Because of Donald Trump's long history of antivaccine statements, his meeting with Andrew Wakefield during the presidential campaign, and his meeting with Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. during the transition, antivaxers thought Trump would give them what they want. They were wrong, just the latest to realize that they've been conned. Is it so wrong for me to feel serious schadenfreude here?
No new Insolence today, I'm afraid. But I have an explanation.
Before I delve into the next topic, I can’t help but congratulate John Oliver yet again for his excellent deconstruction of the antivaccine movement on Sunday night. As I noted on Tuesday, it clearly hit the mark, given how angry one antivax blogger got over it. As of yesterday, over at that wretched hive of scum and quackery, that antivaccine crank blog known as Age of Autism, resident “Media Editor” Anne Dachel was still sputtering over Oliver’s segment, labeling it Oliver’s vulgar treatment of vaccine-injured and their families and posting a line about how allegedly “mocking and berating the vaccine-injured …
On his most recent Sunday show, John Oliver did a tour de force segment on the antivaccine movement. Not surprisingly, antivaxers are not pleased.
A reader asks me why I hate naturopaths. I don't hate naturopaths, but I do oppose naturopathy. Earlier this week, Tim Caulfield reminded me of one reason why: You can't have naturopathy without antivax. Antivax views are baked into naturopathy.
The Court of Justice of the European Union just issued a muddled ruling being proclaimed by clickbait headlines as allowing courts to blame any disease on vaccines without evidence. It does nothing of the sort, but it is concerning nonetheless, as it is confusing and does appear to lower the bar of evidence for vaccine injury claims. That's plenty bad enough.
Bloggers at the Age of Autism blog, like most antivaccine activists, vehemently deny that they are antivaccine, claiming instead that they are "vaccine safety" advocates. Their denials are belied by their having published many posts about a "Vaccine Holocaust."
Two badly designed, incompetently performed "studies" that claimed to show that unvaccinated children are healthier than unvaccinated children were briefly published by a bottom feeding, predatory "open access" journal, and then they disappeared, having apparently been retracted. Now they're back, like Freddie Krueger, Jason, or Michael Myers, and antivaxers are rejoicing. I guess the check must have finally cleared.
Antivaxers are planning on publishing the personal information of employees of the Boston Herald because the paper published an editorial saying that promoting antivaccine misinformation among a vulnerable population should be a "hanging offense." Meanwhile, overblown allusions to the Holocaust are going into overdrive. Same as it ever was.
Last week, the Boston Herald published an editorial about how antivaxers deceived a community of Somali immigrants in Minnesota, referring to the spreading of deadly misinformation as a "hanging offense." Antivaxers took an ill-advised idiom and turned it into a threat of mass lynchings, ignoring their own violent imagery about vaccines and portraying themselves as "pro-vaccine," and used it as justification to threaten to publish the home addresses and phone numbers of newspaper employees. Yes, they are disingenuous and hypocritical as hell.