AEs, and vaccines are no different. However, although the authors found evidence for some serious AEs due to vaccine, the risks were very, very low. For instance:

Although 1 large US epidemiologic study found no association, a recent analysis of the US PRISM program found both RotaTeq and Rotarix associated with intussusception in the short term. Estimated rates were 1.1 to 1.5 cases per 100 000 doses of RotaTeq and 5.1 cases per 100 000 doses of Rotarix.

In other words, severe AEs from vaccines are extremely rare. There were few weaknesses in this study, and what weaknesses there were were minor. For instance, the authors intentionally did not use studies that mined the VAERS database for AEs because it’s a passive surveillance system and cannot be used to assess a statistical association. It was a wise decision, because of how hopelessly compromised the VAERS database has become due to litigation and lawyers urging people to report everything and anything, particularly autism, as AEs to vaccines, whether there is a convincing association or not.

Of course, none of this is anything new. We’ve known that, although minor AEs like redness at the injection site or febrile reactions are not uncommon, severe AEs from vaccines are very rare. Indeed, this study was conceived to build on a previous review by the Institute of Medicine, which I characterized a year and a half ago as “Quoth the Institute of Medicine: The current vaccine schedule is safe and effective. Quoth antivaccinationists: Gahhhh!” The reaction of antivaccinationists is about the same now. That’s how antivaccinationists always react to another brick in the wall supporting the safety and efficacy of vaccines, particularly when it’s a particularly large and strong brick. Weighing the benefits versus the risks of vaccines, the evidence comes down very much in favor of vaccines. As Carrie Byington, MD, a pediatrician at the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, puts it in an accompanying editorial, fortunately, the AEs identified by the authors are rare and expected to resolve quickly and completely in most cases. These have to be weighed against the incredible benefits of vaccination, which, as Dr. Byington puts it, “This [the risk of vaccination] contrasts starkly with the natural infections that vaccines are designed to prevent, which may reduce the quality of life through permanent morbidities, such as blindness, deafness, developmental delay, epilepsy, or paralysis and may also result in death. She also notes that these benefits aren’t just ancient history, either, as in the elimination of smallpox and the impending (we hope) elimination of polio, but continue today:

An evaluation of the US vaccine program from 1900 to 1998 demonstrated reduction or elimination of many infectious diseases that had resulted in substantial childhood morbidity and mortality, including smallpox, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, and Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib). Newer vaccines, including those that target pneumococci, human papilloma virus, influenza, rotavirus, and varicella, are also reducing morbidity and mortality. Modeling of vaccine impact demonstrates that routine childhood immunizations in the 2009 US birth cohort would prevent ∼42 000 deaths and 20 million cases of disease and save $13.5 billion in direct health care costs and $68.8 billion in societal costs. The Vaccines for Children program, operating since 1994 to provide vaccines at no cost to low-income children, has eliminated racial and ethnic disparities in immunization coverage, ensuring that all US children have an opportunity to enjoy the benefits of vaccines.

Oddly enough, the response of the antivaccine movement has been largely muted. The best the antivaccine crank blog Age of Autism could come up with is a post by its “media editor” Anne Dachel, asking What does generally safe mean? It’s basically an attack on Mike Stobbe, an AP reporter, who is lambasted for his reporting on this story, calling him a “true believer,” ranting that he’s never called for the unicorn that is the “vaxed/unvaxed study” that antivaccinationists always call for, she then writes:

Mike Stobbe needs to understand that despite the years of his faithful reporting on vaccines, WE’RE NOT BUYING IT. There’s just too much autism out there that no one can responsibly explain and too many autistic kids who also have seizures. AND JUST TOO MANY PARENTS WHO SAY IT WAS THE VACCINES!

Confusing correlation with causation, thinking that the plural of “anecdote” is “data” supporting causation, it’s all there. It’s also all completely recycled. It’s as though Dachel isn’t even really trying anymore.

Meanwhile, someone whom I have never heard of before, Suzanne Posel, posts five reasons to question recent RAND Study. It’s nothing more than rehashed antivaccine talking points that I’ve refuted more times than I can remember on this blog, all delivered in a confusing fashion. After all, if you’re going to do a post with a title that is obvious link-bait (as most titles that advertise lists like “five reasons that…” are), you should number the reasons clearly. From what I could gather, one of the reasons is “[INSERT GENERIC ANTIVACCINE GARDASIL FEAR MONGERING HERE]” followed by SaneVax nonsense about HPV DNA in vaccines. It’s so dumb that I can’t believe SaneVax keeps repeating it as “microcompetition.” If Posel thinks SaneVax is a reliable source and knows vaccine science, she’s just revealed herself as clueless about vaccines.

Oh, wait. She cites Lucija Tomljenovic, who has been co-author on a number of execrable papers seeking to link vaccines with autoimmune diseases, premature ovarian failure, and, of course, death based on a truly incompetent analysis.

As I said, it’s as though antivaccine loons aren’t even trying anymore.

And vaccines are safe, no matter what the antivaccine loons say.

By Orac

Orac is the nom de blog of a humble surgeon/scientist who has an ego just big enough to delude himself that someone, somewhere might actually give a rodent's posterior about his copious verbal meanderings, but just barely small enough to admit to himself that few probably will. That surgeon is otherwise known as David Gorski.

That this particular surgeon has chosen his nom de blog based on a rather cranky and arrogant computer shaped like a clear box of blinking lights that he originally encountered when he became a fan of a 35 year old British SF television show whose special effects were renowned for their BBC/Doctor Who-style low budget look, but whose stories nonetheless resulted in some of the best, most innovative science fiction ever televised, should tell you nearly all that you need to know about Orac. (That, and the length of the preceding sentence.)

DISCLAIMER:: The various written meanderings here are the opinions of Orac and Orac alone, written on his own time. They should never be construed as representing the opinions of any other person or entity, especially Orac's cancer center, department of surgery, medical school, or university. Also note that Orac is nonpartisan; he is more than willing to criticize the statements of anyone, regardless of of political leanings, if that anyone advocates pseudoscience or quackery. Finally, medical commentary is not to be construed in any way as medical advice.

To contact Orac: [email protected]

159 replies on “Yet more evidence that vaccines are safe and do not cause autism”

Oddly enough, the response of the antivaccine movement has been largely muted.

I’m guessing one of two things.
1) They know it’s bulletproof and aren’t even going to try refuting it.
2) They need time to come up with a “refutation”.

I feel the efforts of anti-vaccinationists, of late, are more focused on outbreaks of measles and pertussis. They swarm all news article comments sections and also make up their own “articles” stating that: (1) the outbreak is proof vaccines don’t work, and (2) the majority of those with measles/pertussis were unvaccinated.

Both are outright lies, but like any propagandist knows, if you repeat a lie often enough, some people will start to believe it.

One possible avenue of attack by antivax loons would be to focus on the RAND Corporation (which once formulated the nuclear deterrence policy of mutually assured destruction and had an analyst who speculated on the possibility of a winnable nuclear war).

Look for “Dr. Strangelove Study Threatens Our Children” or somesuch.

I had actually thought of antivaxers attacking the RAND Corporation. In fact, I’m surprised Mike Adams hasn’t already produced a spittle-flecked post doing just that. Maybe that’s scheduled for tomorrow.

I was offended by Posel’s twisting of HPV evidence.
I find HPV vax uptake to still be abysmal, and I think part of the problem is docs not pushing it enough. Could some folks here recommend methods by which public health schools can reach out to vanilla docs in the wild. (I’m newly in a school of public health now, you see.)

Orac,
Mikey is already too pre-occupied contemplating the horrors of nuclear Ragnarok and simultaneous immigrant-borne infectious disease Armageddon in the medical police state.

I see most of the same braintrust is inhabiting sMothering.

Chris, I believe you made a typo in your #2, should be “vaccinated”.

@ Science Mom #8–yes, I did–should be “vaccinated”. Sorry.

Another avenue for attack for anti-vaxers is Boston Children’s Hospital’s involvement. They’ve been the focus of (IMO) unjustified attacks in the case of Justina Pelletier, something AoA has jumped on, too.

re : ” in any rational world, the myth would have exploded into a pile of red goo and blood, like the vampires in *True Blood* when staked…”

If only.

It looks there are some pretty weird people at Mothering, but I suppose the subtitle: “The Home for Natural Family Living” says it all. I get the impression the word ‘Natural’ serves as a kind of warning sign. If you see that word, you might expect some cows excrement.

Or like the vampires of ‘buffy’- they just turn to dust which floats away….

Speaking of spittle-flecked rants, Mike Adams has a lengthy one posted about the “medical police state” in which U.S. health care workers are allegedly threatened with arrest by “brownshirts” if they divulge the shocking level of communicable disease carried by immigrant Mexican children:

“If the government’s argument is that a schoolchild must be vaccinated to prevent the spread of measles, then how does that same government explain its total lack of willingness to enforce a border that has become a floodgate for measles, Swine Flu, scabies, lice and a long list of other communicable diseases?”

It strikes me that if you’re going to worry about Mexicans bringing in measles and swine flu (not to mention travelers from any foreign country that could be transporting these and other infectious diseases), that’s a very good reason to support vaccinating U.S. residents against the pathogens involved.

Not in Adams Bizarro-World, though.

@Dangerous Bacon

I’m surprised he didn’t include cooties in that list.

rork: I find HPV vax uptake to still be abysmal, and I think part of the problem is docs not pushing it enough.

Maybe, but I think the abysmal uptake is due to the vaccine being too expensive, and not covered by insurance. Thanks to the Supreme Court, uptake is sure to drop like a rock.

how does that same government explain its total lack of willingness to enforce a border

The US government is certainly trying to enforce the border. But it’s thousands of kilometers long, much of which is countryside that is inhospitable to farming. Unless you want to turn large swaths of Texas, Arizona, and California into a police state, some fraction of the people who are trying to cross that border will get through. We know that ICE catch many more in the attempt as it is.

And the rhetoric he’s using sounds remarkably like what eugenicists of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, including Him Who Must Not Be Named, were saying about people they considered inferior. This is a dangerous development, particularly if Mike has also expressed strong opinions on the Second and Tenth Amendments.

@ Eric, aside from that, the vaccine uptake in the lower Americas is very high, better than the U.S. overall.

Eric: Additionally, the majority of undocumented immigrants are people who overstayed temporary visas, not illegal border-crossers.

Mike had rather a condescending attitude about the native people when he lived in Ecuador:
they worked so hard, were so friendly and- best of all- they would build your gigantic hacienda, weed your garden or wash your clothes for virtually nothing!
He would give them little gifts and toys for their kids.
How charming!

He has other interesting attitudes about people who live in the “ghetto”, subsist on governmental assistence etc. Some of his cartoons and videos depict minorities un-attractively – altho’ not 100% of the time- I guess that’s in case he gets called on it.

I don’t know if he really believes this stuff or if he thinks it’s what his audience wants to hear.

Like the other loon I follow- oh wait, I follow LOTS of loons- like the other *alt media honcho* loon I follow, he crafts a despicable message that is fuelled on fear and divisiveness.
There are terrible things on those sites/ media channels.

Enter at your own risk.

Dangerous Bacon @ 14,(quoting the Health Deranger),”….how does that same government explain its total lack of willingness to enforce a border that has become a floodgate for measles”
He does know the present administration has deported caught and deported more immigrants than prior administrations, right? This current crisis aside, the net traffic across the border has been down over the last 3 years; in a former practice we did the medical intake for all juveniles caught by INS, and if we couldn’t contact an adult that could verify immunization status they got immunized(or re-immunized, as it were-the horror!). I don’t know who his “source” was for the story, but it sounds as well researched as anything else on his website…I’ve never been threatened with arrest, but then I’ve never felt compelled to lie about the ” shocking level of communicable disease” of those terrible little brown Petrie dishes that are immigrant CHILDREN. This is what gets lost in the discussion, the depersonification of these children by dolts like Mike Adams. The fact that he exaggerates and promotes fear at their expense when it should be a real public health discussion is disgusting.

Eric @17 —


Unless you want to turn large swaths of Texas, Arizona, and California into a police state,

As you may recall, I frequently have to travel to regions close to the Mexican border for my work.

And guess what? It pretty much is a police state.

Our supposedly lackadaisical border enforcement has pushed desparate people to try to walk many miles through scorching deserts, where hundreds die.

From the unhealthy ranger:

that has become a floodgate for measles, Swine Flu, scabies, lice

Now I’m confused. Wasn’t Adams part of the people saying that measles is Not That Bad and Swine Flu was a US government/Illuminati hoax?
And anyway, why does he worry about pesky contagious diseases? He keep claiming he know plenty of natural products to boost the immune system.

An surprising truth. I, like many others, assumed that most of these “natural cures” people were of the left-wing “all people are our brothers and sisters!” bent. Then again, they seem to believe nature is not theirs to protect, but theirs to exploit.

@16 about HPV vax: ” I think the abysmal uptake is due to the vaccine being too expensive, and not covered by insurance. Thanks to the Supreme Court, uptake is sure to drop like a rock.”
My insurance paid for it for my daughter, and CDC web says most cover it – several years ago that was less true. (I agree it’s expensive – I’ve lamented that since day 1.)
I’m skeptical about the Court effect too – I doubt many nuts are going to argue that vaxes are against their religious beliefs, and even if they did, there’d have to be a workaround available. Briefly: Subsidizing birth control riders for folks whose company wont give it is very cheap for government/taxpayer – costs essentially nothing since having women use birth control saves insurance company money, cause pregnancies are so expensive. (Pay little attention to the cranks who argue they don’t want to pay the money for women to have birth control coverage – the cost may actually be negative for the insurance company. ) If that subsidy were expensive though, the court might say that tax-payer does not have to subsidize employees to make up for employers discrimination or whacky beliefs. There were words about that in the majority opinion.

It’s as though Dachel isn’t even really trying anymore.

Her latest salvo illustrates just how badly wrong things go when she does try to come up with something original.

“Researchers examined 67 studies and 20,000 research papers. Now obviously a research paper doesn’t have the same weight as an actual study….

“INCREDIBLY the Washington Times said that researchers had looked through 20,000 studies. SERIOUSLY? 20,000 STUDIES? So did several others news sites.

“Reporters will say ANYTHING. They have no idea how absurd they sound.”

Poor Anne, whatever will she do now with no anti-vaxx sympathetic stories in the mainstream media? I see Gerg has enlightened his new-found friends with his genius or should that be genus.

Dachel adds her own personally tragic anecdote to one of her media updates:

http://www.ageofautism.com/2014/07/dachel-media-update-what-does-generally-safe-mean.html#more

“…Stobbe talks about seizures as no big deal. Yes, vaccines are linked to seizures, but it’s nothing to worry about. I can tell you from personal experience that they are. My daughter developed seizures immediately following her Hep B vaccination fifteen years ago. She was 10 at the time. She had seizures on a regular basis for the next three years. We never knew when they might happen. Many were severe….”

Wouldn’t you think that Dachel would have filed a claim on behalf of her child who “developed seizures immediately following her Hep B vaccination” (many of which) “were severe”?

D’Olmsted’s accusing AS and the Simons Foundation of being “rearguard and reactionary” is a delightful bit of irony.

The commentariat just seems to be getting sorrier and sorrier:

Science tells us that bacteria and yeasts (candidasis) preferentially pick up mercury. That would also be offloaded onto the fetus, fungus rich in mercury. Which would explain ‘colic.’

Right, which is why mercury compounds are used as fungicides and bactericides.

rork: I’m skeptical about the Court effect too – I doubt many nuts are going to argue that vaxes are against their religious beliefs, and even if they did, there’d have to be a workaround available. Briefly: Subsidizing birth control riders for folks whose company wont give it is very cheap for government/taxpayer.

1. HPV is diffferent from other vaccines,( cause sluts*) so I suspect religious objections to it will be considered more valid than, say, religious objections to MMR.

2. Birth control will never be covered or subsidized by the US government and isn’t covered now. Yes, it ought to be, but the US is too religious.

*I’m not saying I agree with it, just that most religious people strongly object to a vaccine against a sexually transmitted disease because they think women who sleep around ought to be punished. This is also why birth control will never be subsidized or available over the counter.

PGP: last I checked, I can buy condoms at the drug store.

*Hormonal* birth control will never be available OTC, no. But then again, given the broad range of side effects (been there, got the tee-shirt) I’d prefer that there be *some* medical supervision in their prescription, even if it’s just a consult with an RN…

most religious people strongly object to a vaccine against a sexually transmitted disease

I guess that rules out the Catholic Medical Association, the National Catholic Bioethics Center, and the Texas Catholic Conference from the “religious people” club.

[email protected] 36

This is also why birth control will never be subsidized or available over the counter.

Every insurance plan I’ve ever had covers birth control. Since the US government has only recently become involved in healthcare (and not in my own), I consider that subsidized.

I agree with [email protected]: condoms are available. They aren’t even over the counter – they’re on the shelf. And I also agree that the various types of pill should have a gate keeper writing a prescription and monitoring side effects, which include things raised blood pressure – not something on most young women’s minds.

What exactly do you want over the counter? Diaphrams? They need to be fitted. An IUD? Are you planning to insert your own? Please visit the real world some time, before commenting on it.

Since the US government has only recently become involved in healthcare

Oh, but Medicaid has been around for a while; PPACA tried to extend eligibility. Most states already provided contraception coverage.

Narad @42: thanks for the correction. And the links. I was thinking about universal coverage, and we still aren’t quite doing that yet.

I was thinking about universal coverage, and we still aren’t quite doing that yet.

With some states actively opposing the bits that have been accomplished.

“Walker spokeswoman Laurel Patrick called the White House report ‘wrong’ in an email to The Associated Press.”

Birth control will never be covered or subsidized by the US government and isn’t covered now.

The US government picked up the tab for my birth control the entire time I was on active duty, as it does for all female personnel.

(It also pays for vasectomies).

Study mercury and pretend it’s all vaccines. Good trick. Good thing the idiots in the media are to stupid to see the difference

Mr. Schecter: “Study mercury and pretend it’s all vaccines.”

Please tell us which vaccine on the present American pediatric schedule is only available with thimerosal. Do on included influenza, since half of those approved for children have thimerosal free versions.

Then, Mr. Schecter, you can explain exactly how you are not benefiting from the responsible families in your community that vaccinate. Tell us how you are not a parasite.

“Oh and birth control isn’t health care.”

Then explain how you would feel if your daughter became pregnant in the next year or so. Would you be willing to raise that grandchild? Be honest.

To be a parasite requires an action. Not vaccinating is not an action. Parasites take from others or control others. Those who don’t vaccinate do neither. Thise who force vaccines on the unwilling are the parasites since they exert control over others for their own selfish reasons. Please learn the meaning of words before commenting further

Then explain how you would feel if your daughter became pregnant in the next year or so. Would you be willing to raise that grandchild? Be honest.

This does not demonstrate birth control is health care

An error on “Sid”‘s part: You are acting when you don’t vaccinate. You eat, you breathe, you excrete, all of which can act as disease vectors. Also, I imagine he considers people who don’t work but collect unemployment to be “parasites” as well, so I know he considers that argument valid.

“Not vaccinating is not an action.”

So you admit to being a parasite. Because all it has to do is live off of the efforts of others, which is what you are doing.

“This does not demonstrate birth control is health care”

So you have provided all of the birth control your daughter needs. You’ve taken her to the doctor, gotten her the required protection and/or showed her where to buy condoms. And if all else fails you are going to step up and be a proper grandfather and provide all of the prenatal care, and pediatric care for that child.

Good for you!

Also, elemental mercury and thimerosal are different things. If “Sid” were honest, he wouldn’t use the word mercury in that manner. Why do we keep him around, he clearly isn’t interested in honest discussion?

Chris, you seem to have issues with reading comprehension. I explained why your parasitism argumnet is delusional, but you contiune to refuse accept the obvious. As such I am powerless to help you.

Gray

At 9:00 on an ipad I’m not allt hat interested in the pedantry about the differences betwen mercury and thimerosal. I think we all know the point I was making

Why anyone would want to advertise being uptight enough to hold that opinion is a mystery to me.

BTW.

To be a parasite requires an action

According to my understanding and the dictionary, a parasite is:

an organism that lives in or on another organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the host’s expense

Sounds like a match to me. What action do you think is required?

Not vaccinating is not an action.”

Only if you don’t value having free will and the liberty to exercise it autonomously enough to call doing so an action.

Why do you hate free will, liberty, and autonomy?

It’s the 4th of July, ffs.

The difference between mercury and thimerosal is not a matter of pedantry. In chemistry, and in all sciences, one must be exact with one’s terms. For example, ammonium nitrate is a fertilizer, ammonium nitrite is an herbicide.

Sid @47

Oh and birth control isn’t health care.

Get back to me after you carry a pregnancy (conceived due to lack of birth control) to full term and deliver a baby. So is your wife OK with the idea of maybe getting pregnant any time the two of you desire to take things all the way?

Oh and birth control isn’t health care.

Bob, I say this with all due deliberation: I imagine that you’re proud that your daughter looks just like you.

Hah. The genius who brought you this restricts commenting on his lame-ass FB page. After all, it’s his! all his!. Anybody could have given this to me for free!

Given that the last sighting was “at 9:00 on an ipad I’m not allt hat interested in the pedantry,” I imagine that Bob will be on the wrong side of an imaginary “that’s OK, baby” conversation come daybreak.

To be a parasite requires an action.

Oh boy.
So, if I don’t bother to take out the garbage and expect my roommate do it for the both of us, I’m not a parasite? Good to know.

Actually, you are right, Bob. Deciding to not take an action is an action in itself.

As to birth control being health care – perhaps Sid would like to explain the standard treatment for Ovarian Cysts…..

Mr. Schecter: “Chris, you seem to have issues with reading comprehension. I explained why your parasitism argumnet is delusional, but you contiune to refuse accept the obvious.”

I accept that you don’t get to redefine words (or their spelling) to fit your fantasy, parasite. You are benefiting from the community immunity by the fact that your responsible neighbors vaccinate. Your blatant stupidity is an action. You actively put blinders on to avoid reality.

So as you send your daughter off to a private college, you have made sure that she will either be very chaste or are going to be quite willing to pay cash for either birth control or prenatal care… and possibly pediatric care. So what will you be doing?

You are aware that university medical clinics refer to dorms, especially co-ed dorms, as human forms of rabbit hutches? Right?

@ lilady

Could you please find another nickname for Mr Schecter? The one you are using could refer to a perfectly respectable part of a woman’s anatomy.

Which name would you prefer, I use? He certainly isn’t Dr. Paul Offit a respected physician and researcher….and not a respected author as the real Sid Offit is:

of·fal
ˈôfəl,ˈäfəl/
noun
noun: offal; plural noun: offals

the entrails and internal organs of an animal used as food.
refuse or waste material.
decomposing animal flesh.

He certainly doesn’t have the attributes of women’s boobs:

boob
1 [boob] Show IPA Slang.
noun
1.
a stupid person; fool; dunce.
2.
British . a blunder; mistake.
verb (used without object)
3.
British . to blunder.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: