Categories
Antivaccine nonsense Autism Bad science Medicine Politics Popular culture Pseudoscience

Antivaxers in the wake of SB 276 and SB 714

After the passage of SB 276 and SB 714, antivaxers are very unhappy. They show this by likening vaccine mandates to 9/11 and claiming they know the “real reason” for them, big pharma and government “punishing” them and taking away their rights.

As I mentioned the other day, SB 276 and SB 714 are now law in California, having passed the legislature and been signed into law on Monday by Governor Gavin Newsom, even as California’s antivaccine movement tried desperately to portray itself as the “new civil rights movement” even as it consorted with the white supremacist California State Militia. Although imperfect, SB 276 and SB 714 (mostly) took care of the most glaring hole in SB 277, the law passed in 2015 that eliminated nonmedical “personal belief exemptions” to school vaccine mandates in California. Yes, Monday was truly a monumental day in the annals of protecting children from the ideological scientific ignorance of their parents and stomping on antivaccine quacks who had been flooding the state with “medical exemption” letters for indications not supported by science and medicine. I must confess, though, that I was just waiting for antivax reactions to the passage of these new laws protecting children from harmful and potentially fatal infectious diseases. For instance, it didn’t take the Thinking Drinking Mom’s Revolution to weigh in. (OK, their chosen name is Thinking Moms’ Revolution or TMR, but I simply like to harp on their oft-mentioned love of wine.)

It’s actually rather odd. TMR’s blog has been pretty fallow lately, with only three posts in the last month and a half, if you count the latest on SB 276, The Real Reason for Vaccine Mandates. Our wine-loving friends used to be one of the most active voices in the antivaccine movement, and, yet, in the run-up to the votes on SB 276…nothing. Come to think of it, before I get to TMR’s typically brain dead take on vaccine mandates in general and SB 276 in particular, I can’t help but note something very odd. There’s nothing about SB 276 on Natural News.

Let me repeat that. There’s nothing about SB 276 on Natural News. (At least, there wasn’t last night when I wrote this.) Seriously. You’d think that by now Mike Adams would have written multiple screeds about how SB 276 is the end of American freedom, thanks to the evil socialist—nay, Communist!—Senator Dr. Richard Pan, but there’s nothing. You’d think he’d have been castigating the California legislature for weeks (or even months) now, given that SB 276 was first introduced into the California legislature for consideration several months ago, in his usual histrionic and, let’s face it, batshit nuts manner. Similarly, the other major quack website, that of Joe Mercola, has no mention of the passage of SB 276. True, it mentions the Star Wars cosplay protest against SB 276, a protest I discussed a while back when antivaxers descended in a fit of irony (given how the Disneyland measles outbreak in 2015 shaped California vaccine policy) with signs proclaiming their antivax stance. I thought this very odd. Let’s look at the antivaxers who actually did comment on the final passage of SB 276 and its companion bill SB 714 first, though.

First up, there’s everybody’s favorite merry band of antivaxers, the crew at Age of Autism (AoA):

On this day, almost two decades ago, Americans faced a trauma unrivaled since World War II. During World War II, the Greatest Generation responded with a swift and effective attack, the nation banded together in sacrifice, and then in the decades that followed, the nation prospered and we became the beacon of freedom for the world. After 9/11, America responded with swift words, more than one war that has no end and American citizens willingly gave up freedom after freedom, out of fear. FEAR IS A LIAR. On September 9, California took away the right for its citizens to secure a medical exemption from their doctor. They criminalized the doctor patient relationship. They threaten both the doctors and the patients. Out of a fear of measles. A manufactured war on measles. FEAR IS A LIAR. When Americans face prohibition, they do not stop engaging in the activity.

As I read the title of the article, Governor Newsom Just Created a Market for Back Alley Exemptions via his Prohibition Bills, I couldn’t help but shake my head. What, exactly, are they trying to say here? That the “right” not to be vaccinated is like the right to an abortion? That antivax parents will now somehow go into back alleys to meet with antivax-sympathetic doctors to get “medical exemptions” to school vaccine mandates? How would that even work? After all, SB 276 and SB 714 mandate the use of a standardized state form, and all exemptions will be recorded in a database; so even a “back alley” exemption wouldn’t be very “back alley” given that it would be in the database with all the other medical exemptions. It doesn’t even make sense. I suspect that whoever wrote this gem was a little too enamored of the metaphor she’d chosen and didn’t actually think it through. That’s no surprise, it is AoA. As for SB 276 “criminalizing the doctor-patient relationship,” that’s a particularly annoying antivaccine trope that really does irritate the hell out of me. It does nothing of the sort. It simply puts antivaccine doctors on notice that they are expected to adhere to the standard of care when it comes to medical exemptions.

Next up, we have John Gilmore of the Autism Action Network, who makes a rather unfortunate analogy as he reminisces about 9/11 and the fall of the World Trade Center Towers, drawing a line to the “plight” of antivaxers:

Later, that awful day, my wife and I received the devastating confirmation that our fears about our younger son Luke were correct, and that he had autism. We didn’t know it at the time but our experience with Luke was a common one. Following a fever after getting a group of shots, Luke lost his few words, began to appear deaf, lost any sense of pain, and began odd repetitive behaviors. That news turned our personal lives upside down, on 9/11 the entire world seemed upside down.

Because, apparently, your child getting an autism diagnosis is just like thousands of Americans being killed on 9/11. (It really tells you what these parents think of their own autistic children, doesn’t it?) And, apparently, three mothers disrupting the California Assembly to protest SB 276 is just like Rosa Parks, too:

This morning I was thinking about that day 18 years ago, and what is happening now. Several days ago, three brave parents in Sacramento took the step we all knew was coming, just like Rosa Parks more than half a century ago on a Montgomery, Alabama bus, they refused to comply with injustice and conducted civil disobedience leading to their arrest. No doubt this this will be the first of many to come.

Yes, civil disobedience in the service of protest is a hallowed American tradition, but it needs to be emphasized yet again: Antivaxers protesting for their “right” not to vaccinated is not the “new civil rights movement.” They have every right to protest against SB 276 and SB 714, but they dishonor the memory of the Selma marchers and every person who died fighting for equal rights by comparing their desire to have the “right” to let their children remain disease vectors to the battle to end segregation and achieve equal rights for African-Americans, particularly given that these antivaxers tend to be overwhelmingly white and affluent. They do love to cosplay persecuted minorities, though.

And, no, antivaxers are not going to be killed:

In our efforts to keep our rights in New York we were called Nazis, lunatics, and every expletive you have ever heard. Far more troubling, a former Obama administration official in an editorial published in a newspaper owned by the richest man in the world called parents who question the good intentions of the vaccine cartel, “terrorists.” “Terrorists.” Just like the hijackers on 9/11. And we all know what happens to terrorists.

I wouldn’t go so far as to call antivaxers “terrorists,” but they do harm society. Their rhetoric is also increasingly resembling that of terrorists, full of violent imagery. It also didn’t help the SB 276 protesters’ cause when they teamed up with the xenophobic and nativist California State Militia, a group known for cosplaying soldiers patrolling the southern border looking for brown people trying to cross.

Finally, let’s get back to the “Thinking Moms,” who think they know the “real” reason for increasingly strict school vaccine mandates. Of course, they don’t believe that it’s about public health, even though it is. Oh, no. To them, it has to be about “control” and punishment. To make the argument, they draft someone named Ted Kuntz as the male auxiliary to their coffee klatch:

The argument made for denying a public education to children who are unvaccinated or selectively vaccinated is the risk they pose to the immune-compromised who can’t be vaccinated. It’s a heart-warming story motivated out of compassion for those children who are medically fragile. Or is it? If we take these pro-mandate advocates at their word, then it would follow that we also cannot allow any child or adult to attend our public schools and day cares who isn’t fully immunized. This means not just being vaccinated, but rather genuinely immunized against infectious diseases.

You can see where this is going:

So, this begs the question(s):

  1. Are immune-compromised children who can’t be vaccinated allowed to attend school and day care?
  2. Is the 10% of the population who are non-responders to artificial immune stimulation allowed to attend schools and day cares?
  3. Is the significant percent of the population whose antibody levels have waned allowed to attend schools, day cares and other public spaces?
  4. Is titre testing being conducted to determine who has adequate antibody levels and therefore safe to attend school and day care?
  5. And, if disease transmission is really what the proponents of vaccine mandates are worried about, then shouldn’t children recently vaccinated with live-virus vaccines also be excluded from schools and public spaces until the viral shedding has ceased?

If vaccine mandate proponents aren’t demanding all of these individuals be excluded from schools, day cares and other public spaces, then one has to wonder whether the transmission of disease and the safety of the school environment really is their primary concern.

Let’s answer Mr. Kuntz’s “concerns”:

  1. Yes. That’s what herd immunity is for, doofus.
  2. Yes. That’s what herd immunity is for, doofus.
  3. Yes. Antibody levels don’t necessarily correlate with immunity. Central memory established by vaccination is sufficient under most circumstances to confer protection, and there isn’t always a good surrogate for immunity for certain vaccines. Basically, titers are an imperfect measure of immunity.
  4. No. It’s expensive and unnecessary. Again, titers are a very imperfect measure of immunity. Susceptibility to disease as determined by epidemiology is what matters in determining the vaccine schedule. That’s why the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) meets three times a year to review data and decide how many doses of each vaccine at what ages are needed to provide optimal protection given the resources available and practicalities of vaccinating.
  5. No. Live-virus vaccines, even though they can shed, do not transmit disease. There was a time when, out of an abundance of caution, cancer centers used to recommend that children immunosuppressed due to chemotherapy stay away from recently vaccinated children, they no longer do.

For example, antivaxers like to point to this insert from Johns Hopkins:

https://twitter.com/TracyAl39361446/status/1167150808808341505

Looks pretty damning, doesn’t it? However, years ago, Johns Hopkins changed its policy based on evidence:

Dr. Vincent Iannelli explains:

Guidelines from the Immune Deficiency Foundation state: “Close contacts of patients with compromised immunity should not receive live oral poliovirus vaccine because they might shed the virus and infect a patient with compromised immunity. Close contacts can receive other standard vaccines because viral shedding is unlikely and these pose little risk of infection to a subject with compromised immunity.”

The oral polio vaccine, of course, has not been used in the US for many years. All the other live virus vaccines can be given to siblings and close contacts of immunosuppressed people safely.

Of course, it’s all just a smokescreen for Mr. Kuntz to claim that vaccine mandates are just a pretext for the government to take away his rights:

What is obvious, if we dare to think, is that vaccine mandates are not about making the public space safer. Vaccine mandates and school expulsion are punishment for challenging vaccine ideology. Vaccine mandates are a crude and heartless means to coerce families to vaccinate their children by creating hardship and threatening the future of their children. When you examine the justification given for eroding parental rights, the medical right to informed consent and constitutional rights, it isn’t what they claim it is. It isn’t about medical risk. It isn’t about compassion for the medically fragile. This is the sham of the medical industry. This is the deception of the vaccine lobbyists. This is the lie perpetuated by the mainstream media.

Parental “rights” are not and never have been absolute. Parents do not own their children, and children have a right as autonomous beings not to be medically neglected, which is what leaving them unvaccinated is. When parental decisions are clearly harmful to the child, such as the decision not to protect the child from serious and potentially fatal illnesses because of pseudoscience and fear based on conspiracy theories about big pharma and government (which Mr. Kuntz demonstrates in abundance), the state does have a duty to step in, however reluctantly.

While I’m happy that SB 276 and SB 714 finally passed, I do have some concerns. I worry that, as happened four years ago after the passage of SB 277, the law that originally eliminated nonmedical exemptions to school vaccine mandates in California whose flaws were mostly fixed by SB 276 and SB 714, antivaxers became more extreme after that. Now, given their rhetoric, I fear that they’re becoming increasingly radicalized. It’s not an unjustified fear, either. After all, the protests over SB 276 and SB 714 brought antivaxers and the militia movement together in California. I hope I’m wrong, but, given incidents like the assault on Sen. Richard Pan, I fear that I might not be.

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]

192 replies on “Antivaxers in the wake of SB 276 and SB 714”

“We didn’t know it at the time but our experience with Luke was a common one. Following a fever after getting a group of shots, Luke lost his few words, began to appear deaf, lost any sense of pain, and began odd repetitive behaviors. ”

Where is that “common?” I have been on this earth for almost 3/4 of a century, have family, friends, acquaintances, and a sign that says, “Tell me your life story” on my forehead (I can’t see it, but I know it’s there), and I’ve NEVER had anyone tell me an experience like that. I have never experienced it with children, grandchildren, or great grandchildren. So, “common?” Is it common outside the confines of Internet websites promoting disease?

I have seen (and have access to) some videos where behavior was present at one point and then not at a later point in time in children with autism. I’m not defending in any way the account about Luke but regression has been observed. Maybe it is the norm. For example, orienting to sounds out of sight may be present shortly after birth. Then, weeks or months later there is no orienting to sounds out of sight. More research on the very early correlates of an autism diagnosis is certainly warranted.

I took the comment the same way that (I think) Ellie did: that Gilmore was saying it was common for this to happen “after getting a group of shots”, that is, that the vaccines did it.

As unfortunate as it might be, if the anti-vaxxers become radicalized, it should become much more apparent to most other people that they are unreasonable cranks (perhaps I am being too solicitous) and that they are wrong. Time will tell.

Ultimately, laws like these will improve the situation with regard to vaccines despite some necessary compromises along the way.

“When parental decisions are clearly harmful to the child, such as the decision not to protect the child from serious and potentially fatal illnesses because of pseudoscience and fear based on conspiracy theories about big pharma and government (which Mr. Kuntz demonstrates in abundance), the state does have a duty to step in, however reluctantly.”

If this were true, if the decision not to vaccinate were harmful to the child, then vaccine mandate laws would not be restricted to children who attend school. The legal rationale is not to protect the child, but to protect public health. The decision not to vaccinate is not enough to justify a government intervention into private family matters in order to protect the child the way laws against child abuse and neglect allow. Given that there are those with sincere religious objections to vaccinations, a legal option (homeschooling) that allows them to do so is required in order for such laws to be constitutional in the USA.

Your claim that the law is to protect the individual child is as incorrect as their claim that the law is a “punishment for challenging vaccine ideology”. Further, it’s not even a debate about whether or not the government can enact such laws but whether or not they should. It’s worth having a public discussion about whether the public good – herd immunity – achieved by such laws is worth the cost – denying a public education to those children whose parents are committed to not vaccinating them.

You’re somewhat right, in the sense that when school mandates work well, herd immunity is high enough to protect unvaccinated children, and then there really is no justification to go into the home. To remind you, in the one time there was active “going into the home”, during the 1991 Philadelphia measles outbreak, it was when herd immunity failed to protect children who had legal exemptions. And you are also right that the focus in discussing school mandates is the public health. They’re easier than laws directly penalizing parents who don’t vaccinate and don’t protect their children because it’s not just about their child. That’s all true.

But they do also protect individual children, by getting children whose parents won’t protect without the mandate to vaccinate and protect them. The reason they stand on such powerful legal footing is exaclty because they sit in the intersection of protecting the parents’ children, protecting other people’s children, and protecting the community.

I do agree with you, however, that it’s important to have a discussion on the advantages and problems of strong school mandates. And reasonable people can and do disagree on the balance there.

I don’t get the impression that these California opponents are going to be meaningfully involved in such a discussion.

Thanks for the calm tone and agreement that reasonable people can disagree on the issue. Yes, such laws do also protect those individual children who’s parents decide to vaccinate them in order for them to attend school, as Dr. Gorski said. They do this by implementing a “punishment for challenging vaccine ideology”, as Mr. Kuntz described them. In that sense, both are correct. However, my point was that these are the effects of the law, not the rationale justifying it.

I agree that it’s unlikely that many of the CA opponents are going to be meaningfully involved in such a discussion. Apparently, neither will the soon-to-be-former CA director of health. https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/articleComments/jennifer-kent-resignation-medical-vaccines-14431584.php

It’s awfully hard to have a calm rational discussion of the pros and cons of such legislation when the leaders of both sides seem more inclined to denigrate and insult than engage respectfully with those who disagree.

“Given that there are those with sincere religious objections to vaccinations”

Which religions? The only one I know of are Church of Christ, Scientist and the Dutch Reformed Church. And not all of Dutch Reform members avoid vaccines; some call them “a gift from God.”

I don’t know of any large religions that have codified a rejection of vaccinations. I don’t think that’s key to this point. Individuals, regardless of what church they belong to and even those that don’t belong to a church, can hold sincere religious objections. They can feel quite strongly about it even when their objections contradict with the official views of their church. For example, I know Catholics that disagree with the Pope regarding the use of aborted fetuses in the development of vaccines and refuse them for their children based on that. I don’t have to agree with them to respect the sincerity of their religious beliefs.

So here “religious objection” can mean a “religion of one, without deity or spirituality or other connotations of religion”? So basically a “strong personal objection”?

So here “religious objection” can mean a “religion of one, without deity or spirituality or other connotations of religion”?

Sigh. Yes, the Establishment Clause allows most of that, aside, perhaps, from “connotations.” It has nothing to do with labeling.

“So here “religious objection” can mean a “religion of one, without deity or spirituality or other connotations of religion”? So basically a “strong personal objection”?”

Sounds like the way racists and homophobes who won’t own their bigotry will hide behind “their religion”.

Assuming, counterfactually, that there is sufficient reason to respect people’s religious beliefs by law, those reasons would have to be based in things like

lifelong experiences as part of assuming an adult identify, so that being made to abandon them feels like walking away from oneself;
a widespread community needed to maintain one’s social being, so that being made to abandon it is like losing family;
following practices from a very young age, so that being made to abandon them feels like losing part of oneself
etc., etc.

In the case of recent made-up religions that just coincidentally advance politically controversial doctrines, these sorts of conditions do not apply. Thus, they are not entitled to respect by law.

Shorter version: get away from me with this bullshit. No, you may not have special privileges by playing the ‘religion’ card.

And as Orac, Pan and Offit rattle their fingers and their desks and quietly muse, ‘Hey – was everything a success? Did we really get them? What are they up to? What are they planning?….’ Indeed how pensive things are as we deal with ‘the quiet before the storm. Boo!!! Just kidding!..

Anyway Orac, as a vaccine safety advocate — ok ok, maybe I am a little antivaccines — here is my take on the passage of SB 276. Out of solidarity to my Californian brothers and sisters, I also mourn their loss. I also feel sad that the bill got passed. Yet Orac, in terms of winning the vaccination war and showing that the emperor indeed has no clothes, I really think Californian Democrats ramming forced medicine down its citizens’ throats in the end will only further our cause

As I alluded to before,the biggest obstacle that we ‘antivaxxers’ face when waging war against you guys is the gullible masses naive devotion to the vaccination faith. Mandates on the surface are scary, but as we’ve seen there are always ways around them (Insert scary grin). The bamboozling of the public, however, is a different animal. Simply to make a real stir we need more public support, but once we obtain
that nothing will stop us — not even mandates. Seriously — try forcing medicine on people where even 50% of the population oppose. Yet, as I explained to the Dangerous One, I feel the backlash against SB 276 will indeed engender us more friends and sympathies. It will cause the public to think, and, as I stated, people thinking is not good for you guys.

I like to compare the Vaccination War to the War on Drugs. Recently we have seen moves by some localities and countries to legalize drugs. This has largely come about from the War on Drugs being lost, How essentially was that war lost, you ask? It was lost largely by the public becoming faint at heart at the abuses and overreach in waging the war Simply, they got sick a the toll it was taking on marginalized communities. Even COPS, where doors were busted down and young black men escorted off to jail started losing its entertainment value. Faith in The War on Drugs took a serious hit.

With Vaccination, your censorship, mandates and other heavy handedness will likely cause similarly stomach churnings. Hey — and as for that eerie quiet, if you listen closely, I think you will hear some stomachs churning right now.

After the first few words of your post, all I hear is Charlie Brown’s teacher going “Wah wah wahh wah waah wah wahhh…..”.

Christopher, the funny thing about hanging around here is after awhile you read enough comments that you start getting.a sense of personalities. I sometimes find myself asking, despite them being lying shills who here might I like if I were to meet in person? Perhaps I might like JT, TBruce, Terrie, Althaic, Dangerous One, Narad, and even Orac. Denice? C’mon Greg, control yourself!

Christopher, I can honestly say. I could never see myself liking you.

Words of wisdom gergle:

I don’t have any problems with anyone; they have serious problems with me 🙂

gergle, you too 😀

Alain

Christopher, I can honestly say. I could never see myself liking you.

Good for him. Why do you suppose anyone would give a shit who you “might like” in the first place?

I don’t see how the war on drugs analogy works. A substantial percentage of teenagers and young adults have used marijuana and this has been the case for decades. Nearly half of prisoners are in for drug offenses.

What percentage of the population is fervently anti-vaccine? How prevalent are vaccine injuries? Is the proverbial man on the street more or less inclined to view autism as being the result of vaccinations than they were 3 years ago, 5 years ago, 10 years ago?

The actual e-commerce giants who are most responsible for spreading anti-vaccine information have apparently decided that profitability is much more important than dying on the vaccine mandate hill. I’m sure they will chime in eventually. Their loyal, captive and stagnate audience will complain otherwise. But the vaccine battle is a zero growth game. They have turned to veggies and exercise for a reason. Or in the case of Natural News, an unusual fixation on sexual identity, revolution and virility.

Apart from the e-commerce giants, various bloggers and other activists have shown zero ability to reach the masses and even generate page views and clicks, let alone rebellion.

I don’t doubt for a second that Adams and Mercola are fervently anti-vaccine. But it was always about content marketing. In the effort to avoid being an ordinary sheeple, a lot of people took the bait and bought into slickly marketed sales pitches and ideological content designed to drive supplements into shopping carts.

Most of their divinely enlightened customers aren’t going to concede that they fell for it book, line and sinker. That they essentially decided a salesman was a Godman whose insights far outweighed the collective knowledge of the world’s medical experts.

I doubt there is some critical mass of parents ready to take marching orders from the remaining rump of book and video selling thought leaders, eager to overthrow the medical establishment no matter the cost. There just aren’t that many people who think the local CVS is a modern Rumbula.

The War On Drugs at one time had wide public support and appeal, with the soundly indoctrinated public fearing that drugs were bad and evil and should be eradicated. Indeed there was rational defense of the faith such as arguing that drugs were unhealthy, risky choices, but it was the visceral fear that drugs were dirty, evil, sinful that really drove things. You needed not think too hard on the matter but trust that drugs were bad.

Yet, as we are now seeing, certain undesirable consequences that comes with waging the war are causing serious doubt to creep in. People are starting to think and ask questions. They are asking why no matter how hard we fight, drugs consumption only seems to be increasing? What’s the sense in arresting and incarcerating already marginalized people when it leads to more broken families and communities? Why waste tax dollars on a war that we are not winning? How dangerous are drugs anyway? And so goes erosion of the faith.

Vaccination is similar because for the most part it too is a faith base exercise. Yes, parents are told to vaccinate their kids because vaccine are ‘safe and effective’ and they will promote good health, but this ‘rational’ excuse is not the main driver of the acceptance. The main driver is trust. You do the ‘good’ thing and vaccinate you kids by trusting yourself, your doctor, and, foremost, you trust the faith. Again, where there is trust you really don’t need to think.

Yet, as I mentioned, just like waging war on drugs resulted in undesirable consequences that got people thinking, so can we expect the same of the push to force vaccines Indeed ‘consequences’ such as now have 1 in 36 disabled kid on our hands already had people musing. These musings are likely to get a lot more pronounced with things turned up a ‘notch’ and kids now getting kicked out of school and their moms jailed for protesting. People will continue to reflect, and, again, thinking for the most part is not conducive to faith.

“As a vaccine safety advocate — ok ok, maybe I am a little antivaccines ”

You are neither. You are a spreader of lies and misinformation.

Greg, if your fantasy is fulfilled and a significant proportion or perhaps even a majority of the general public refuse to vaccinate their children, the result will be the spread of disease on a massive scale, the resulting death and debilitation should ensure that the survivors keep up to date with their shots so that their descendants don’t suffer the same fate. Certainly my parents were very happy that they wouldn’t have to worry about their descendants suffering from polio, whooping cough etc.

A. Mr. Kuntz is a Canadian activist whose son had a severe seizure disorder and other problems that he blames on vaccines. Tragically, his son died young in 2017. He has collaborated with Dr. James Lyons-Weiler on several things, including, I think, Hbot. https://vaccinechoicecanada.com/personal-stories/first-no-harm-ted-kuntz/

B. I also worry about their increasing extremism.

C. Civil disobedience is an important tradition, but aside from your valid point about content, there are also manner and place considerations for effective civil disobedience. Standing and shouting during discussions of other bills or singing in the halls of the Capitol after the bill is law doesn’t have the same spot-on character that sitting in a forbidden section of the bus to call out discrimination does. The latter makes a point. The certainly shows their anger at not getting their way, but just doesn’t carry the same ring.

A lot of the current grandstanding is better seen as uncivil disobedience. For instance, two people were arrested for chaining themself to a exit door. Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, anyone?

The FB group MMAMV (Millions March Against Mandatory Vaccination–which has had run ins with RFKjr’s groups b/c apparently MMAMV is too pro-gun) has been calling for a car pool of everyone to California since the signing of SB 276 and SB 714. Not clear what they are hoping to accomplish, but they seem rather worked up over things.

“So, this begs the question(s):”

He needs to get his vaccines so he can go back to school and learn what ‘begging the question’ means vs ‘bringing up the question.’

The three entitled brats who stood on their chairs in protest, halting the assembly meeting, have filed referenda on SB276 & SB714 to put the laws on the Nov. 2020 ballot for voter approval.
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-09-11/vaccine-bill-critics-california-ballot-referendum-sb276
They have 90 days to collect 623,212 valid signatures to have them put on the ballot. (Yeah… Right!)
Considering that the law they are trying to repeal is one that stops fraudulent and bogus medical exemptions I think it would be wise for the officials to carefully check that the signatures are indeed valid.
After all, their referenda reflect their desire to promote and legalize fraudulent documents.
.
They are the new Privileged Rights Movement!
They are outraged you do not respect their entitlement!
Since they were 3 year old, they have never had anyone with the temerity to tell them “No” and they certainly are not going to stand for it now!
If they have to hold their breath until they turn blue or lay on the floor flailing their arms, kicking their legs, and red-faced screaming to get what they want and are entitled to they will!
You don’t know who you are talking to!
They want to speak with the manager!
.
Maybe they can get Tim Donnelly to run the scam signature collection as was done for SB277… BTW – Did they ever figure out what happened to the crowd-funded ~$50,000 that just vanished without comment when the referendum effort miserably failed?
Oh well… The anti-vaxxers never miss an opportunity to raise unaccountable money from the dimwitted anti-vax marks.
Talk about a cottage industry…
Let the grifting begin!
.
.
Similarly, RFK, Jr. has promised to file legal challenges to SB276 & SB714.
One wonders if he will be asking for donations to pay his ambulance chasing trial lawyer buddies.
Considering Bobby, Jr. is a trust-fund baby worth ~$50 million you would think he’d finance these challenges himself and do the work pro bono. You know, like Bill Gates who has donated a substantial portion of his wealth to saving the lives and improving the health of all the world’s children.
Instead, I predict he will be asking for donations to pay his buddies. The only ones benefiting from these lawsuits are the grifting anti-vax lawyers. Each loss merely digs the legal hole deeper for the anti-vax cult.
.
When will the anti-vax culties learn from their past history?

A few things:

re “entitled brats” standing on chairs, interrupting the legislature, filing referenda, “posing for artistic black and white images*
True, but you have to admit, one of them sure made a splash with that white, tiered dress- everyone recalls it.
How Instagramable!

RFK jr solicits money for his charity, Child Health Defense: so do all of the anti-vax groups we survey ( AoA, TMR, etc) as do PRN and NN** who frequently tout anti-vax.

** but Mikey may have become more of a right wing activist of late.

Denice said, “…you have to admit, one of them sure made a splash with that white, tiered dress- everyone recalls it.”
err…
Not to sound too stereotypical, but being male I didn’t pay any attention to their haute couture and it made no impression on me (the husband who never notices the wife’s new dress).
I’m too old to remold.
I did notice the plethora of tats and laughed inside about the anti-vax complaint about “injected vaccine tocksuns”.
.
On the RFK, Jr. front:
He gave a speech right after the anti-vax SB276 defeat that is just a long litany of anti-vax lies.
It really needs to be comprehensively fisked by a well known blog or some-such to show what a sleazy, ignorant, and dishonest POS this guy really is.
.
Have fun.

Dear Reality:

Of course, I said that to get a laugh but on a more serious note, white was used as a political statement by women’s suffrage advocates more than 100 years ago and was copied by modern day democrats recently.

So they tried for both an iconic image with the flag ( a la 9/11) AND a nod to past women’s rights activists.

Denice –
Ah…
I didn’t know that you weren’t serious as I don’t know if that dress is laughable or fashionable or neither.
The only reason I dress well is because I have the women in my life accompany me to the shops; which is why I end up with things I would never buy myself like pastel pink or peach dress shirts, etc., that I must admit look nice with some of my suits and some ties also selected by them.
I’m not a fashion disaster on my own but I would be strictly boring without the stylish flash they insist upon.
.
.
Denice said, “…on a more serious note, white was used as a political statement by women’s suffrage advocates more than 100 years ago and was copied by modern day democrats recently.”
Hmmm.
Your monitoring the anti-science, anti-vax culties may have produced a hit:
https://riverheadlocal.com/2019/09/12/parents-ask-school-district-to-help-them-in-the-fight-against-state-imposed-vaccine-mandate/
“Good was one of about 20 parents — all dressed in white — to speak publicly at the meeting and to protest the state’s decision,…”
It seems you may have picked up on an anti-vax cult trend/attempt at appropriating another cultural motif.
.
Have fun.

@ Denice, Reality

It seems you may have picked up on an anti-vax cult trend/attempt at appropriating another cultural motif.

This thing about wearing white – it’s indeed recent, and I think Orac blogged about it. Maybe one of the AVer protest in CA, at the start of SB 276.

@ Athaic:

They must have seen (on television) how women of the Democratic Party have recently used it : the first female presidential candidate, 2016, the first female Speaker of the House ( but her second turn)/ first day of Congress of new women representatives when a record number were elected, both 2018 and I think, some representatives/ senators did it when Trump spoke as if to say, “Here we are”. But it is originally from women’s voting rights advocates in the early 20th century and may go back even further to the UK suffragists’ leaders.

As usual, anti-vaxxers, want to create a scene using an analogy that isn’t warranted: wearing a yellow star of David like victims of Nazism,las Madres of the disappeared ones, civil rights’ activists/ victims of racial injustice/ Apartheid etc.

Right you are, Athaic.
.
https://respectfulinsolence.com/2019/08/15/s2994-the-disappeared/
“Which brings us to the white clothing. As explained in the subsequent article by Gwynne Hogan:
“Many who stand to be affected by the new law gathered outside the State Supreme Court on Wednesday dressed in white. Organizers said their uniform harkened back to Las Madres de Plaza de Mayo, a group of Argentinian women who protested the murder and disappearance of their children during their country’s military dictatorship.”
Here’s a Facebook post by the New York Alliance for Vaccine Rights:
Here’s the key passage about Las Madres:
“PLEASE WEAR WHITE (avoid t-shirts)- we are rolling out a campaign inspired by the “Mothers of the Disappeared.” Back in the 70s, the Argentinian government “disappeared” (kidnapped and killed) 30,000 mostly young activists who spoke out against the dictatorship. Their mothers donned white scarves and stood vigil…””

.
Because, you know, requiring kids be vaccinated to attend school is exactly like 30,000 mostly college students kidnapped and murdered by a dictatorship…
.
These anti-vax death cultists are beyond disgusting.

@ Reality

Ah, so it was That event. I foggily remembered that.
I was too lazy to search myself. Or too sure finding it will not be good for my blood pressure.

Comments on the TMR article:

the Professor TMR ( Zoey O’Toole) writes that doctors are “duped like cult members” and that their health policies have not resulted in the good health of the population.
Let’s look at that:
it’s true that many people have preventable health problems BUT how is that due to official medical policies? Aren’t adults advised to control their weight, not smoke or drink to excess and to exercise and eat a balanced diet. Does that mean that they always DO these things? No. So how is that SBM’s fault? Cancer and CVD can be partially attributed to NOT following the aforesaid advice.: heavier people and those who smoke or drink a lot have more cancer and CVD. How much is it due to NOT following SBM advice? Personal choice ?

O’Toole has a degree in physics and is an actor ( on her bio TMR) yet she criticises SBM.

** IN OTHER NEWS as I write, Null reads his new article on Wikipedia ( Chopra) where he says Dr DG started out as an editor then administrator on Wikipedia but moved on ( 45 minutes in) and talks about his work in oncology- belief in genes.

Well, that’s what she says ( see About TMR/ Getting Personal ) She likes to “correct” SB commenters.

More alarming to me is that a few have graduate degrees in psych/ social work ( TMs MacNeil and “Saint” who appeared to have left/ Katie Wright of Safe Minds, Child Health Defense). They should know better: even if you don’t need to study neurophysio to get a degree, there is plenty of other stuff: I can’t see how they missed it all.
But then there are anti-vax doctors and nurses so go figure!

@ Denice–stating it on a page populated with verbage by a bunch of wine-swigging anti-science narcissists who use their kids as an excuse to be more into themselves doesn’t exactly lead me to believe any of them are being at all truthful about their actual backgrounds.

I’d like proof O’Toole has a degree in physics.

Speaking as someone with an undergrad physics degree from the same era but from a better school, I’d like to know why she thinks anyone should be impressed. I doubt she’s lying awake at night musing about Bell’s Theorem.

IN OTHER NEWS ( continuing)

re today’s broadcast of GN at PRN ( tape and written ” Deepak”)
at 2 minutes, the shriveled old woo-meister claims that he got “insider” info and recordings of ” in depth internal” convos ( which now may be erased) from a “scholar editor” of 10 years who was later banned ( Rome Viharo? sounds like it!) 39 minutes in?
at 45 minutes- lots on Dr DG- as editor, administrator at Wikipedia, left for other propaganda work. The Doctor is against Deepak but supports Angelina Jolie’s decision for bilateral mastectomy. His views on oncology;GN says he “missed research” on genes**. ( Other crap about “picture hanger” Susan, not an expert like GN).

** OY fucking VEY

But SRSLY, Dr G:
he want to ‘splain that research you miss about teh oncogene!!!!!

We need comedy like this .. oh wait, he was serious.

I hear, “Oh the tears of unfathomable sadness

Yeah — you preach it brother. ‘ We will continue to take them down one by one! Today California! Tomorrow the rest of the world! Autism? Who cares about Autism!’

Me? I will continue to play the Fool in these Shakespearean plays!

You just could have stopped after “play the Fool.”

There is actually plenty of on-going research into autism…just because they’ve disproven your pet hypothesis, doesn’t mean that people aren’t interested in the cause.

We have learned an awful lot about the causes and we have also learned a lot about effective intervention strategies. Autism research initiatives are an advocate to access to treatment success story. There is certainly a long way to go on both etiology and intervention. I’m excited to be a part of it.

Vaccines don’t cause autism. Thus, you don’t have a case.

I think parents who listen to death metal cause autism, so let’s ban death metal. What do you say? Why is your case better than the death metal-autism hypothesis? Slightly greater initial plausibility, I’ll admit.

But guy, you don’t have any evidence, just your insistence that you are right. Wouldn’t it be unreasonable for me to agree with you? That’s the issue; you have given no reason to agree with you.

One thing you get right Greg, though it raises a question: is a prediction prescient if you already know it to be true?
Your 2019 “prediction” that pro-vaccine activities will engender you more anti-vaxxers was also true when smallpox was eliminated in 1980; heck, it was even true after Jenner popularized and standardized variolation over 200 years ago. There have always been science deniers; there will always be anti-vaxxers.

A couple of things you get wrong:
1. You aren’t being censored. It’s self-evident on this blog that you are not censored provided you stick to the usual anti-vaccine disinformation…
2. The public isn’t bamboozled. Rather, you’re an extremist. People that support an idea or cause so adamantly and without compromise that they can justify any actions tend to be small portions of populations. No one is stopping you from believing that extremists will eventually become the majority in Canada or the US (psst, spoiler alert: extremism is uncommon). Oh, and extremists often employ violent means, so it’s redundant for you to threaten that “nothing will stop us.”
3. As per pro-vaccine activities in NY and CA, there aren’t going to be “always ways around” sending intentionally unvaccinated children to schools here in the US. Parents can still choose not to vaccinate, though given that no vaccine provides perfect protection and not all children are immunocompetent, as a consequence of their decision those parents can’t also elect to intentionally put other kids at risk for hours each day in school.

Even the word ‘extremist’ is a stretch, for Greg does not simply advocate extreme positions, he advocates extreme positions whose fact-basis is non-existent. He’s more extreme than extremists.

Lenin and Stalin, those were extremists. While both surely were unreasonably confident in their beliefs, and remarkably quick to sacrifice others for them, those beliefs were not poofed out of nowhere, as Greg’s are. No, Greg’s gig is even more fanatic than fanaticism; he is willing to oppress, harass, and maybe even kill over non-existent issues, crazy paranoid fantasies.

We’re boned, for Greg’s sort is not as rare as I wanted to think a few years ago.

I just thought of this

after viewing Del’s and others’ videos and looking at their photos, something looked off to me
a few years ago, I visited Sacramento – and actually liked it- of course, I looked up various material about the city as I do.
( see city data.com Sacramento, CA)
There is a pie chart of “race” divided as ( I cut off decimals for speed):
white- 33%, Asian 18%, Hispanic 28%, Black 13%, 2 or more races 4%, “Native Hawaiian” 1%,”Amer Ind” < 1%, other < 1%
and it looks diverse when you’re there. Income 55K/ 19% poverty rate
Whilst I realise that protestors came from all over, they didn’t look representative of the locals,

California itself is quite diverse as well. Kids under 18 may be even more so.

Our area is very diverse too. My sons were always a racial minority in every school or daycare they attended, as Caucasians and even more as Jews. My classes in law school are very diverse.

The protesters in New York and California did not resemble the population I’m used to.

It’s interesting that California is the third state to effectively limit exemptions to medical exemptions only, with Mississippi and West Virginia having limited exemptions long before California did – and that West Virginia, IIRC, requires these medical exemptions to be approved by the country medical officer. And yet I don’t recall hearing vast protests in those states against the laws that created these limitations. What do the people of Mississippi and West Virginia know that we don’t know in California?

“What do the people of Mississippi and West Virginia know that we don’t know in California?”

That despite appalling poverty, food insecurity, low incomes, and lack of access to healthcare, they’ve managed not to have a measles outbreak in over two decades?

And yet I don’t recall hearing vast protests in those states against the laws that created these limitations. What do the people of Mississippi and West Virginia know that we don’t know in California?

I think that it’s just been the case for so long versus viewing something that has been taken away. Although there are efforts in both states by anti-vaxx groups to get a religious exemption on the books. Also, NY has also eliminated it’s religious exemption so is the fourth state to have just medical.

Also, NY has also eliminated it’s religious exemption so is the fourth state to have just medical.

Note also that NYS has the most substantial juridical infrastructure in place on this matter.

Doesn’t the ‘create your own’ approach to religion rather miss the point? I mean, if one Christian religion says that God approves of vaccination and another one says he doesnt, then aren’t people creating God in their own image?

I realise that the answer has always been yes but religious people are supposed to pretend it’s the other way round. You don’t get to force your viewpoints on your own creator.

One thing you get right Greg, though it raises a question: is a prediction prescient if you already know it to be true?
Your 2019 “prediction” that pro-vaccine activities will engender you more anti-vaxxers was also true

And speaking of tha, I saw this tweet at Vaxxed-hashtag

ABC removes poll after results show 93% of people disagree with California’s fascist #vaccine laws.

Is this true?

Slight correction: first Gerg eats said turd, THEN he hurls.
.
It’s an anti-vax ritual, similar to the famous hotdog eating contest. The difference is that the anti-vaxxer is graded on two components: volume of turds ingested and distance hurled.

It’s a tweet Lawrence. Check Vaxxed hashtag

Twats Tweets do have URLs, Gerg, not that that goes to the claim itself, which was the whole point.

Quoting myself from above…..

Yet, as we are now seeing, certain undesirable consequences that comes with waging the war are causing serious doubt to creep in. People are starting to think and ask questions. They are asking why no matter how hard we fight, drugs consumption only seems to be increasing? What’s the sense in arresting and incarcerating already marginalized people when it leads to more broken families and communities? Why waste tax dollars on a war that we are not winning

Another interesting parallel here… Like the War on Drugs brought us broken families and communities, and ruined budgets, so too does vaccination bring us broken families, broken schools and ruined budgets. Yet, the excuse with vaccination is ‘correlation’. Correlation or not, 1 in 36 disabled kids (and that’s being generous), is a losing proposition.

The provaxxers’ have the biggest guns? No we do, and Autism is our biggest!

Have you ever worked out why girls have a much lower incidence of ASD? Only I notice that your figure is actually only for boys. Seems to be a common theme. Lying by omission. Claiming 1 in 36 kids when its 1 in 36 boys. Much like the rest of ant-vax talking points, lots of shite and handwaving.

Gerg is just here to insult the commentators who identify as Autistic / Aspergers by calling them “disabled”. He is probably pissing himself with laughter. Somewhere there is a fire waiting for him to die in it.

Although it is one of the evilest antivaxx demons speaking, bear with.it, he is just discussing the figures…

Yah.

“During this same time, the prevalence of diagnosed autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability did not change significantly.”

<

blockquote>
Today California! Tomorrow the rest of the world!

<

blockquote>

And as the provaxx war machine survey the map and contemplate their next invasion, they realize they have the same problem as an infamous German dude. They also have a Red problem. Any chance of striking a deal with Stalin/Trump to permit a free hand? Might be tough with an election approaching and everyone eager to exploit things for votes.

A “red” problem?

Both Mississippi and West Virginia have had the strictest vaccine mandates for decades….and somehow they don’t have the highest rate of autism, nor do they have outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases.

Derek: And yet I don’t recall hearing vast protests in those states against the laws that created these limitations.

I can think of a few reasons. First of all, Missisippi and West Virginia aren’t tourist destinations, unlike California. They also don’t have concentrated areas of wealthy, bored people who can clog up traffic and concourses for hours. And an old white dude is a less attractive target than a youngish ‘uppity’ Asian man. (I know Pan’s in his forties or early fifties, but that’s young in politics.) West Virginia and Missisippi are also not seen as aspirational places- lots of people want to live in California. I’ve never met ANYONE who wanted to live in Missisippi. I mean, seriously, the state has a dress code.

I worry that, as happened four years ago after the passage of SB 277, the law that originally eliminated nonmedical exemptions to school vaccine mandates in California whose flaws were mostly fixed by SB 276 and SB 714, antivaxers became more extreme after that. Now, given their rhetoric, I fear that they’re becoming increasingly radicalized. It’s not an unjustified fear, either. After all, the protests over SB 276 and SB 714 brought antivaxers and the militia movement together in California. I hope I’m wrong, but, given incidents like the assault on Sen. Richard Pan, I fear that I might not be.

Well, here’s anti-vaxxers becoming more extreme today 9/13: https://tinyurl.com/yxbrufku . Anti-vaxxers shut down the California Senate today throwing red liquid from the balcony onto Senators below, shouting “That’s for the dead babies”.

One would guess that a holocaust victim would file a complaint. No millions here, though.

Nah Science Mom. People are talking.– and thinking! Goodd!

That’s nothing more than foul, theatrical, self-gratification; anti-vaxxers repulse the general population with such antics and push themselves further into the fringe.

Nah Science Mom. People are talking – and thinking!! Good!

I checked the Twiddle. Sure enough it is already a False-Flag operation. The red-liquid lady was not one of us! An infiltrator! But we support what she did anyway!!

Why wouldn’t they support her? They are pro disease ghouls, with a Fixed Great Idea, and care nothing about anything or anyone outside of their obsession – certainly not other human beings.

Traipsing around the net as I am known to do:
— not one of the anti-vaxxers I usually survey ( AoA, TMR, Kim Rossi, Katie Wright, NN, @highwire) even mentions this guerrilla theatre / bad performance art
— less ridiculous sources ( like SF Chronicle) report that it was a 43 year old from the Santa Cruz area ( not close by) who threw a menstrual cup filled with “red liquid”: she was arrested on 6 charges, including vandalism with 10K USD bail.

Again, we have an anti-vaxxer accusing others of crimes ( dead babies) and feeling justified shutting down a body of elected legislators. At RI, how often have Orac and his minions been accused of criminal activity? Killing children, keeping them in diapers, ruining their brains, destroying their parents’ lives, being “complicit” in domestic violence? We heard this first from activists and woo-meisters who created THE narrative about pharma/ medical “crimes against humanity” then preached that REPEATEDLY to their entranced followers over the years.
The more deranged amongst them might take action in order to get “justice” or become well-known and photographed on social media so on one day you have activists posing for meme- worthy images ( see white dress radical &Co) and being featured in multiple videos for posterity- in which they try to “top” each other for more likes AND then, THIS. What’s next?

Here is the thrower shouting stuff from minute 46 and all.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1351092415051921&id=100004535269349

And yes. What is going to be remembered from their week of protests is that one of them threw menstural blood at Senators. I dont think most of them condone this; but when they work a group of people who are already angry and bitter into a frenzy, they can expect that some of them – especially the less stable, and they know they have less stable members – will do something foul and violent.

And yes. What is going to be remembered from their week of protests is that one of them threw menstural blood at Senators. I dont think most of them condone this; but when they work a group of people who are already angry and bitter into a frenzy, they can expect that some of them – especially the less stable, and they know they have less stable members – will do something foul and violent.

Dorit, you drug dealers are absolute riots. I swear, if pharma was to ever fire you guys, you should audition as comedians. So other ‘antivaxxers’ are responsible for an ‘antivaxxer’ throwing her tampon at Senators because they kept discussing SB 276 and how she got screwed and making her even more mad. You move that they stop talking about it and reminding people that they got screwed?

Truly laughable. Laughable too that you can’t even remember that a similar attempt to overturn SB277 back in 2015/16 failed spectacularly.

Ha ha ha. They seem to have forgotten the petition for a referendum on SB277 failed by more than 130,000 signatures.

And indeed my point soared over your heads. I brought out the article not so much to discuss the recall but to show the sympathies for the ‘antivaxxers’. Again guys — California is just one state, in one country in the world. At the end of the day, where is the win if the effort to increase California’s vaxxed rate by miniscule percentage points lends to a global erosion of the faith? Again, your health and longevity will always lie in the strength of the faith, not mandates. Speaking of which, wasn’t SB 275 promised to be the start of something that would put the final nails in the coffin of antivaxxers? I am looking especially at you, Reality. Whatever happened to that? Oh– I guess we all know now!

And indeed my point soared over your heads out of my ass.

FTFY.

At the end of the day, where is the win if the effort to increase California’s vaxxed rate by miniscule [sic] percentage points lends to a global erosion of the faith?

California, Mississippi, West Virginia, New York, and Maine, Peaches.

Connecticut may be next ( see the CT mirror, yesterday):

I’ve heard rumblings for a while from Kim, Del and others.
The Health Commissioner may announce the repeal of the religious exemption tomorrow; both the governor and majority leader agree with her. It appears that the rate of religious exemption has recently increased ( 25%) from 2% to 2.5%
I wouldn’t be surprised if other NE states with religious exemptions follow their example

NJ, in the past 5 years the rate of religious exemptions rose from 1.7% to 2.6% ( Phil Inquirer). PA may have concerns as well.

Here is an interactive map of the 2016 Presidential Election Results. I am expecting in the next Election the vaccination vote will swing 10% in the Reds direction. What does this mean? If you guys keep things up and the US doesn’t slide into major recession before the fall of next year, you guys might keep Ore, Calif, Ill, Maryland, NJ, Conn, Mass, VT and NY in 2020. Of course there are no guarantees. Personally, If I were a Democratic hopeful for the next election, I would be super pissed that my party pitched its tent on such a stinker of an issue. But — hey– gotta give it to you guys for being so much smarter than Trump!

https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/president

What does this mean?

That you’re a jabbering idiot.

you guys might keep Ore, Calif, Ill, Maryland, NJ, Conn, Mass, VT and NY in 2020

Cue Billy Madison.

I’m sure that nothing will persuade Connecticut legislators to refuse to support any effort to repeal religious exemptions for vaccination so much as the prospect that a deranged wacko might throw blood at them.

@ Greg:

Anti-vax is not a new topic ( e.g. SB 277 4 years ago?, other laws) and most of its partisans are not newbies.
So what happened in late 2018?
It was called “the Blue Wave” – opposing Trump, who has been associated with anti-vax: 40 extra Democrats, many women; CA and NJ eliminated many Republican reps- the CA coast is now blue. Look it up.
What percentage of people get exemptions? Easy to find. Hint: CA is not the highest ( OR/ ID with around 6%).
Is 2 or 4% of parents– ( parents are not equal to VOTERS-) enough?
The world doesn’t conform to your wishes.

Greg, I think you’re reading too much into that. Not responding is not the same as chickening out, in any case, as the article makes clear, he has already made his pro-vaccine views known relatively recently.

Carl, I agree that Biden’s colours on mandates are quite obvious. That’s all the reason to.suspect that he is now trying to hide them by not answering. Saved for Warren, all the leading Democratic candidates are trying to hide theirs. Pay attention also to Sanders’ more muted response. Last time in his Run was he not promising to raid the saloon and call the antivaxxers out for some justice?

“Here is an interactive map of the 2016 Presidential Election Results. I am expecting in the next Election the vaccination vote will swing 10% in the Reds direction.”

The “vaccination vote”, negligible it is, would probably trend Democratic these days. A few more serious disease outbreaks, especially if deaths result, would increase that bloc and put it solidly in the Democratic column.

Fear the viruses and their enablers, Greg.

The “vaccination vote”, negligible it is, would probably trend Democratic these days. A few more serious disease outbreaks, especially if deaths result, would increase that bloc and put it solidly in the Democratic column.

Fear the viruses and their enablers, Greg.

Dangerous One, I will rebut this by simply suggesting that you open your eyes. For just about a year now, you guys and the MSM have been screaming bloody murder about Measles. How many people obliged by taking to the streets in anger and freight and confront ‘antivaxxers’ saying, “we are mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore!’? Dangerous One, SB276 was introduced and people took to the streets in California in anger and freight and saying, ‘we are mad as hell and we’re not going to take it anymore!’ Now, what about the next outbreak leads you to believe that you guys will finally win the fear and anger war? Are you plotting to assist with crisis actors?

Also Dangerous One, if you feel the ‘vaccination vote’ is so negligible, how do you account for Biden’s reservation in answering those Buzzfeed questions?

It’s truly incredible that the provaxx strategy is entirely predicated on the thinking that they can win because the public will remain stupid, and the antivaxxers are too weak and insignificant. It’s the same naivety and cockiness that the Democrats ended up ruing, after a certain ‘orange’ man that they thought was too much of a clod and a brute to win the White House did just that.

Um…..that certain “orange man” did two pro-vax things recently: (1) he posted that people need to vaccinate their kids against measles and (2) he ordered more research for an improved flu vaccine. When VPD outbreaks get bad, most politicians aren’t dumb enough to be on the side of death (aka you anti-vaxxers).

Um…..that certain “orange man” did two pro-vax things recently: (1) he posted that people need to vaccinate their kids against measles and

The Orange one can say anything, people still know which party has their backs when it comes to medical freedom and vaccines. Trump is also well aware that he can have his cake and eat it too. As for you guys? You keep giving him the — freaking! — cake, and as you drool on yourself, pick your nose, and yammer on about how dumb he is.

Umm…gergle,

Mirror, mirror. Ever heard of a small detail called projection?

As for you guys? You keep giving him the — freaking! — cake, and as you drool on yourself, pick your nose

So you wish…Did your nogging taste good gergle?

The Orange one can say anything, people still know which party has their backs when it comes to medical freedom and vaccines

Need I remind you, silly boy, that actions speak louder than words:

he ordered more research for an improved flu vaccine

Ordered, being the operative word here, silly boy.

Alain

Greg: “The Orange one can say anything, people still know which party has their backs when it comes to medical freedom and vaccines.”
Greg: “the provaxx strategy is entirely predicated on the thinking that they can win because the public will remain stupid”

The pro-Trump anti-vaccine contingent isn’t displaying enormous intelligence by continuing to believe that he “has their back”, despite his not doing anything to fulfill their feverish dreams – and actually taking a couple of pro-immunization stands. 🙂

@ Dangerous Bacon:

Anti-vax activity is not new in blue states BUT somehow it didn’t lead to a “red tide” in the 2018 elections- in fact, there was a blue wave. There are many new, liberal women who were elected in states where anti-vax is an issue ( CA, NY, MI)- why didn’t the on-going anti-vax sentiment if it is so powerful interfere with those wins? The CA coast is now entirely blue ( where the affluent liberals live) and NJ lost all republican representatives save one. NY state anti-vaxxers hold that 26,000 kids will be affected by the new law ( no religious exemptions) : how many people live in NY? How many children go to school there?
Anti-vaxxers accuse CA and NY of being beholden to drug companies, corrupted by money, etc BUT they are in fact the two states most affected in recent years by outbreaks of MEASLES.

Denice, with your spiel, I’d say your guilty of not paying attention to timing. The election occurred in 2018 and since then you’ve moved on Wa, NY, Me, and Calif. If anyone had any doubts that the Dems would respect their medical rights in respect to refusing vaccines, those doubts have been resoundingly put to bed with your recent moves. Denice, the die is effectively cast.

Denice, the [sic] die is effectively [?] cast.

Well, at least I got one good laugh before diving into paperwork. Gerg, what exactly do you think acta alea est[o] means in this context?

The election occurred in 2018 and since then you’ve [sic] moved on [sic] Wa, NY, Me, and Calif.

New Jersey should be the next domino, Gerg, although Connecticut might beat them out. HTH. HAND. FODADIAF.

Dangerous One, don’t want to be petty and slap you with poor reading comprehension, but how many red States have recently tightened their exemptions. In the blue States that tightened theirs, who have been overwhelmingly opposing such proposals. Yeah – keep consoling yourselves with Trump provaxx ‘overtures’; we will see how much votes it buys you in the next election.

Dangerous One, don’t want to be petty and slap you with poor reading comprehension, but how many red States have recently tightened their exemptions.

Funny from you when you don’t know the basics of epidemiology. Which of those red states have suffered the outbreaks that CA and NY have?

SB 277 CA passed in June 2015 : prior to its passage- and after, anti-vax leaders and followers protested loudly on the internet ACROSS state lines and staged various demonstrations around the whole nation. Anti-vax proselytisers wrote polemics, created groups, films, books and educational materials- giving Orac & Co plenty of grist for their respective mills. It seems that they never shut up.
Why didn’t any of this have effects on the 2018 election- which was less than a year ago? Democrats and liberals on television** have vocally supported vaccines and it has often been a subject for late night comedy hosts. Why haven’t they been punished by an anti-vax wave boycotting their shows? Why haven’t politicians changed their tunes and gone anti-vax in order to garner support? Even the Donald has supported vaccines. Why haven’t Dr Pan and others who have supported him in his earlier efforts been thrown out of office? Why do anti-vax sites and groups have troubling assembling support ( check out number of likes/ followers on sites, twitter etc. Even Del doesn’t do well)

Denice, nothing you’ve written undercuts my assessment that the ‘vaccine hesitant’ may swing up to 10% of votes Republicans’ way in the next.election. You are discussing popularity contests and asking why the ‘antivaxxers’ don’t dominate. You don’t have to be popular and dominant to screw over elections. Case in point — look at last Italian election. Were ‘antivaxxers’ a dominant voting block? Would you deny that they played a significant role with that result?

Case in point — look at last Italian election. Were ‘antivaxxers’ a dominant voting block? Would you deny that they played a significant role with that result?

I’m so glad Orac doesn’t moderate so as to give you enough rope to hang yourself. You not only do that but manage to jump overboard with an anchor. No, anti-vaxx didn’t “play a significant role” with their brief foray into power and notice they lost it quite quickly. The M5S’ is a populist and anti-immigration party first and those are what got them to the Italian parliament, barely.

Denice, nothing you’ve written undercuts my assessment that the ‘vaccine hesitant’ may swing up to 10% of votes Republicans’ way in the next.election.

This is a “problem” with pulling things out of your ass. What’s with your new fondness for interword stops?

If anti-vaxxers are such a powerful voting bloc, why oh why:
— couldn’t they defeat Dr Pan at the polls? Or Ms Gonzalez? Other supporters in CA?
— why are exemptions in the single figures statewide all over the US? The highest ones are 6% Oregon
( Remember too that that is a percentage of children– not VOTERS!)
— why has not one single politician who is visible nationally – congress, senate, mayors, presidential candidates- ever been aligned with anti-vax? ( People who spoke suspiciously about vaccines have had to retract to protect themselves – Trump, Paul, Williamson, Carson etc)
— and finally, why do dyed-in-the-wool anti-vaxxers CONSTANTLY say that they’re not “anti-vax”.If it were a vote getter/ attractive choice, they would BRAG about it! Wear pins and ribbons proclaiming their affiliation.

Because it’s box office poison, bad press, stigma, loon bait, not good, very bad.

M5S’ is a populist and anti-immigration party first and those are what got them to the Italian parliament, barely

You may be confusing the M5S with the League. The League are populist, anti-immigration and neo-fascist. The M5S are “anti-elite” populist, not especially concerned with coherence, but chill about immigrants, which is why the new Italian coalition of the M5S and the Democrats have reversed the hard-line No Refugees policy of the previous governing coalition.

Interesting for those of us who can actually read Greg.

The anti-vaxxers won’t determine this election. Immigration, corruption and unemployment rank higher on voters’ lists, according to a Feb. 14 survey from LUISS Guido Carli in Rome. Only 22% of the 6,000 people polled said removing mandatory vaccines was a voting priority.

And it’s only an editorial. Anti-vaxx did not put M5S into power, just equally stupid ideologies. And they’re out beside, so what are you nattering on about or is this just juvenile distraction from the fact that you don’t know your arse from a hole in the ground about red/blue states and the politics of anti-vaxx either?

Right. If you read Italian General Election 2018 Wikipedia** which discusses the entire situation in detail
( complete with MANY inter/ intra-party designation charts) you’ll discover that amongst the major issues, there is NO mention of vaccines , even though more niche interests like the Animal Party ( anti-fur clothing, regulation of circuses etc) are mentioned. Lots about taxes, immigration, wages, university fees, etc.
Anti-vaxxers outside of Italy wrote about the election before it happened then, afterwards, shut up: I wonder why?

In addition, the parties get support along geographical lines long existing in Italia ( see maps) M5S is more popular in the south; centre-right and centre-left in the north. A north south division.

** next thing you know, the contrarians/ anti-vaxxers will start complaining that Wikipedia is biased and untrustworthy in the pocket of pharma- what else?

Anti-vaxxers cluelessly believe that the are a significant proportion of society when in reality, they are a very small faction. If you only hang around an echo chamber you might think that the rest of the world agrees with you when it doesn’t. If Facebook friends are your means of sampling public opinion, you’re doing it wrong. Niche websites and blogs that cater exclusively to your pet ideas are not representative of the world at large.
We at RI have had a close-up view of this highly idiosyncratic system of beliefs and mode of thought courtesy of a few outliers.

Yikes! I see one of your salvos was aimed directly at me.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/toronto-public-health-calling-on-province-to-end-non-medical-exemptions-for-vaccines-in-schools-1.5285012

Guys, chill out! You didn’t have to go so overboard at my ‘lying drug dealers, shills, perpetuating an holocaust against innocent kids’ thing. Why did you have to get Management involved?

Anyway, seems like my good man, Doug Ford, has my back — for now! I did vote for him, you know. For what it’s worth though, some here in Ontario think he is worse than Trump. Anyway, this all brings me to an article that I wrote at that ‘wretched hive at antivaxx scurm, AoA’ (you’re so inspiring Orac). What is your take on my take that vaccine mandates would face a steeper court hurdle here in Canada? TBruce, I believe you’re also Canadian. Care to opine?

Hi Dr Nass and Everyone, the Education Minister, Dominic Cardi, that is proposing the bill recently held panel discussions on the bill. I am pleased to say it didn’t go well for her. Grieving parents overwhelmed the panel, so much so that MLA leaders started sympathizing, stating that they were having cold feet and not sure if they would vote for the bill. Sears also flew in to testify on our side. I haven’t heard much about next steps and it seems like things are in a limbo.

Interestingly though, with the worldwide vaccine mandates push, it seems to be hitting Canada and the UK less aggressively. Maybe John Stone can offer his opinion on this. Is there something about our shared monarchy and constitutions that poses a steeper obstacle to vaccine mandates? Indeed Cardi also stated that she wasn’t sure how the bill would fare constitutionally, since the issue has never been adjudicated.

Indeed our Canadian Charter explicitly grants us conscientious and religious rights that would apply to refusing vaccines. In fact, in the three provinces that have mandatory reporting (Ontario, NB, and now recently BC) parents can submit affidavits exempting their kids on those grounds. I understand the US constitution also grants its citizens the right to refuse vaccines, but the Jacobson ruling setting a precedent, effectively overriding those rights and allowing the government to fine people or bar unvaxxed kids from school.

Still, is it a case that vaccine mandates would still face a steeper constitutional challenge in Canada? Is it due to the fact that the right to an education is enshrined federally and making it so much of a bigger hurdle for the Government to argue that school mandates should be imposed since they’re in the pressing interest of the state? Or does vaccination mandates face a steeper constitutional challenge simply because we have no Jacobson, and no precedents for the courts to side with mandates. All the issues would then have to be debated, and especially the science supporting the claim that vaccines are ‘safe and effective’.

Indeed when considering all the recent US rulings upholding school mandates, I am struck how little science is taken up in them. It’s always a case of falling back on Jacobson. In Canada, however, it would appear the Government would need to put all its cards on the table and argue the science. Is this the reason then for a lesser push? They are well aware that the emperor truly has no clothes and fear being mercilessly exposed in court?

Interestingly, with a recent Ontario custody battle surrounding vaccination an arbitrator dealt with a case with a father wanting to vaccinate their child and a mother refusing. Toni Bark even testified in the case as an expert witness, testifying that vaccines were indeed risky and dangerous. The arbitrator went on to rule in favour of the mother, and agreeing that vaccines were indeed risky. Is this an harbinger of things to come should vaccine science be tested in court?

For what it’s worth though, some here in Ontario

Didn’t you claim to be in New Brunswick in the past day or two? I mean, you denied being Canadian in the first place.

<

blockquote>

Didn’t you claim to be in New Brunswick in the past day or two? I mean, you denied being Canadian in the first place.

<

blockquote>

Why you always so concerned about where I live? You wanna meet up for some beers or something? Isn’t that a breach of your contract, anyway? Doesn’t Management forbids socializing with anti-vaxxers?

I understand the US constitution also grants its citizens the right to refuse vaccines, but the Jacobson ruling setting a precedent, effectively overriding those rights and allowing the government to fine people or bar unvaxxed kids from school.

You understand so little poor Greg.

If anti-vaxxers are such a powerful voting bloc, why oh why:
— couldn’t they defeat Dr Pan at the polls?

Reflect on this Denice: In the 2018 Senate Midterms, Sen Pan ran against Eric Frame and Independent. Eric ran on a ballot in which he declared that he was strongly opposed to vaccine mandates. Eric lost to Pan 30/70. Denice, that’s 30% of Californians who voted for a candidate that was against mandates and was vying to defeat Pan. That’s potentially 30% of Californian being ‘antivaxxers’. Yikes! Really, how insignificant of a voting bloc is that?

https://www.kcra.com/article/vaccination-debate-sparks-sacramentoyolo-county-california-senate-race/23903726

I bet, if you queried those voters, you’d find that “vaccines” had very little to do with their vote.

And a 70/30 split in an election is considered even more than a landslide, it’s a slaughter.

Correct.
This can be a lesson for Orac’s readers:

during the Christine deluge, sadmar and I discussed Mr Frame and I found an article about him. In fact, right now, my computer showed me highlighted it when I typed in “Eric Frame”:
–capradio.org, Nov 1, 2018 *Anti-vaccination Groups Align with Outsider Candidate…”
he supports other health related issues as well: he thinks that Monsanto causes cancer, he wants single payer health care and is an advocate for “natural health”, i.e. diet and lifestyle not meds.
So he’s not a one trick pony but a well-rounded natural health advocate. ( According to Bing, he runs a company wherein he “supervises visitation” for divorced parents and this isn’t his first foray into politics)

So Greg had access to that weeks ago and it didn’t sink in. Single payer health is a very important issue in US politics these days. Also Mr Frame didn’t get 30% of voters in CA: he got 30% of voters in his district which is only in and around Sacramento – not the whole state. Two very different things..

Astro turfers, drug dealers, and shills stay posted. I will follow-up later with what an anti-vaxx aided victory for the Repubs in the next election may look like.

You do not have freedom to infect other people’s children. Situation would be different if Canada had a measles outbreak

IN other news…

Mike Adams ( NN, today), who has MANY sources within the anti-vax movement in CA, purports that the woman who threw a “red liquid” at senators in the capitol was planted there by vaccine supporters- no one in anti-vax knew her. Oh, and it wasn’t blood in a menstrual cup but a “fruit cup”.

Null and his learned colleagues continue their expose of sceptics, focusing upon Dr Novella and his links to industry, QW and Wikipedia-
read aloud, printed will follow at PRN.fm. A short synopsis ( paraphrase)
“Novella, Yale, SBM, paid shill!! Oh noes! Not friend wholesome organic food; love that ‘glyphosphate’ ( sic) Entine too. Connected to BAD!! This wanna-be Barrett! We no can has that! Shill shill shill!!!!! etc.”

Oh, and it wasn’t blood in a menstrual cup but a “fruit cup”.

The mental gymnastics these wankers engage in are almost hilarious, if it weren’t for the ensuing violence. They disseminate violent rhetoric and imagery and then are SHOCKED that people in their ranks would actually engage in violence. Or perhaps they aren’t shocked at all but silently approve of the acts and too chickenshit to do it themselves while aware these actions are viewed as repugnant.

Interestingly, the article keeps circling back on herd immunity. As that argument ever been tested in court?
What if it was and the science was shown to be ‘wanting’? Wouldn’t you guys then be in that proverbial place — up shitcreek without a paddle?

@Narad
I really don’t care where you live. It’s the strength of your arguments that matters.

Why would it be “tested in Court?” Courts don’t decide scientific facts.

Since anti-vaxxers don’t have any science to support their contentions, they have become enamoured with litigious means to make their point.

Herd immunity is quite obvious. If enough people do not spread virus, virus stops spreading. I am certain that a jury would understand this.

Herd immunity is quite obvious. If enough people do not spread virus, virus stops spreading. I am certain that a jury would understand this.

Sure they would understand that! They would also understand that by that logic unvaxxed teachers, admin staff, visitors to schools, parents picking up their kids would also need to be barred from schools. They would also understand that, in fact, actions would not just need to stop at schools, but the entire unvaxxed community would also need to be quarantined to protect kids. Kids run into unvaxxed people when they leave schools, no? Practical or not, these would be the steps the State would need to also take to show that it was acting on a pressing interest. Anything short, and things wouldn’t seem so pressing after all. Not to mention, this matter would be seperate from the Government also having to show that vaccination would be so effective at preventing diseases.

Yet again we see how rough the waters can be when your BS gets truly tested, rather than the smooth sailing of, ‘Jacobson said so’.

Children in the school spend lots of time with each other. A visitor would spend much less. So obviously, children need vaccination much more. And there is only one teacher in the class, versus many children.
And of course, idea is to protect children from the disease, not to build up herd immunity in the first place.

@ Science Mom:

Preach it, sister!
Right now, RFK jr & Co are looking for clients to sue over Glyphosate ( he’s in television ads) ; also he has taken on Mary Holland for CHD . I foretell his future in suing whomever he can over whatever they manufacture.

Also, woo-meisters love courts because they can use emotional testimony to sway juries which they can’t do in periodicals.
Notice how Null uses lawyers ( see PRN; see Orac’s recent correspondence from a legal eagle there)

Lawrence and Science Mom, courts don’t decide science, but they get to inquire whether they’re being presented with ‘science’ or BS, no?

And yet they also keep losing, consistently, in the Courts.

Lawrence, losing consistently when your crap gets tested in Courts or because ‘Jacobson says so’? Recently in a legal proceeding having to do.with a custody battle your crap got tested. You lost. Big time!

Imagine, your ‘science’ couldn’t even pass the sniff test of an arbitrator. How would it fare with serious, scrutinizing constitutional judges, watching to see you — bring it!

https://nationalpost.com/news/arbitrator-sides-with-ontario-parent-who-refuses-to-immunize-child-cites-anti-vaccination-expert

I read the article. The father fully intends taking the decision on review. Dr. Toni Bark, the referenced antivaccine “expert”, is nothing of the sort. Given that a US Court refused to accept her as an expert, this verdict is a disgrace.

And Canadian Courts are not US Courts…..feel free to post something of any relevance…because you haven’t.

A dead veterinarian?!? You have a dead veterinarian on your side, so victory is assured!!???!!!!
.
Thanks. This made my day.

Who really should be the one laughing, Opus? Your science flunked a 50/50 plus a feather test, with Toni Bark and a former Health Canada scientist showing you guys to be posers. How optimistic would things then be, having to face a much steeper test of a Supreme Court challenge and and a Oakes test?

Who really should be the one laughing, Opus? Your science flunked a 50/50 plus a feather test, with Toni Bark and a former Health Canada scientist showing you guys to be posers.

Yet you fail to mention what Chopra’s and Bark’s qualifications are re: vaccines. Any studies they have conducted? Anything?

Shiv Chopra was one of those scientists who did not improve with age ( see also Pauling, Duesberg, Montagnier)- he has appeared in various Null docudramas such as Seeds of Death detailing the horrors of GMOs.

In this article, you can find a link to the verdict upholding SB 277. Pay attention to the verdict and how it entirely addresses the State justification in encroaching on Rights. In siding with the State, various court cases are cited as precedents. Notice how next to nothing about the science of vaccines is taken up, especially it’s safety and efficacy. The US Government could mandate that kids take cyanide and call it a vaccine and this Ruling would support that.

Fortunately, there is no history of mandating vaccines in Canada so any such proposal facing a court challenge cannot rely on precedents. The Government would have to argue the science supporting the proposal. As I have stated, I can see the Government getting slaughtered in such a scenario.

https://www.courthousenews.com/california-appeals-court-upholds-vaccination-law/

Your courts will likely draw on public health law jurisprudence elsewhere, https://www.loc.gov/law/help/health-emergencies/canada.php

And I would not assume they will relitigated the science of vaccines. Generally, courts in the U.S. and elsewhere are pretty deferential to the expert bodies on the science when it comes to public health, and I’d be surprised iif your courts go into fully relitigating the science.
And if they do, that doesn’t actually improve your chances.

In siding with the State, various court cases are cited as precedents. Notice how next to nothing about the science of vaccines is taken up, especially it’s [sic] safety and efficacy.

Congratulations, you don’t understand what appeals courts do.

Something got me reflecting, in accordance with the SB277 ruling the Government could mandate that kids take cyanide, calling it vaccines. Parents couldn’t argue that it is an illegitimate encroachment on rights. Yet, why did the Appellants solely focus on rights? Why didn’t they also test whether the Government objectives were reasonable and achievable, and of coursethe Government would’ve then been forced to speak to the science — i.e. herd immunity.

Without having a history of mandates here in Canada, that issue would naturally be argued. Did SB277 opponents screw up?

Wow, the idiocy continues. Not every vaccine produced is required for school attendance. I am sure there would be severe resistance for a requirement to consume laetrile to attend school.

. I am sure there would be severe resistance for a requirement to consume laetrile to attend school.

There is for vaccines and it hasn’t stopped you guys.

Different kind of resistance. The one from ACIP* would be from actual education and experience, not conspiracy theories.

Do I have to explain to you what that means, and how it works? Here is a hint: John Salamone was a parent who became a member of ACIP in his quest for the USA to switch from OPV to IPV.

Why didn’t they also test whether the Government objectives were reasonable and achievable, and of coursethe Government would’ve then been forced to speak to the science — i.e. herd immunity.

Unsurprisingly, you still don’t understand what U.S. appellate courts do.

I don’t think he understands that the USA and Canada are two different countries, with their own sets of laws. Which include legal procedures.

Gah! I just had someone yesterday evening try to tell me that all Canadians are kind polite people. Obviously, he had not encountered the ignorance of Greg nor Lawrence Solomon..

Chris: I too used to think that Canadians were, generally, nice and polite people. Then I had the misfortune to work for Valeant, a Canadian company who we referred to as “the evil Canadians” for their hideously unethical price gouging on essential, life-saving medicines (and their mustache-twirilingly dumb and asinine business practices).

Now my theory is that, while most Canadians are nice and/or polite, when they’re jerks they are huge jerks. Just to balance everything out.

Most of my in-laws are Canadian, and we have been to BC lots of times. There is nothing special with nationality. Though some things are better because they have a national health plan, and there is much less stress with health issues.

And they do love their health system, even the aunt who loved listening to Rush Limbaugh. And they also have their own sovereign citizen bunch: https://lethbridgenewsnow.com/2019/08/29/david-stephan-claims-prejudice-at-alberta-childrens-hospital-because-they-are-sovereign-citizens/

Remember that guy?

As promised and my last post on this thread, here is how I envision an antivaxx aided victory for the Repubs in the next Election. Let’s consider a random sample of 100 voters that vote in the next Election. They vote and after the Exit Polls show there was an equal 25% split of the voters declaring Healthcare, the Economy, Immigration, and Other as the biggest factors determining their votes. Further probing also showed that within Other, 5% considered vaccination as their biggest concern

As to the actual votes, they were Healthcare (14D, 11R), Economy (9D, 16R), Immigration(11D, 9R), Other (11D, 9R), and Vaccination (1D, 4R). Again we have a Republican victory and it will be Trump for four more years. Yay!! But what else can we find out about the results on the vaccination front? Well it appears that of the people that were most interested about vaccination, the vast majority of them were antivaxxers and they voted Republican. With the debate intensifying many were turned off by the Dems mandates push, as well, the visceral image of a woman throwing her tampon at a Senator stuck in their heads.

Still, some may interject here: They say, ‘Greg, even so, vaccination wasn’t what determined the election, It was issues such as healthcare, the economy and immigration. Greg, you also predicted that antivaxx support would bring the Republicans a net 10% gain and it was only 3%. Ha ha, you were so way off, Greg.’

Anyway, Anderson Cooper decides to do a show on the Election and he seeks out that 100 random sample. He brings those folks into the studio. After bawling his eyes out backstage and breaking a few furnitures at the prospect that he will have to put up with that big orange goon four more years, he goes out to meet them. He interviews each of them separately and after having intense discussions about their thought processes as they voted, it appears that a lot of folks who voted on certain issue were considering other stuff or issues as they voted. In fact, some of those other stuff either sweetened or soured those primary issues. Giving a specific example, Cooper explaines that of the 75 folks that Healthcare, the Economy and Immigration were their primary concerns, 10 of them were also concerned about vaccines and mandates and it either strengthened or weakened their choices between the parties on those primary issues. He also adds that the effect was a net negative for the Democrats with the Republican gaining 7% extra votes

Did you hear that? Not only did vaccination bring the Republicans 3% extra votes from single-interest hardcore vaccination voters, but they gain another 7% from softer supporters. Did antivaxxers win the Republicans the election? In a technical sense, no, but pure sense, yes.

What an interesting fantasy you’ve concocted. I guess you missed the part that in the US, Presidential elections are not decided by total popular vote, instead by the Electoral College. Neither California, nor NY will change from Blue to Red, which means those electoral votes will go to the Democratic candidate…..so anti-vaxers in those states won’t matter a whit.

And if you think that the more Crunchy folks in other states are going to be voting for Trump, given that he’s shown nothing but “industry bias” you’re fooling yourself.

Didn’t flounce after all…..

The technicality of Electoral College does not void that scenario. It could play out in any of those Colleges. Yes, chances are you will keep Calif and NY. How did that work out in 2016?

And how’d that work out for the Republicans in 2018? They lost the suburbs….and they’ll keep losing them in 2020 as long as dipshit is still in the White House.

Just can’t stick the flounce! Another way the vaccination vote may help the Republicans that my scenario did not take into account: Dems pissed off at their party’s vaccination/mandates policy, but who still can’t bring themselves to vote Repubs won’t vote. Think of my 100 random voters sample skewing Repubs.

Can you name one election other than POTUS 2016 where the winner was explicitly anti vax and used that in speeches and ads.

Please limit to citywide or larger and vote difference less than 5%.

@Narad – “New Jersey should be the next domino, Gerg, although Connecticut might beat them out.

Wrong and wrong again!

Comments are closed.