LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE  January 2015

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE January 2015

Subject:

Re: The devastating impact of vaccine deniers, in one measles chart from The Washington Post

From:

Chandler Davis <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Science for the People Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 26 Jan 2015 13:23:06 -0500

Content-Type:

MULTIPART/MIXED

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (284 lines)

You're certainly right that the view should be broadened, Sigrid.
Let me add some reactions to the narrow question, however.

Mitchel listed a dozen ingredients of vaccines, some of which
sound noxious.  Is he saying that Big Pharma prescribes these
dubious ingrediants, or that they creep in as contaminants?  If
the latter, should we --in addition to keeping a critical eye
on the public health scene-- be calling for more vigilant
quality control?  If the former, what is the motive?

I don't think that hair-trigger response to any conceivable
capitalist plot is necessarily progressive.  Mitchel, and the
other vaccine skeptics we know, should ask themselves whether
they like the UN's program of vaccinating against polio.
Some of the challenges Mitchel makes would apply to that too.
What did he examine that led him to drop his opposition to the
Sabine vaccine? and has he done the comparable examination of
measles vaccine?  Some --perhaps including Mitchel but I don't
know that-- would oppose inoculating people with anything.  This
seems difficult to defend.  If they defend it on anti-sapitalist
grounds, how do they rebut the argument that the vaccines in
these programs don't bring in much profit?

Chandler



On Mon, 26 Jan 2015, Sigrid Schmalzer wrote:

> Hello. I am pro-vaccine for all the reasons that Michael and others have been emphasizing. However, I have many friends who do not vaccinate. I cannot consider them "fools" and I know them to be
> political allies on virtually every other issue. Their opposition to vaccines comes from the same kind of critical concern about capitalism, state power, etc. that leads them to embrace environmentalist,
> anti-racist, and other important social movements.
> 
> So, assuming Michael, Carol, Herb, and many others including myself on this list are right about vaccines, what has gone wrong? Two possibilities occur to me. One is that their understanding of science
> is poor. That's definitely part of it, but honestly I'm not sure that more science education would change things that much. It's not easy even for people with good college-level science to sort through
> the scientific arguments on this and many other issues. Arguments like the ones that Mitchel is raising can sound like good, rational arguments, especially if we don't know whose data to trust. At the
> end of the day, a lot of what people know about science is based on whom they trust (see Shapin's A Social History of Truth for a nice class-based analysis of this).
> 
> I think focusing more attention on the political analysis might be a better angle to take. Herd immunity, for example, has a scientific aspect that we should be hammering away at, but it also has a
> political aspect. We should be asking how progressive movements (especially around food and medicine) have taken on highly individualist values (protecting "my" family) that are in fact not in concert
> with the deeper social values that most of these folks (at least the people I know) hold dear. And, having succeeded in encouraging people to be skeptical about the power structures that push science in
> anti-social directions, we should work to refine that analysis to capture more of the nuances so that people don't end up rejecting science that is in fact working for people despite the fact that it's
> embedded in capitalist structures.
> 
> And of course we should always be keeping our sights on capitalism. People are right to suspect that medical knowledge is rigged in favor of power holders and that it fails to serve women, poor people,
> people of color, people in the global south, etc. equally. If we could liberate science from capitalism, we would be far better able to encourage people to place their trust in vaccines and other
> important life-saving technologies.
> 
> The vaccine debate is one of the most obvious issues today where the rubber meets the road for Science for the People, since we've got people questioning authority (which we want) but doing it in a way
> that many of us think is counter-productive and even hazardous. It's an opportunity for us to hone the analysis... and given all the other equally important, scary issues out there, it's not surprising
> that it should be such a frustrating high-stakes problem.
> 
> Sigrid
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sigrid Schmalzer
> Associate Professor, History Department
> Director, Social Thought & Political Economy Program
> UMass Amherst
> On 1/25/2015 5:27 PM, Michael H Goldhaber wrote:
>       Vaccines are anti-capitalist, on the whole. Any self-interested drug company or hospital corporation far prefers diseases that can be managed at great expense but not cured and certainly not
>       prevented. Public health workers, overwhelmingly pro-vaccines, are mostly on the left for obvious reasons.  Parents who decide their child shouldn't be vaccinated are hardly good examples of
>       the socially concerned.
>
>       Best,
> Michael
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Jan 25, 2015, at 10:28 AM, Mitchel Cohen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>       Well, all your arguments have not convinced me, because there is little real science in them. You argue hyperbolically.
>
>       I've tried to point out any number of issues, which you have not addressed, including serious problems with the composition of the vaccines themselves. You ignore all of that, as though
>       it's inconsequential.
>
>       You say: "Here's a question for you: If a baby too young to be vaccinated dies of the measles because the unvaccinated destroyed the herd immunity, will you take any responsibility?
>       After all, you've been repeating this sort of remark re vaccines for years, presumably with some effect on the badly educated."
>
>       OK, here's one right back at you: "If a baby IS vaccinated and dies because of an adverse effect (or becomes lifetime disabled), will you take any responsibility? After all, you?ve been
>       repeating this sort of remark re vaccines for years, presumably with some effect on the badly educated."
>
>       **********************************
>       If I conflated your remarks with Herb's, sorry 'bout that. I don't remember seeing any remarks by Herb, except his sending of the Washington Post story.
>
>       Here's on radio show to listen to and comment upon with David Crowe, Suzanne Humphries MD (anti-vax) and Jennifer Raff (pro vax).
>       Both at: http://prn.fm/shows/infectious-myth
>
>       By the way, it might interest you to know that I am not against vaccines, per se. I understand the scientific principles underlying them. (We can argue over whether those principles are
>       aided or thwarted by injection of all sorts of chemicals directly into the bloodstream, the marketing, the orchestrated hysteria, the failure to deal with contamination, and so-called
>       "environmental" causes, and so forth.) What I have seen here, however, is all the worst capitalist propaganda for mandatory injection of little children -- I think they're up over 48
>       different vaccines in the infant's first few months, before their immune systems are even half-way developed -- which betrays the real science, in the name of profits. And you fall for
>       it every time. You're unable to bring your critique of capitalism into a critique of science, and science as practiced. Repeatedly. Amazing.
>
>       Mitchel
> 
> 
>
>       At 01:06 PM 1/25/2015, you wrote:
>             Mitchel, it's interesting that you don't bother to reply to my question about taking responsibility. Don't you even read what you reply to?
>
>             You obviously don't  even have the time or interest to distinguish my remarks from Herb's. Nor apparently the willingness to follow major trends on the news. Currently,
>             there's a substantial measles outbreak that has been spread from Disneyland. As I said, a large majority of the children infected were unvaccinated. Orange County, where
>             Disneyland is, is a center of the anti- vaccination movement.
>
>             Mitchel, instead of reading the news or looking up even approximately authoritative medical sources, relies on an acquaintance who strings together a list of outlandish
>             claims. In fact, measles is most dangerous to children. It results in fatalities quite commonly, as I mentioned. In this country, those have been ended by the vaccine.
>
>             We've had numerous discussions over the years on this list relating to vaccination in general, and the unreliability of arguments against them. Did Mitchel ever alter his
>             general position as a result? I think not. He just moves on to new outlandish arguments rather than ever conceding on anything. This method in general, as I said resembles
>             the methods used by deniers of other well-established knowledge.
>
>             Mitchel, I do know you're not a Holocaust denier and assumed you're not a climate-change denier, which is exactly why I used those examples to point out the flawed way you
>             argue, hoping to shock you into reconsidering. Let me reiterate: you argue just like them!!!
>             MITCHEL, YOU ARGUE JUST LIKE THEM.
>
>             Of course, it's foolish of me to believe Mitchel will change his ways, or even consider the gist of any reply with enough care to come close to doing so. So henceforth I'll
>             refrain from replying to him unless, amazingly, I do note such a change.
>
>             Best,
>             Michael
> 
> 
>
>             On Jan 25, 2015, at 7:52 AM, [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>                   Without getting into the other items being discussed, I want to respond to one issue Mitchell raises.
>
>                   He says:
>                   "Do you really think that graph from the Washington Post proves anything at all other than there are more cases of measles this year than in years past? It shows
>                   a sudden leap, actually, and not the gradual or even exponential leaps from year to year that one would expect in claiming a "trend"."
>
>                   In infectious diseases like measles, there is often a pattern of sudden outbreaks where a virus gets into a pool of susceptibles and runs through them rapidly. 
>                   This can easily produce leaps rather than gradual increases.
>
>                   (Mitchell may or may not be acknowledging this in his/your rather cryptic phrase about "even exponential leaps" which has many, many possible meanings.)
>
>                   best
>                   sam
> 
>
>                   -----Original Message-----
>                   From: Mitchel Cohen < [log in to unmask]>
>                   To: SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE < [log in to unmask]>
>                   Sent: Sun, Jan 25, 2015 8:13 am
>                   Subject: Re: The devastating impact of vaccine deniers, in one measles chart from The Washington Post
>
>                   Michael,
>                   Let's go through this slowly.
>
>                   1) If you can't convince me, you should ask yourself "why not?", instead of calling folks like me "holocaust denyers" and "climate change denyers" -- neither of
>                   which category is applicable, and you know it.
>
>                   So you should also ask yourself why you need to disparage people in that way, even when you know it not to be true.
> 
>
>                   2) Do you really think that graph from the Washington Post proves anything at all other than there are more cases of measles this year than in years past? It
>                   shows a sudden leap, actually, and not the gradual or even exponential leaps from year to year that one would expect in claiming a "trend".
>
>                   So why do you use such a graph to bolster your claims? Don't you see how that makes your arguments suspect, untrustworthy, and even frivolous?
>
>                   I will look at the CDC data a little bit later, to give you time to consider these.
>
>                   Mitchel
> 
> 
>
>                   At 03:51 AM 1/25/2015, you wrote:
>                         Mitchel,
> 
>
>                         It??????s not only insulting but indication of a poor memory for you to suggest I haven??????tbeen listening to and rebutting the fools as well as you on this subject for
>                         years.
>
>                         I have in fact heard a great deal from the fools over the years. They will not listen to reason. Measles vaccine is highly effective, with rare,
>                         far-from-fatal side effects. On the other hand, measles (the disease, not the vaccine) kills one in a thousand, and does serious permanent damage to
>                         several more.
>
>                         With optional vaccination, herd immunity is lost. Those who have an immuno-compromised status and can??????t be vaccinated are therefore in far more danger. In
>                         the current outbreak, almost all the victims are apparently un-vaccinated. It is not part of a cycle. It goes along with the rise in whooping cough.
>                         Nothing worrisome is in the vaccines.
>
>                         The reasoning you indicate, Mitchel, by your list of questions, resembles that of deniers of well established truths of all sorts, from
>                         climate-change deniers to Holocaust deniers and many others. Ignoring that there is well-known and readily available evidence that deals with most of
>                         their questions, as with yours, they all adopt an unwarranted  attitude of ignorance and mistrust of all painstakingly verified studies and careful
>                         analysis. Another similarity is each time new evidence is presented against them they act as if nothing has ever been argued or rebutted before.
>
>                         Why you choose to take the side of such people the kind of questions you seemingly reflexively ask here I don??????t know. It doesn??????tredound to your credit.
>
>                         Here??????s a question for you: If a baby too young to be vaccinated dies of the measles because the unvaccinated destroyed the herd immunity, will you take any
>                         responsibility? After all, you??????ve been repeating this sort of remark re vaccines for years, presumably with some effect on the badly educated.
>
>                         Michael
>
>                               On Jan 24, 2015, at 5:00 PM, Mitchel Cohen < [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>                               At 06:25 PM 1/24/2015, you wrote:
>                                     According to a program on KQED yesterday, one of the groups with a large number of vaccine refusers are holders of advanced
>                                     degrees. What is the process of educating fools?
> 
>
>                               First step is to listen to what those so-called "fools" are saying, and see if you can successfully rebutt their concerns and understand
>                               them even if you disagree.
>
>                               There are actually several issues rolled into one:
>
>                               1) Mandatory vs. Optional vaccination
>
>                               2) What else is in the vaccines?
>
>                               3) Effectiveness of different types of vaccines
>
>                               4) Is this spike representative of a general "comeback" of measles in the U.S. or of a longterm cycle?
>
>                               5) The history of measles vaccine in the U.S.
>
>                               More later.
> 
> 
> 
>
>                                     Best,
>                                     Michael
>
>                                     > On Jan 24, 2015, at 1:49 PM, herb fox < [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>                                     >
>                                     > http://wapo.st/1ATEQTz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
>       http://www.lulu.com/shop/mitchel-cohen/what-is-direct-action/paperback/product-20937425.html
>       Mitchel Cohen's book, "What Is Direct Action? Lessons from (and to) Occupy Wall Street" (foreword by Richard Wolff) (596 pages). Get it now!
>
>       Check out http://www.MitchelCohen.com
>        o  HAPPY BIRTHDAY, DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. by Mitchel Cohen
>        o  ON PHIL OCHS, MALCOLM X, & JE SUIS CHARLIE by Stan Rogouski
>        o  PROTESTERS, COPS & THE MAYOR -- the movement to end violence by police sweeps across the country (Mitchel Cohen, Dave Zirin, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Black Agenda Report?s Dr. R. Marsha
>           Coleman-Adebayo, Glen Ford, Bruce Dixon; CommonDreams? Abby Zimet; Max Blumenthal, Sam Mintrani); Hey, Guess what? Another FOX-News Twistory: No one ever said 'Kill a Cop!'
>        o  WHY I HATE THANKSGIVING by Mitchel Cohen
>        o  AUDIO: Listen to poems by Mitchel Cohen: "The Permanent Carnival," and "In Memoriam: For Fallen Comrades"
>        o  IS VIOLENCE IN YOUR GENES? Genetic Racism & Biological Determinism, by Mitchel Cohen
>       Ring the bells that still can ring,  Forget your perfect offering.
>       There is a crack, a crack in everything, That's how the light gets in. 
>       ~ Leonard Cohen
>
>       Realize that little things lead to bigger things ... And there?s a wonderful parable in the New Testament: The sower scatters seeds. Some seeds fall in the pathway and get stamped on, and
>       they don?t grow. Some fall on the rocks, and they don?t grow. But some seeds fall on fallow ground, and they grow and multiply a thousandfold. Who knows where some good little thing that
>       you?ve done may bring results years later that you never dreamed of.
>       ~ Pete Seeger
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
May 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager