PDA

View Full Version : How folkscience can kill innocent babies



Pooka1
09-21-2010, 06:05 AM
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?device=iphone&storyId=129913054

People are idiots. We do not live in a demon-haunted world and yes science really is the answer.

Dead babies is what folkscience has to show for itself.

SandyC
09-21-2010, 08:55 AM
Pooka1,
I absolutly agree. I just don't get the reasoning behind the decision not to vacinate (sp) a child. I have never had a parent explain to me the "science" of not doing so.

I'm old enough to understand the horrors on polio/whooping cough (had it as a kid)/measles (both kinds) etc since the vaccine wasn't around when I was a child. I remember the panic my mother was in when it was discovered that my sister and I were exposed to polio.

These diease's are making a come back because of poor decision making on the part of young parents who don't have a clue as to the results of some of these illness's.
SandyC

Ballet Mom
09-21-2010, 11:46 AM
All these babies that died were too young to have had the DPT vaccination. It is outrageous to think that because people are making these decisions not to vaccinate, they are not necessarily killing their own kids, but other peoples kids, by allowing the illnesses to take hold in the general community.

Last week a medical doctor who's daughter is in my daughter's ballet classes stood up at a parent meeting and asked to make sure that all kids had been vaccinated against pertussis via the DPT vaccine and she recommended that adults be revaccinated also (after consultation with your own doctor) due to the nine baby deaths.

As we were leaving the meeting, one parent said that her daughter's chiropractors were totally against the vaccines and so she and her family wouldn't be getting them.

The chiropractor community should be ashamed of themselves and if they want to dispense medical advice they ought to go and become medical doctors themselves and take care of the sick and dying patients caused by their former profession's stupid advice.

mariaf
09-21-2010, 02:29 PM
These diease's are making a come back because of poor decision making on the part of young parents who don't have a clue as to the results of some of these illness's.
SandyC

Well said, Sandy.

It's more than even just poor decision making. It is, as you say, cluelessness, ignorance and a total disregard for the health and welfare of others.

Pooka1
09-21-2010, 02:31 PM
That's a great point about chiros generally being against vaccination, in keeping with their complete lack of rigorous training in anything real.

I posted some quotes from chiro school graduates who thought chiro school was a joke as were the "teachers."

Most of chiro apparently is really just a multilevel marketing scheme as far as I can tell.

Pooka1
09-21-2010, 02:33 PM
Well said, Sandy.

It's more than even just poor decision making. It is, as you say, cluelessness, ignorance and a total disregard for the health and welfare of others.

I previously posted my agreement with SandyC about how her longer term perspective was important and necessary in the discussion. Apparently, my post was too factual for some folks because it was deleted.

LindaRacine
09-21-2010, 02:39 PM
Sorry Sharon. I had to remove it because of your use of the word "faith."

Pooka1
09-21-2010, 02:47 PM
Sorry Sharon. I had to remove it because of your use of the word "faith."

Okay thanks for that tip. I'll remember it.

I am carefully replacing certain words and phrases with others that are equivalent and I notice that works. I'll just keep chipping away at this.

Sorry for making work for you.

jillw
09-21-2010, 08:28 PM
A few people in my son's class at school were diagnosed with pertussis last spring. We were all so surprised because all of them were up to date on the dtp vaccination (and booster shots), but they got it anyway. One poor girl had a "spit cup" at school because she couldn't control her coughing but wasn't diagnosed for months...they thought her allergies/asthma was causing the coughing and didn't consider pertussis since she had been vaccinated.

Pooka1
09-21-2010, 08:43 PM
Well apparently the vaccine doesn't work 100% in everyone. That's another reason for everyone who has no history of bad reactions to get immunized. That way, these kids in whom the vaccine does not confer immunity are more protected.

hdugger
09-22-2010, 12:29 AM
I got my son vaccinated for DPT, but I would not have gotten him the chickenpox vaccine (didn't have to because he got the pox before the vaccine came out). My reasoning was that chickenpox is a relatively mild disease in children, but pretty bad in adults and the vaccine shows some signs of "wearing off" after awhile.

This is just to say that sometimes there are reasonable disagreements with vaccine policy (although I don't think that DPT is the right vaccine to disagree with - the risk of the disease is much worse than the risk of the vaccine)

Pooka1
09-22-2010, 05:31 AM
Yes reasonable people can disagree on certain vaccines. But not others.

I think most of the problem is true ignorance although there is moral turpitude lurking among the folks who know they are relying on herd immunity. There are people walking around loose who think that the vaccines aren't necessary because so few people get these diseases any more. These folkscientist "geniuses" (please pardon that redundancy) don't realize that these diseases are by no means eradicated. Small pox in the wild has been eradicated which is why I was vaccinated but my children were not. That is a tribute to the vaccine specifically and science in general. Prayer played no role whatsoever.

Science has mastered the reality landscape. You could say it has cornered the market on that.

Pooka1
09-22-2010, 05:47 AM
http://scepticsbook.com/2010/07/12/avn-slammed-for-misleading-false-and-anti-vaccine-information/


After a lengthy investigation the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) have finally handed down their findings into the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN).

The commission concluded that the AVN provide misleading information about vaccination and must post disclaimers on their website clearly stating they are anti-vaccination.

The report found evidence that the AVN misleads readers by using reliable and peer reviewed literature but selectively quotes from it, often in contradiction to the conclusions or findings of the studies. The AVN also gives non-peer reviewed and anecdotal material the same authority as peer-reviewed literature.

Quote mining... the game of people who know or should know they have lost the debate. Despicable.

mariaf
09-22-2010, 09:05 AM
Well apparently the vaccine doesn't work 100% in everyone. That's another reason for everyone who has no history of bad reactions to get immunized. That way, these kids in whom the vaccine does not confer immunity are more protected.

I was going to say the exact same thing. To me, the fact that there are these cases out there - some of them in children who were immunized - is even more reason for everyone without a history of a bad reaction to get immunized. Otherwise, before you know it we will be hearing about more and more of these cases and all of our children will be at greater risk.

Ballet Mom
09-22-2010, 10:40 AM
Well apparently the vaccine doesn't work 100% in everyone. That's another reason for everyone who has no history of bad reactions to get immunized. That way, these kids in whom the vaccine does not confer immunity are more protected.

No vaccines work 100% on everyone. We rely a great deal on herd immunity. It turned out that I had no antibodies to rubella when I was pregnant with my son. And there was actually an outbreak of rubella at the university I was attending when I was pregnant with him. It scared the bejeebers out of me. My obstetrician had to wait until after I had him to re-vaccinate me.

Pooka1
09-22-2010, 10:58 AM
I also had no immunity to Rubella when I was pregnant although I was vaccinated for it. I was told to stay away from young children. I did not get the impression that loss of immunity to Rubella was unusual after so many years.

Pooka1
09-22-2010, 11:29 AM
Public health should have no exception for ignorance FULL STOP.

hdugger
09-22-2010, 04:29 PM
Yes reasonable people can disagree on certain vaccines. But not others.

Another questionable vaccination policy: Apparently, older folks do not gain much benefit from the flu vaccine. Something about their immune system. Yet, there they are lining up every year to get them (and probably being exposed to lots of germs in the process.)

All of this is just to say that the government would find much greater compliance with their vaccination policy if it were not full of these kinds of lapses. It tends to make people a little distrustful of *all* of their recommendations.

On the overall topic, I think that distrust of vaccines is largely tied in with distrust of government. I don't think it has much to do with any particular belief system or political bent, except that people who don't trust their government's recommendations tend to fall back on their own prejudices. Among the hippy-dippy homeschooling crowd (my group) for example, there was a very low compliance rate with vaccination. It had to do (as best I could tell) with a sense that vaccines interfered with more "natural" mechanisms.

Pooka1
09-22-2010, 07:40 PM
Another questionable vaccination policy: Apparently, older folks do not gain much benefit from the flu vaccine. Something about their immune system. Yet, there they are lining up every year to get them (and probably being exposed to lots of germs in the process.)

I don't think this is widely known. Not even sure it is true. So I don't think this is a common motivation. Just throwing that out there.


All of this is just to say that the government would find much greater compliance with their vaccination policy if it were not full of these kinds of lapses. It tends to make people a little distrustful of *all* of their recommendations.

People in a modern society have to learn to triage what they are told. I will be the first to agree that as more and more things are realized to be more and more complex and technical, the average joe has to take more and more of their facts on trust from the experts. But the difference between this and other things they choose to take on trust is that this is evidence driven. That is THE key difference that folks can use to distinguish the various claims from authorities.


On the overall topic, I think that distrust of vaccines is largely tied in with distrust of government. I don't think it has much to do with any particular belief system or political bent, except that people who don't trust their government's recommendations tend to fall back on their own prejudices. Among the hippy-dippy homeschooling crowd (my group) for example, there was a very low compliance rate with vaccination. It had to do (as best I could tell) with a sense that vaccines interfered with more "natural" mechanisms.

One can only hope the MPHs among that cozy little group bucked the trend and vaccinated. If we can't trust an MPH to vaccinate then we can all give up and go home. ;)

jrnyc
09-22-2010, 07:43 PM
never heard that about older folks not benefiting from flu vaccine...
doesnt make sense...what is it about their immune systems?

we were told in teaching that one develops immunity to a lot of the colds 'n stuff kids bring into school...25 years in the public school system, teaching, testing and doing counseling...never got that immunity!
so i take what they say with a grain of salt...:rolleyes:

jess

Ballet Mom
09-22-2010, 07:59 PM
I would like to know who found the following comment offensive?


I guess it's offensive to point out that Christians developed and funded most of the hospitals in Western civilization.

And that anti-vaccination fervor is not at all confined to those with faith, or that the main promoter of it was actually a medical doctor who doesn't seem to have a religious background at all.

We don't live in the Soviet Union as much as some people would like to believe they do.

Pooka1
09-22-2010, 08:10 PM
I doubt anyone found that offensive. I think it is irrelevant speculation.

I don't report posts. I think I once reported one post a million years ago but not since then. Not in years. I control what I read and wish everyone would.

I also wish people would critically examine various societal taboos against criticizing certain ideas. These are all ideas and none should be immune from criticism.

Ballet Mom
09-22-2010, 08:19 PM
I doubt anyone found that offensive. I think it is irrelevant speculation.

I don't report posts. I think I once reported one post a million years ago but not since then. Not in years. I control what I read and wish everyone would.

I also wish people would critically examine various societal taboos against criticizing certain ideas. These are all ideas and none should be immune from criticism.

If no one found it offensive....why was it deleted?

Pooka1
09-22-2010, 08:23 PM
If no one found it offensive....why was it deleted?

I don't think being offensive is the only reason for deletion of posts.

Ballet Mom
09-22-2010, 08:33 PM
Well, that certainly brings us to the question as to why it was deleted at all, doesn't it?

jrnyc
09-22-2010, 08:40 PM
what?
i do not have any questions about religion or who started what...
just want to know WHAT it is about older folks immune systems that would indicate that they don't benefit from flu vaccines...
i always question statements about immune systems and how they work for a particular group...not that i think none of the statements could possibly be true..just that i questions them...
i waited 25 years for my "elementary school immunity" to kick in...retired, it still hasnt :rolleyes: so i tend to question what people tell me about immunity...

my Lyme doctor in East Hampton Long Island once gave me a pneumonia vaccine, saying it would kick my immune system up to better fight Lyme...i dont think it did...
i question stuff about immunity...due to many personal experiences...

jess

Pooka1
09-22-2010, 08:45 PM
i question stuff about immunity...due to many personal experiences...


Yeah I agree with you. Hdugger is usually right on but I am skeptical of that one comment which doesn't seem to comport with much other stuff I have heard.

Pooka1
09-22-2010, 08:46 PM
Well, that certainly brings us to the question as to why it was deleted at all, doesn't it?

Not really. Nobody cares.

Ballet Mom
09-22-2010, 09:01 PM
Not really. Nobody cares.

I care. Very much.

jrnyc
09-22-2010, 09:15 PM
ditto...
i just want to know about immune systems and the flu shot!

jess

skevimc
09-22-2010, 10:06 PM
Our immune systems get less responsive the older we get. Just like our muscles become less responsive. Bones become less responsive. Just about every system becomes less responsive as we age. You want to know 'why'? Most aging researchers want to know the same thing.

So I'm not sure if she's referencing a specific study. But I know that there are studies that have increased the amount of vaccine to elderly in order to boost their immune system even more since they are at higher risk since they are somewhat immune compromised.

jrnyc
09-22-2010, 10:11 PM
thanks for the reply...
that makes sense to me...but the post said that older people DON'T benefit from flu vaccine...that's what does not make sense to me...

jess

hdugger
09-23-2010, 01:18 AM
ditto...
i just want to know about immune systems and the flu shot!

jess

Here's one report summarizing some of the studies:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/health/02flu.html

and here's the quote about the immune system:

"That finding has a biological basis. Vaccines work by priming the immune system to recognize and respond to incoming threats. Because the immune system slows down with age, older adults do not respond as well to vaccines as younger adults."

Again, just to say that what appears to be proven by science ain't necessarily so. It's all just fallible humans looking at things and making their best guess on interpreting what they see, and it can all be turned topsy-turvy with another look. I'm more trusting of the thinking behind the DPT studies, but, knowing what I know about the state of medical research, I'm not really willing to bow down before any of it.

And, yes, I did vaccinate my son against Pertussis :)

hdugger
09-23-2010, 01:49 AM
So, actually, it seems as if the whole thing with DPT vaccines is more complicated then it appears.

Like chickenpox, the protection provided by the vaccine is much shorter than the protection provided by the disease itself (5 to 10 years for the vaccine compared to 7 to 20 for the infection). The increase in pertussis is not primarily among unvaccinated children - it's in teens and adults. That *sounds* like people who have had their vaccine wear off, although there's probably no way of telling. And these teens and adults are primarily the ones who are infecting infants.

To avoid infecting infants, adults would have to be vaccinated pretty darn frequently to provide that herd immunity.

(Here's one report - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2532581/. There are others)

So, although the vaccine helps (and helped alot when it was first introduced) I'm not certain how effective it will turn out to be in the long run, unless adults are repeatedly vaccinated.

Pooka1
09-23-2010, 05:22 AM
Again, just to say that what appears to be proven by science ain't necessarily so. It's all just fallible humans looking at things and making their best guess on interpreting what they see, and it can all be turned topsy-turvy with another look. I'm more trusting of the thinking behind the DPT studies, but, knowing what I know about the state of medical research, I'm not really willing to bow down before any of it.

And, yes, I did vaccinate my son against Pertussis :)

Yes but saying medicine is flawed, and we know it is in large part because of the inability to do controlled trails in some cases, in no way undermines the fact that it is still the only game in town for hoping to know anything real. It is evidence-based versus everything else which is based on wishful thinking.

Vaccination is a victim of its own success in some ways. It is hard to control for masses who have not enough training to reason their way out of a paper bag in the case of these anti-vac folks. Some privately held beliefs don't just harm the individual... they harm innocents. That is an ongoing issue.

mariaf
09-23-2010, 07:06 AM
If no one found it offensive....why was it deleted?

I believe that Linda stated earlier that she had no choice but to remove any posts containing the word 'faith'. That is probably the reason it was deleted, rather than anyone reporting it or being offended by it.

hdugger
09-23-2010, 09:28 AM
Yes but saying medicine is flawed, and we know it is in large part because of the inability to do controlled trails in some cases, in no way undermines the fact that it is still the only game in town for hoping to know anything real. It is evidence-based versus everything else which is based on wishful thinking.

"Hoping" is the operative word. That I trust science's process says absolutely nothing about the veracity of a particular result. Trusting a particular scientific results *is* a matter of faith. You could have faith that science had proved that vaccinating the elderly against the flu was effective, and your faith would be misplaced.

The fear of the pertussis vaccine isn't faith against science, btw. It's science against science. It's parents weighing the scientific reports that pertussis leads to neurological damage against the scientific reports of its protective effects. That the science on one side appears to be weaker than the science on the other is not that easy to parse out. But it's not a faith vs. science battle.

Pooka1
09-23-2010, 11:02 AM
I believe that Linda stated earlier that she had no choice but to remove any posts containing the word 'faith'. That is probably the reason it was deleted, rather than anyone reporting it or being offended by it.

Also some posts are removed for being too factual where the facts involved fall under some societal taboo. That is the obvious reason but is never the stated reason for obvious reason.

I think Linda just wants people moving along, a sentiment with which I completely agree. She is responsible for keeping things on track and she is doing it all on a voluntary basis to her great credit.

jrnyc
09-23-2010, 11:05 AM
thanks hdugger...for that quote...
but i still dont quite trust those kinds of statements...and i do believe i have benefited from flu shots...at every age! even if their claim is true...i dont see the harm in getting one, on the chance it can help...there are some really nasty flu viruses out there! :rolleyes:

jess

Pooka1
09-23-2010, 11:13 AM
"Hoping" is the operative word. That I trust science's process says absolutely nothing about the veracity of a particular result. Trusting a particular scientific results *is* a matter of faith. You could have faith that science had proved that vaccinating the elderly against the flu was effective, and your faith would be misplaced.

Careful of your use of the "f" word there. :D

Yes but some things being discussed are not open questions. Just because some open questions remain in this area doesn't mean others are necessarily still open.


The fear of the pertussis vaccine isn't faith against science, btw. It's science against science. It's parents weighing the scientific reports that pertussis leads to neurological damage against the scientific reports of its protective effects. That the science on one side appears to be weaker than the science on the other is not that easy to parse out. But it's not a faith vs. science battle.

Well I made a similar point earlier about how the unwashed masses are almost completely unarmed in making this determination. At some point, when public health is at stake, they must trust the scientists who as a group are the good guys in this game.

I am also saying that other modes of discourse that are not evidence-based can only undermine the efforts to understand complex medical, scientific, and technical issues in modern society. In that sense, the choice is to come at it from an evidence-driven viewpoint versus to come at it from a wishful thinking viewpoint. Many children are taught that evidence is not required in certain endeavors so they are not likely to seek it out in others where the rubber meets the road.

The answer obviously is to beef up science education so folks can understand the issues much better. There are some who seek to undermine science education and this could not be more counterproductive.

hdugger
09-23-2010, 11:25 AM
thanks hdugger...for that quote...
but i still dont quite trust those kinds of statements...and i do believe i have benefited from flu shots...at every age! even if their claim is true...i dont see the harm in getting one, on the chance it can help...there are some really nasty flu viruses out there! :rolleyes:

jess

You're too young for the lowered immune stuff :) It's primarily in people over 70.

The caution, I think, is not to place too much faith in the flu shot. Protect yourself during flu season "as if" you hadn't had the shot. That's probably the safest course.

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 11:30 AM
The problem is the attempt to associate anti-vaccination hysteria with people of f---- and their "demon-haunted world" due to some people's pre-existing prejudices. It is quite clear that people of all stripes are in the anti-vaccination crowd.

"In February 1998 a paper written by Wakefield and 12 other doctors about 12 autism spectrum children was published in the Lancet."

Dr. Wakefield, who was a respected surgeon and twelve other doctors somehow managed to get their research published in a major scientific medical journal.

That sounds like science to me. It apparently didn't turn out to be very good science...but what's new? Hardly a reason to be blaming religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield

hdugger
09-23-2010, 11:40 AM
Careful of your use of the "f" word there. :D

Yes but some things being discussed are not open questions. Just because some open questions remain in this area doesn't mean others are necessarily still open.

My point is that there's no science to back up the idea that your science-based faith is a more effective in medical decision-making than any other kind of faith. I don't believe the question has ever been examined. Science might be right 25% of the time in medical matters, which would make it a less effective predictor than a chimp picking numbers out of a hat. There's just no way to say with any particular result. Again, it's the *process* that is trustworthy - not any particular result.


I am also saying that other modes of discourse that are not evidence-based can only undermine the efforts to understand complex medical, scientific, and technical issues in modern society. In that sense, the choice is to come at it from an evidence-driven viewpoint versus to come at it from a wishful thinking viewpoint. Many children are taught that evidence is not required in certain endeavors so they are not likely to seek it out in others where the rubber meets the road.

The problem with DPT and autism is that there was some evidence to suggest that they were related. I'm not going to remember the source of the article - I think it was Salon, but I'm not at all sure. But I did read a pretty convincing article about 6 years ago tying the two things together. Again, I'm pretty hazy, but the evidence had to do with when vaccines were introduced (or discontinued) and what happened to the rate of autism.

OK, I found the article, but I'm don't really have time to review it right now - http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/06/16/thimerosal

hdugger
09-23-2010, 11:51 AM
"Health officials also released demographic information showing that 77% of the hospitalized infants under 6 months old were Latino, as were eight of the nine fatalities."

A complete guess, but I suspect this has to do with lack of access to medical care. Poorer people (again, total guess that these were poorer Latinos) tend to wait way too long to get medical attention because they can't pay for it.

hdugger
09-23-2010, 11:59 AM
Emergency room care is pretty darn inconvenient. If you have to wait hours to be seen, you don't bring you child in at the first troubling sign but instead wait until they seem *really* sick.

skevimc
09-23-2010, 12:31 PM
That's not been my experience at all.

Against better judgment I'm going to comment on this because this could go in a very bad direction quickly. However...

You have absolutely no way of knowing why the people you see in the ER waiting room are there unless you speak to them and take their medical history. How long they have been sick. Is this their first baby. etc... Certainly this is the case for some but it's also not the case for some. You get upset when people make blanket statements about f@ith (as do I) because it doesn't represent the entire population. It is based purely on preconceived notions aka. prejudices.

LindaRacine
09-23-2010, 01:22 PM
Also some posts are removed for being too factual where the facts involved fall under some societal taboo. That is the obvious reason but is never the stated reason for obvious reason.

I think Linda just wants people moving along, a sentiment with which I completely agree. She is responsible for keeping things on track and she is doing it all on a voluntary basis to her great credit.

Buttering me up will do you no good! Oh, well, maybe just a little bit. ;-)

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 03:44 PM
Against better judgment I'm going to comment on this because this could go in a very bad direction quickly. However...

You have absolutely no way of knowing why the people you see in the ER waiting room are there unless you speak to them and take their medical history. How long they have been sick. Is this their first baby. etc... Certainly this is the case for some but it's also not the case for some. You get upset when people make blanket statements about f@ith (as do I) because it doesn't represent the entire population. It is based purely on preconceived notions aka. prejudices.

Regarding my "prejudices":


L.A. Emergency Rooms Full of Illegal Immigrants

Overburdened by the uninsured and overwhelmed by illegal immigration, public health care in Los Angeles is on life support.

Sixty percent of the county's uninsured patients are not U.S. citizens. More than half are here illegally. About 2 million undocumented aliens in Los Angeles County alone are crowding emergency rooms because they can't afford to see a doctor.

According to the State Association of Hospitals, California's public health system is "on the brink of collapse." In Los Angeles County, patients can wait four days for a hospital bed and up to two years for gallbladder surgery.

"The hospitals are closing because of the totality of the uninsured," said Dr. Thomas Garthwaite, director of the Los Angeles County Health Department. "If you're legally a resident in California and you're poor, you have a right to basic services."

But some critics say the taxpayers can't be the HMO to the world. Last year, Los Angeles County spent $340 million to treat the uninsured; that's roughly $1,000 for every taxpayer.

"We're citizens here. Why should somebody from another country that's here illegally get anything that we can't get? I mean that's dumb, that's not right," said Don Schenck, whose son, Bill, is mentally disabled.

Though the Schencks are uninsured, and considered poor by county standards, his father had to find a way to pay for his Bill's care while thousands of others, in the country illegally, get it for free.

"It makes you feel pretty bad when you're born in that country and you're handicapped and you've got a learning disability and you can't get medical," Schenck said.

Mike Antonovich, the Los Angeles County supervisor, said the system has been "basically bankrupted."

The Department of Health has a $1.2 billion deficit. Caring for illegals is siphoning money from other services and forcing clinics, trauma centers and emergency rooms to close, he said.

"We cannot afford to have a open-door policy to encourage illegals to continue to come here and receive all the medical care, because it's too expensive," he said.

Immigrants like Yolanda Hernandez, however, argue that if there were cheap insurance plans available to her community, people would buy them.

"[Americans] have enough money to pay for insurance," she said. "They make good money and are educated. Unfortunately, we are not."


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150750,00.html

Pooka1
09-23-2010, 04:04 PM
...f@ith...

:D

You are very clever Dr. McIntire... very clever. That's going to fool Linda for sure!

hdugger
09-23-2010, 04:05 PM
You'll be surprised to hear (:)) that the CDC disagrees with Fox News (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db38.htm#emergency). According to them, it's those infernal old people and people with Medicaid coverage filling up the emergency rooms.

For the purpose of our discussion (about whether the uninsured are getting routine care in emergency rooms), the important bullet point is:

"ED visits by the uninsured were no more likely to be triaged as nonurgent than visits by those with private insurance or Medicaid coverage."

The rest of the bullet points are:

"Older adults (aged 75 and over), non-Hispanic black persons, poor persons, and persons with Medicaid coverage were more likely to have had at least one emergency department (ED) visit in a 12-month period than those in other age, race, income, and insurance groups.

Among the under-65 population, the uninsured were no more likely than the insured to have had at least one ED visit in a 12-month period.

Persons with Medicaid coverage were more likely to have had multiple visits to the ED in a 12-month period than those with private insurance and the uninsured.

Persons with and without a usual source of medical care were equally likely to have had one or more ED visits in a 12-month period."

Side question: I wonder if the over-representation of Medicaid patients (who can't possibly be that big a percentage of the population) is due to doctors not accepting them as patients. That's especially bolstered by the "multiple visits" for medicaid patients. Emergency rooms are a really crummy place to get ongoing care - I can't imagine going there if you could see a doctor.

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 04:13 PM
Not really fair to average in Southern California with the rest of the nation's emergency rooms.

Very easy for a Portlander to not know the reality of what's going on down here. I know, I grew up in Portland and visit regularly.

Pooka1
09-23-2010, 04:21 PM
The point BEING.....

Folkscience, as a popular brand of ignorance from ALL quarters, is killing babies.

Next.

hdugger
09-23-2010, 04:22 PM
The important point, for my position, was this:

"ED visits by the uninsured were no more likely to be triaged as nonurgent than visits by those with private insurance or Medicaid coverage."

and I don't imagine that would change by area or proportion of uninsured. In case it got lost in the thread, my position was that Latino infants were getting care further along in the disease process (thus, deferring care until the issue *was* an emergency) and that's why they were sicker.

However, according to the reports, that's not the case. Nor is it the case that infants are getting sick because children are under-vaccinated (Pooka's point). Apparently, just to spite all of us, the issue is that Latino infants are exposed to more adults than other infants, and adults (of all races and ages) tend not to be protected against whooping cough.

So, in summary, forget about vaccinating your children to protect to the herd and just stop socializing :)

hdugger
09-23-2010, 04:23 PM
The point BEING.....

Folkscience, as a popular brand of ignorance from ALL quarters, is killing babies.

Next.

Actually, that doesn't appear to be the case. The issue is that adults are not getting vaccinated every 5 to 10 years against whopping cough (I suspect because they never thought of it, rather then that they're afraid of becoming autistic at 50). And that, apparently, Latinos socialize too much.

Pooka1
09-23-2010, 04:42 PM
just stop socializing :)

Works for me. I am forever trying to maximize my saddle time anyway. :)

Pooka1
09-23-2010, 04:44 PM
Actually, that doesn't appear to be the case. The issue is that adults are not getting vaccinated every 5 to 10 years against whopping cough (I suspect because they never thought of it, rather then that they're afraid of becoming autistic at 50). And that, apparently, Latinos socialize too much.

I'm taking this under consideration because I like the cut of your jib demeanor-wise. :)

skevimc
09-23-2010, 06:18 PM
Regarding my "prejudices":




That is a cleverly worded article. Especially this sentence.


About 2 million undocumented aliens in Los Angeles County alone are crowding emergency rooms because they can't afford to see a doctor.

This reads like 2 million undocumented aliens 'alone' are overcrowding LA county ER's and taxpayers are footing the bill. (If you interpret that differently, let me know). There were only around 2.5 million illegal immigrants in 2009 in ALL of California. So this article wants us to believe that 2 million of those immigrants live in LA county and 'alone' are crowding the ER's. Whatever... This is a pointless argument and perfectly demonstrates why I said it could get ugly really fast.

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 06:22 PM
My point was basically that the large number of illegal immigrants in California who many have not received health care in the past and many do not have vaccinations is probably going to keep befuddling our public health system in many ways....whooping cough only one of the things. I do notice that the outbreak is confined to California.

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 06:32 PM
I'm sure the number is very hard to pin down, it's not like they actually want to be counted. Plus the number has been dropping due to the recession.


Here's another report:

"A new study says nearly a quarter of the nation's illegal immigrants live in California, despite a nearly 4 percent drop in the state's illegal population.

A Pew Hispanic Center report released Wednesday estimates California had 2.55 million illegal immigrants in 2009, a 3.8 percent decrease from the year before. The state accounts for 23 percent of illegal immigrants in the United States.

The study also says illegal immigrants now compose 6.9 percent of California's population - the highest percentage in the country. "

http://www.presstelegram.com/breakingnews/ci_15966333

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 06:39 PM
Of course, I'm sure we can all just sweep it under the rug and blame it on stupid demon-haunted people of faith who are the evil anti-vaxers and everyone will be happy.

hdugger
09-23-2010, 06:55 PM
My point was basically that the large number of illegal immigrants in California who many have not received health care in the past and many do not have vaccinations is probably going to keep befuddling our public health system in many ways....whooping cough only one of the things. I do notice that the outbreak is confined to California.

According to the reports I read, the immigrants (up to teenagers) actually had a *higher* level of vaccination then the general population.

The issue is that adults, across the board, don't tend to have immunity to whooping cough and, because they don't get vaccinated every 5 to 10 years, they're spreading it everywhere.

All adults spread it. The issue for Latino infants is that they're exposed to so many adults that they're chance of being exposed is way up.

So, anyway, "excessive socializing" is apparently the public health issue. I'm fascinated to see how they're going to deal with that. I can almost hear the public service messages now. "Being alone - it's the right thing to do!"

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 07:02 PM
According to the reports I read, the immigrants (up to teenagers) actually had a *higher* level of vaccination then the general population.


Did the report you read make a distinction between legal or illegal? I have heard that legal Latinos have a high rate of vaccination but I find it hard to believe that holds true for those who have come across the border illegally. It's hard to believe that Mexico and points south have great vaccination programs.

hdugger
09-23-2010, 07:09 PM
Did the report you read make a distinction between legal or illegal? I have heard that legal Latinos have a high rate of vaccination but I find it hard to believe that holds true for those who have come across the border illegally. It's hard to believe that Mexico and points south have great vaccination programs.

Apparently they do have a good program, and Mexico is avoiding the outbreaks we're seeing here.

Here's the FAQ from the health department - http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/09/q-a-on-whooping-cough-are-immigrants-fueling-the-epidemic.html

Actually, if Mexico is avoiding the epidemic, then it sounds like the vector is:

White american adults infect Latino immigrant adults who (in large numbers) infect the infants

Proving again that white folk are the source of all problems :)

skevimc
09-23-2010, 07:14 PM
I'm sure the number is very hard to pin down, it's not like they actually want to be counted. Plus the number has been dropping due to the recession.
[\quote]

Didn't stop a major 'news' network from publishing it as fact.

[QUOTE=Ballet Mom;108751]
Of course, I'm sure we can all just sweep it under the rug and blame it on stupid demon-haunted people of faith who are the evil anti-vaxers and everyone will be happy.


My point was basically that the large number of illegal immigrants in California who many have not received health care in the past and many do not have vaccinations is probably going to keep befuddling our public health system in many ways....whooping cough only one of the things. I do notice that the outbreak is confined to California.



See here... this demonstrates my initial point. You're clearly upset that people on here have been critical of people of faith. Yet you're ready to blame 'them', the illegal immigrants, on befuddling health care and spreading disease.

And by "confined to California", you also mean Idaho, Michigan, Ohio, Oregon, South Carolina, Texas, Arizona, Indiana, Iowa, and Wisconsin, as well as upstate New York. These states all saw an increase in pertussis outbreaks in the last year.

The actual reason isn't immigration or religious reasons.



Using a complex research model, the investigators examined school data on the disease of primary interest to them—pertussis. What they found was that states where personal belief exemptions exist and are easily obtained had higher exemption rates and greater incidence of pertussis than those with religious exemptions only. Pertussis incidence in states allowing personal belief exemptions was more than twice as high as in states that allowed only religious exemptions. States with easy procedures for granting personal belief exemptions had a 90 percent higher incidence of pertussis.

http://tiny.cc/5ps7cx8oxf



It's mostly linked to how easy it is to fill out an exemption form. And it boils down to rich white families who send kids to private or charter schools or who home school. This doesn't mean EVERYONE who fits this category is bad or anything. It's just a correlation.

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 07:22 PM
Apparently they do have a good program, and Mexico is avoiding the outbreaks we're seeing here.

Here's the FAQ from the health department - http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2010/09/q-a-on-whooping-cough-are-immigrants-fueling-the-epidemic.html

Actually, if Mexico is avoiding the epidemic, then it sounds like the vector is:

White american adults infect Latino immigrant adults who (in large numbers) infect the infants

Proving again that white folk are the source of all problems :)


Multiple families living in a single household is very common.

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 07:31 PM
See here... this demonstrates my initial point. You're clearly upset that people on here have been critical of people of faith. Yet you're ready to blame 'them', the illegal immigrants, on befuddling health care and spreading disease.
/
/
It's mostly linked to how easy it is to fill out an exemption form. And it boils down to rich white families who send kids to private or charter schools or who home school. This doesn't mean EVERYONE who fits this category is bad or anything. It's just a correlation.

Actually, I was trying to come up with logical reasons for the deaths, without having health statistic data in front of me, instead of jumping to the conclusion that it had to be stupid religious whackos at fault. If you lived here, you'd realize that it's a pretty obvious thing that people will think of instead of immediately calling me prejudiced. I notice everyone stays mute when Christians are being attacked non-stop. Just depends on whose ox is being gored.

And here is the REAL REASON, for the outbreak and deaths. SCIENCE.Thirteen medical doctors published a study in Lancet, a very impressive medical journal recommending avoiding the MMR due to a possible correlation with autism and irritable bowel syndrome.


Dr. Andrew Wakefield, the author of research on autism, visited Orange County this summer. His insinuation, in 1998, that autism is connected to the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine caused frightened parents around the world to withhold the shot from their children.

In California, parents can opt out of vaccines by signing a waiver called the PBE – personal belief exemption. This can be done for religious grounds, political beliefs or distrust of vaccines or the medical system in general, and it can cover one vaccination or all of them.

Recently, the Watchdog Institute, a nonprofit journalism center at San Diego State University, reported that the number of PBEs granted for kindergartners at public and private schools has skyrocketed. In the fall of 1990, there were 2,719 such waivers granted at schools with at least 10 kindergartners; in the fall of 2009, there were 10,280.

The numbers from the state Department of Health database show that Orange County's PBE rate is 2.69percent, exceeding the state rate of 2.03 percent. Among county public schools, the rate was 2.35percent; for private schools, it was 5.01 percent.

Twenty-four Orange County public schools had PBE rates of at least 10 percent, including eight in the Capistrano Unified School District. Here are the top five:

Orange County Charter School, Costa Mesa, 56 percent (46 exempted out of 82 kindergartners enrolled).

http://www.ocregister.com/news/percent-87497-ocprint-county-school.html

Journey School, Aliso Viejo, 38 percent (20 of 53).

Culverdale Elementary, Irvine, 37 percent (36 of 97).

Trabuco Elementary, Trabuco Canyon, 33 percent (4 of 12).

Del Obispo Elementary, San Juan Capistrano, 27percent (12 of 44).

Twenty-eight Orange County private schools had PBE rates of at least 10 percent. The top five:

Calvary Chapel Private School, Santa Ana, 70 percent (7 of 10).

Broderick Montessori, Dana Point, 59 percent (13 of 22).

Hope Christian Academy, Garden Grove, 53 percent (9 of 17).

Heart Christian Preparatory, San Juan Capistrano, 39 percent (7 of 18).

Waldorf School of Orange County, Costa Mesa, 39 percent (28 of 72).

The theory of “herd immunity” (or “community immunity”) states that a certain level of the population has to be inoculated to ensure that everyone is protected, including those who aren't vaccinated. That inflection point varies depending on the disease, but it's between 80 percent and 94 percent. Because no vaccine is 100 percent effective, justifications for exempting children can be flawed.

Without that level of community immunity, “the chances are going to go up that you're going to have a disease that normally wouldn't be a threat,” said Dr. Nancy Bowen, the county's chief medical officer.

Pertussis, which nearly was wiped out in California in the '70s but has made a comeback with the worst outbreak in the state in 50 years, presents special problems.

Immunity from vaccination wears off over time. (A bill in the Legislature would require boosters for incoming seventh-graders, while still preserving the opt-out waivers.) Also, herd immunity doesn't appear to work as well with pertussis as with other diseases.

Bowen said the county is prepared to act quickly if a pertussis outbreak hits a school this fall. Teachers should watch for symptoms, and infected children should be kept home and be taken to a doctor right away. Other children who may have been in contact with infected kids can be treated with prophylactic antibiotics to provide extra protection.

“But that's taking a lot of chances,” Bowen said. “A much more surefire method would be to have more children vaccinated.”

http://www.ocregister.com/news/percent-87497-ocprint-county-school.html

hdugger
09-23-2010, 07:59 PM
Actually, I was trying to come up with logical reasons for the deaths, without having health statistic data in front of me, instead of jumping to the conclusion that it had to be stupid religious whackos at fault. If you lived here, you'd realize that it's a pretty obvious thing that people will think of instead of immediately calling me prejudiced. I notice everyone stays mute when Christians are being attacked non-stop. Just depends on whose ox is being gored.

Actually, I thought both Kevin and I stepped in to defend you on the faith point.

I thought the whole discussion was kind of interesting (from a meta viewpoint) in the way that everyone interpreted the same information through their own personal filter, right down to Pooka calling out fake science and me bemoaning inequity of healthcare.

Turns out we were all wrong.

We might take a lesson away from that in our other discussions. Or, you know, maybe not :)

Pooka1
09-23-2010, 08:03 PM
Bunny cries over this thread...

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/01/11/you-make-bunny-cry/

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 08:14 PM
Bunny cries over this thread...

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/01/11/you-make-bunny-cry/

That bunny is obviously an evil demon-haunted bunny praying.

Pooka1
09-23-2010, 08:18 PM
That bunny is obviously an evil demon-haunted bunny praying.

One of my guinea pigs thinks she is a Jain just because she is nakee all the time.

Ballet Mom
09-23-2010, 08:24 PM
Actually, I thought both Kevin and I stepped in to defend you on the faith point.


I appreciate any support. I especially thank you for defending the term faith from its banishment.

skevimc
09-23-2010, 09:15 PM
Actually, I was trying to come up with logical reasons for the deaths, without having health statistic data in front of me, instead of jumping to the conclusion that it had to be stupid religious whackos at fault.


So instead of jumping to conclusion about religious wackos you jump to conclusions about illegal immigrants.




If you lived here, you'd realize that it's a pretty obvious thing that people will think of instead of immediately calling me prejudiced.


I didn't immediately call you prejudiced. I said:



You get upset when people make blanket statements about f@ith (as do I) because it doesn't represent the entire population. It is based purely on preconceived notions aka. prejudices.

We're all prejudiced about something or someone in varying levels. Whether or not we allow those prejudices to affect our view of an entire demographic is what I took issue with.



I notice everyone stays mute when Christians are being attacked non-stop. Just depends on whose ox is being gored.


I don't generally comment on matters of faith. Immigration is a hot button with me.




And here is the REAL REASON, for the outbreak and deaths. SCIENCE.Thirteen medical doctors published a study in Lancet, a very impressive medical journal recommending avoiding the MMR due to a possible correlation with autism and irritable bowel syndrome.


You know. You're partially correct. The problem is that people took that article and then made assumptions about ALL vaccines. A blanket statement, if you will.


Actually, I thought both Kevin and I stepped in to defend you on the faith point.

...

Turns out we were all wrong.

We might take a lesson away from that in our other discussions. Or, you know, maybe not :)

Nice.

Pooka1
09-24-2010, 05:37 AM
You know. You're partially correct. The problem is that people took that article and then made assumptions about ALL vaccines. A blanket statement, if you will.


That's not the only problem...


Published research findings are sometimes refuted by subsequent evidence, says Ioannidis, with ensuing confusion and disappointment.

http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

John P. A. Ioannidis

Abstract

There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research.


Of course none of that undermines IN THE LEAST that science is still the only way of knowing anything real. If science doesn't yet know the answer then no field does FULL STOP. It is truly the only game in town, imperfect though it may be.

There are many papers that should not have been published, some where the reason is obvious. And there is a failure of review. This is a surprise to nobody who is familiar with the field. Scientists know all this but lay, untrained parents, not so much. Hence the hysterics.

Pooka1
09-24-2010, 05:42 AM
http://www.michaelshermer.com/2006/08/folk-science/

"Why our intuitions about how the world works are often wrong" by Michel Shermer

Here is an excerpt...


In this latter case, we have a recent scientific analysis of this ancient folk science supposition. The April issue of the American Heart Journal published a comprehensive study directed by Harvard Medical School cardiologist Herbert Benson on the effects of intercessory prayer on the health and recovery of patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery. The 1,802 patients were divided into three groups, two of which were prayed for by members of three religious congregations. Prayers began the night before the surgery and continued daily for two weeks after. Half the prayer recipients were told that they were being prayed for, whereas the other half were told that they might or might not receive prayers. Results showed no statistically significant differences between any of the groups. Case closed.

Of course, people will continue praying for their ailing loved ones, and by chance some of them will recover, and our folk science brains will find meaning in these random patterns. But for us to discriminate true causal inferences from false, real science trumps folk science.

The research section of this scoliosis forum is stocked stem to stern with folkscience.

Pooka1
09-24-2010, 05:48 AM
http://astro.physics.sc.edu/pseudoscience.html

An example of an organized pseudoscience is chiro.

Also this excerpt...


The world is not a dichotomy between science and pseudoscience. There is a third division, which we will call non-science. Any hypothesis that makes statements, which, in principle, cannot be disproved, would be non-scientific. A statement being scientific or non-scientific may have no bearing on its correctness. Many religious ideas fall into the non-science category. For example, the belief in the existence of the universe by a willful act of a creator is, in and of itself, a non-science statement. On the other hand, the belief that a particular religious story which explains the existence of fossils is subject to verification. As such, it may be treated as a science or a pseudoscience.

Pooka1
09-24-2010, 06:06 AM
http://www.physics.buffalo.edu/whkinney/notevenwrong.html


# Lancet retracts a 1998 paper linking MMR vaccines to autism in the wake of a ruling by the British General Medical Council against the study's principal author, Andrew Wakefield. The GMC cited misconduct including unauthorized lumbar punctures and colonoscopies to 11 children. (Autism/vaccine advocate Barbara Loe Fisher responds with a paranoid screed, which is particularly ironic considering her history of attempting to silence critics with lawsuits.)
# Wakefield has now been stripped of his medical license.

This is a good place to start trying to make sense but everything should be checked out... some of this might be mistaken.

skevimc
09-24-2010, 07:34 AM
http://www.physics.buffalo.edu/whkinney/notevenwrong.html



# Lancet retracts a 1998 paper linking MMR vaccines to autism in the wake of a ruling by the British General Medical Council against the study's principal author, Andrew Wakefield. The GMC cited misconduct including unauthorized lumbar punctures and colonoscopies to 11 children. (Autism/vaccine advocate Barbara Loe Fisher responds with a paranoid screed, which is particularly ironic considering her history of attempting to silence critics with lawsuits.)
# Wakefield has now been stripped of his medical license.


This is a good place to start trying to make sense but everything should be checked out... some of this might be mistaken.

This is the part that gets me. When the original paper was published it certainly was one of those things where, if true, would be a game changer. Or at least cause the vaccine makers to re-assess what they put into the vaccines. So a decade goes by and all of that happens. In the mean time a celebrity's kid 'gets' autism and certainly someone must be to blame. (Well, someone except the celebrity who spent years and several surgeries with silicone bags (which have been shown to leak) planted in her chest.) Panic ensues. And when the findings don't hold up and the journal retracts, the panic remains.

When we find out our soap-box (or research paper) is factually incorrect, we should all take a lesson from Rosanne Rosannadanna and learn this phrase. "Never mind".

Ballet Mom
09-24-2010, 09:06 AM
I don't generally comment on matters of faith. Immigration is a hot button with me.


Immigration is a hot button issue...period. Not just for you. There is nothing that makes me angrier than people who wish to exploit their nanny, housekeeper, gardener, employee and not pay a living wage to them and expect to shift all their most expensive employment costs to people not involved with the transaction...(i.e. the bankrupt taxpayers), including education, medical, foodstamps, medicaid, emergency services, legal and judicial services, translation services, prison costs etc.

And in the process cause American workers to be unable to compete because they're required to follow employment rules, pay taxes, get licenses and insurance and would actually rather not have to live with other families in a crowded apartment. In addition to bringing gang activity with them, changing our culture and now requiring anyone to speak Spanish in order to be able to get a job.

Pooka1
09-24-2010, 09:09 AM
This is the part that gets me. When the original paper was published it certainly was one of those things where, if true, would be a game changer. Or at least cause the vaccine makers to re-assess what they put into the vaccines. So a decade goes by and all of that happens. In the mean time a celebrity's kid 'gets' autism and certainly someone must be to blame. (Well, someone except the celebrity who spent years and several surgeries with silicone bags (which have been shown to leak) planted in her chest.) Panic ensues. And when the findings don't hold up and the journal retracts, the panic remains.

Yes Jenny McCarthy is leading the folkscience parade in this area. It's a shame. Someone recently pointed out that on some TV shows, scientists are given a few sentences to explain this area and on the same show, McCarthy is given several minutes to explain her specious reasoning. This is TV being used in a blind leading the blind leading the naked fashion.


When we find out our soap-box (or research paper) is factually incorrect, we should all take a lesson from Rosanne Rosannadanna and learn this phrase. "Never mind".

Concur. Actually science might be the only field where you gets points for proving yourself wrong. That is just to say that dogma is not allowed and will eventually be rooted out and discarded.

Ballet Mom
09-24-2010, 09:10 AM
http://www.michaelshermer.com/2006/08/folk-science/

"Why our intuitions about how the world works are often wrong" by Michel Shermer

Here is an excerpt...

The research section of this scoliosis forum is stocked stem to stern with folkscience.


Why don't you just drop it. Scientists are so pompous and arrogant these days we're more likely to have a civil war than bow down to our scientific overlords.

mariaf
09-24-2010, 09:20 AM
Immigration is a hot button issue...period. Not just for you. There is nothing that makes me angrier than people who wish to exploit their nanny, housekeeper, gardener, employee and not pay a living wage to them and expect to shift all their most expensive employment costs to people not involved with the transaction...(i.e. the bankrupt taxpayers), including education, medical, foodstamps, medicaid, emergency services, legal and judicial services, translation services, prison costs etc.

And in the process cause American workers to be unable to compete because they're required to follow employment rules, pay taxes, get licenses and insurance....

I have to tip my hat to you, Ballet Mom. I could not have said that any better myself.

In addition, many of those who employ these nannies and housekeepers, while they are very well off financially, often know of legal loopholes and such to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. And so once again, the families where mom and dad hold down 3 or 4 jobs between them, pay the price...literally. No wonder most working families have a hard time making ends meet these days.

Ballet Mom
09-24-2010, 09:28 AM
Why don't you go find a faith healing forum?

It's pretty clear why the Soviet Union was a disaster.

foofer
09-24-2010, 10:32 AM
Ladies,

Could you please take it outside?

PNUTTRO
09-24-2010, 11:08 AM
If you have an opinion, just state it. Don't complain that you don't like the flow of the conversation.

Personally, I was astonished at the prejudice that Ballet Mom exhibited in this thread. It never would have come out without the discussion about vaccines. Remarkably, I saw a few very outspoken individuals that are very fixed in their opinions having a good discussion and unforeseen agreement.

Carry on.
p

Pooka1
09-24-2010, 11:18 AM
If you have an opinion, just state it. Don't complain that you don't like the flow of the conversation.


<lower lip slowly protruding and starting to quiver...>

STOP! I love you both (platonically of course) and it scares me to see you two disagree!

Ballet Mom
09-24-2010, 11:42 AM
If you have an opinion, just state it. Don't complain that you don't like the flow of the conversation.

Personally, I was astonished at the prejudice that Ballet Mom exhibited in this thread. It never would have come out without the discussion about vaccines. Remarkably, I saw a few very outspoken individuals that are very fixed in their opinions having a good discussion and unforeseen agreement.

Carry on.
p

Please state specifically what prejudice you're talking about? The fact that I am aware of who is in emergency rooms here? Or aware of people exploiting illegal immigrants? Or are you just insulted that I said that scientists were arrogant?

Ballet Mom
09-24-2010, 11:56 AM
True compassion, true realization that people are victims of their circumstances to a great extent, does not come naturally to some. Everyone is parochial but only some recognize this and try to overcome it. Others recognize it and make no attempt whatsoever to overcome it. Some never recognize it.

Her worldview does not conduce to true understadning, true compassion, an honest regard for minimizing suffering, etc. etc. etc.

That's absolutely ridiculous. It doesn't do anybody any good to have the United States collapse in bankruptcy. Just wait until the bankers have their way with our uncontrolled spending. You'll see true suffering. Including researchers in their ivory towers.

hdugger
09-24-2010, 01:57 PM
Personally, I was astonished at the prejudice that Ballet Mom exhibited in this thread.

Oh goodness yes. The foibles of others never cease to shock, amaze, and amuse me. Thank goodness I have none myself.

Excuse me while I go and bask in the wonder and glory that is me :)

skevimc
09-24-2010, 03:06 PM
We have to always keep in mind that people are not their ideas. Ideas, all ideas, can and must be on the table for criticism. People can start making sense at any time (and are sincerely invited to do so).

I would also offer up that there is criticism and then there is criticism. One is good for discussion and the other is really just ridicule masquerading as criticism, which is antithetical to discussion.

hdugger
09-24-2010, 03:30 PM
There is criticizing people for what they are and there is criticizing people for what they think.

I have not found either kind of criticism of people very effective in improving my little corner of the world. In fact, I'd call "criticism of people for what they think" the most corrosive force at play in our civic sphere. If it were a force of good, our political life would be in its glory days. That it is not, proves, I think, my point.

hdugger
09-24-2010, 04:31 PM
No it's not quite that dismal.

It is. You have to look at the tables in your link. The "evolution only" percentages are around 15%. The number you're quoting of 40 to 50% accepting evolution includes those who believe in intelligent design.

So, not a rousing success.

SandyC
09-24-2010, 04:32 PM
Oh for heaven's sake this was about not getting kids vaccinate. Why does it have to turn into a religious/politics free for all :mad::mad: :confused::eek:

CHRIS WBS
09-24-2010, 04:37 PM
False.

http://friendlyatheist.com/2009/03/09/the-2008-american-religious-identification-survey/


I don't think so.

http://creationwiki.org/Decline_of_atheism

mamamax
09-24-2010, 06:26 PM
Perhaps that explains why Atheism is on the decline.

LOL - interesting how the funniest stuff - is also usually, true! Good one Chris! :D

jrnyc
09-24-2010, 07:13 PM
arent these religious posts supposed to be kept off of forum?
this thread should not deteriorate into one of those believe/don't believe fights!
it is not helpful, turns people off, and does nothing to help medical information!

Sandy C...you are so right!

jess

hdugger
09-24-2010, 07:15 PM
Back to the topic, I've scanned the Salon article (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/06/16/thimerosal), and it still seems pretty convincing. I really have not researched this area at all (although I have a child with who is somewhere on the Asperger spectrum), but there does seem to be actual science (as opposed to folk science) on the other side.

Some snippets:

"In May of last year, the Institute of Medicine issued its final report. Its conclusion: There is no proven link between autism and thimerosal in vaccines. Rather than reviewing the large body of literature describing the toxicity of thimerosal, the report relied on four disastrously flawed epidemiological studies examining European countries, where children received much smaller doses of thimerosal than American kids. It also cited a new version of the Verstraeten study, published in the journal Pediatrics, that had been reworked to reduce the link between thimerosal and autism. The new study included children too young to have been diagnosed with autism and overlooked others who showed signs of the disease. The IOM declared the case closed and -- in a startling position for a scientific body -- recommended that no further research be conducted."

"So far, though, only two scientists have managed to gain access [to the database used to study vaccines and autism]. Dr. Mark Geier, president of the Genetics Center of America, and his son, David, spent a year battling to obtain the medical records from the CDC. Since August 2002, when members of Congress pressured the agency to turn over the data, the Geiers have completed six studies that demonstrate a powerful correlation between thimerosal and neurological damage in children. One study, which compares the cumulative dose of mercury received by children born between 1981 and 1985 with those born between 1990 and 1996, found a "very significant relationship" between autism and vaccines. Another study of educational performance found that kids who received higher doses of thimerosal in vaccines were nearly three times as likely to be diagnosed with autism and more than three times as likely to suffer from speech disorders and mental retardation. Another soon-to-be-published study shows that autism rates are in decline following the recent elimination of thimerosal from most vaccines."

"In April, reporter Dan Olmsted of UPI undertook one of the more interesting studies himself. Searching for children who had not been exposed to mercury in vaccines -- the kind of population that scientists typically use as a "control" in experiments -- Olmsted scoured the Amish of Lancaster County, Penn., who refuse to immunize their infants. Given the national rate of autism, Olmsted calculated that there should be 130 autistics among the Amish. He found only four. One had been exposed to high levels of mercury from a power plant. The other three -- including one child adopted from outside the Amish community -- had received their vaccines."

"Even more alarming, the government continues to ship vaccines preserved with thimerosal to developing countries -- some of which are now experiencing a sudden explosion in autism rates. In China, where the disease was virtually unknown prior to the introduction of thimerosal by U.S. drug manufacturers in 1999, news reports indicate that there are now more than 1.8 million autistics. Although reliable numbers are hard to come by, autistic disorders also appear to be soaring in India, Argentina, Nicaragua and other developing countries that are now using thimerosal-laced vaccines. The World Health Organization continues to insist thimerosal is safe, but it promises to keep the possibility that it is linked to neurological disorders "under review.""

mamamax
09-24-2010, 08:17 PM
From: http://www.healing-arts.org/children/vaccines/vaccines-dpt.htm#DPT_Vaccine_Autism In Affiliation with the Program in Integrative Medicine / University of Arizona College of Medicine:


Autism spectrum disorders increased from 1 in 10,000 in 1978 to 1 in 300 in some US communities in 1999. As of February 2007, approximately 1 in 150 children—representing various communities in the United States—have an autism spectrum disorder, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention working group. Known as the Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network, it includes researchers from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and 12 additional institutions. See, CDC Releases New Data on the Prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorders: First and Largest Multi-site Study Provides Baseline for Future Comparisons.

Megson proposed that autism is linked to the disruption of the G-alpha protein, affecting retinoid receptors in the brain. A study of sixty autistic children suggested that autism could be caused by inserting a G-alpha protein defect, particularly the pertussis toxin found in the DPT vaccine, into genetically at-risk children. This toxin separates the G-alpha protein from retinoid receptors. Those most at risk report a family history of at least one parent with a pre-existing G-alpha protein defect, including night blindness, pseudohypoparathyroidism, or adenoma of the thyroid and/or pituitary gland.

Megson proposed that natural vitamin A could reconnect the retinoid receptors critical for vision, sensory perception, language processing and attention.

Megson proposed that treating autistic children with natural cis - forms of Vitamin A could have the effect of reconnecting the hippocampal retinoid receptor pathways, critical for vision, sensory perception, language processing and attention.

Megson noted that many autistic children needed natural, unsaturated cis forms of Vitamin A found in sources such as cold water fish (salmon, or cod liver), kidney, and milk fat, foods not commonly available in the modern diet. Instead, children depend on Vitamin A Palmitate, found in commercial infant formula and low fat milk. Unfortunately, absorption of Vitamin A Palmitate requires an intact gut mucosal microvilli surface at the right pH, in the presence of bile for metabolism. Since many autistic children already had damaged mucosal surfaces due to unrecognized wheat allergy or intolerances, their capacity to absorb vitamin A is questionable.

Megson also argued that live viral measles vaccine depleted children of their existing supply of Vitamin A, negatively impacting retinoid receptors. Natural Vitamin A, in the cis form, is important for activation of T and B cells for long-term immune memory. Measles, mumps and rubella titers are either significantly elevated or negative, in spite of one or two doses of the vaccine given to many of these children. Fish oils contain one retinoid metabolite, alpha 14 hydroxyretroretinol that has a role in T-cell activation, vision and growth of lymphoblasts.

mamamax
09-24-2010, 08:25 PM
It is a fact that there are people for whom, vaccines are not safe. This is something that has personally touched my own family.

The challenge is to know who these people are before vaccination takes place.

A screening process prior to vaccination is what is needed.

The cost of implementation on a large scale - unfortunately, prohibitive. After all, who cares about a few cases out of several thousand people, right? That is until the "rare" case surfaces in your own family.

Pooka1
09-24-2010, 09:11 PM
Back to the topic, I've scanned the Salon article (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/06/16/thimerosal), and it still seems pretty convincing. I really have not researched this area at all (although I have a child with who is somewhere on the Asperger spectrum), but there does seem to be actual science (as opposed to folk science) on the other side.


That is the Robert Kennedy piece. Someone associated with Kennedy who was on this bandwagon with him has since abandoned it. Can't recall the guy's name. The data rule out a connection between EtHg and autism and his buddy admitted it. Why Kennedy doesn't also admit it is a mystery and it undermines his credibility on everything because of it.

You would have to invoke a conspiracy of independent scientists so large that it strains credulity to maintain there is even a possibility of a causal connection. This goes in the column of "Disproved." Kennedy has no relevant training in this field. It is folk science in a cheap tuxedo.

Pooka1
09-24-2010, 09:21 PM
Here's a piece written by someone with relevant training...

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=220

The last paragraph...


Education and contributing to science-based medicine, what more could one ask for? Buy and read Autism’s False Prophets instead of Jenny McCarthy’s new book Mother Warriors. Your brain will thank you.

Pooka1
09-24-2010, 09:37 PM
You can find much data from around the world generated by independent scientists. That is a conspiracy size seemingly larger than the claimed CIA/MAFIA Kennedy assassination, faked moon landings and US Gov behind the 9/11 attacks put together. That, in a nutshell, is why the anti-vac folks must be wrong on this, along with the boatload of data directly disproving the hypothesis.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080107181551.htm


Editorial: Fears About Vaccines Persist Despite Evidence

"In the last decade, two hypotheses on autism-immunization links were raised that have had a profound impact in the field of autism research and practice and on public health at large," writes Eric Fombonne, M.D., of the Montreal Children's Hospital, in an accompanying editorial. "One incriminated the measles component of the triple measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine, the other the amount of thimerosal (about 50 percent of which is ethylmercury) contained in most other childhood vaccines."

Since the 2004 Institute of Medicine report favored the rejection of both hypotheses, "more studies have accumulated that have reinforced this conclusion, one independently reached by scientific and professional committees around the world," he writes.

This is what it means to suggest folks are unarmed to assess scientific evidence in general but in this case, it's graph upon graph upon graph showing the autism rates continuing to climb years after EtHg removal form vaccines in several countries.

I can't prove all those data are not cooked. I can only talk about likelihood of it.

mamamax
09-24-2010, 10:12 PM
From the US Food and Drug Administration ....

http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228#toc



In its report of October 1, 2001, the IOM's Immunization Safety Review Committee concluded that the evidence was inadequate to either accept or reject a causal relationship between thimerosal exposure from childhood vaccines and the neurodevelopmental disorders of autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and speech or language delay. Additional studies were needed to establish or reject a causal relationship. The Committee did conclude that the hypothesis that exposure to thimerosal-containing vaccines could be associated with neurodevelopmental disorders was biologically plausible.

Biologically plausible - yet no "adequate evidence" either way to support a causal relationship. I presume that means - no accurate reporting, or rather - inaccurate/flawed reporting.

Kind of like: it is biologically plausible that a chicken egg will hatch, but if no one "reports" it "adequately" then, "evidence" of the event doesn't exist ... meanwhile there are a bunch of chickens running around.

No evidence that thimerosal exposure, which is 50% mercury by weight, in childhood vaccines has a relationship to the neurodevelopmental disorders of autism, and yet ....



The FDA is continuing its efforts to reduce the exposure of infants, children, and pregnant women to mercury from various sources. Discussions with the manufacturers of influenza virus vaccines (which are now routinely recommended for pregnant women and children 6-23 months of age) regarding their capacity to potentially increase the supply of thimerosal-reduced and thimerosal-free presentations are ongoing.

hdugger
09-24-2010, 10:59 PM
But . . . I *believe* the Kennedy assassination conspiracy. (I come by it honestly - my mother was way ahead of the Kennedy conspiracy crowd).

Yes, I see the conflicting reports. As I say, I don't really know much about this area. But, given my feelings about medical research, I'd feel more grounded seeing the actual studies, rather than the summaries and assurances.

The genetic thing and the explanation that there's always been the same number of autistic kids, but they used to be labelled as retarded . . . I don't know. I've seen lots of these kids (my husband used to work with autistic kids), and I can't imagine that there were generations of these kids with sudden onset of odd non-social behavior that noone bothered to report on. And I can't understand, if the condition has existed for ages and it's just a change in diagnosis, why there's not an equal number of adults being diagnosed.

So, anyway, I do confess that I'm kind of conspiracy prone, but some parts of this explanation aren't parsing very well. The vaccine stuff, I really don't know enough about. But, the fact that that explanation is sort of coupled with the genetic "it's always been here, you just never noticed it" makes the whole thing a little difficult to choke down.

Pooka1
09-25-2010, 08:30 AM
Nobody in this sandbox knows enough about this. Robert Kennedy clearly doesn't know enough about this. I would need to study this for at least a year non-stop, maybe more, and gather a stack of reprints and books that would fill an entire section of my home office in order to respond in a dispositive fashion with the actual data which is the bottom line here (assuming it was collected and crunched correctly and wasn't cooked of course). Quote-mining, as we all have been doing, even if done in an honest manner, is useless in a matter such as this. Of course most quote-mining is done in a dishonest manner but I don't think that is the case in this particular thread.

The only people who can hold forth on this from a point of knowledge are the researchers who crunched the numbers. Now any one of these papers can probably be picked apart method-wise but when you have paper after paper after paper of graphs from around the world that are going the exact opposite way than they should go if there was a causal connection between EtHg and autism then that almost certainly means something.

Scientific malfeasance in one instance (Wakefield et al.) does not mean there is a there there. The crush of papers holding otherwise probably does.

Pooka1
09-25-2010, 08:33 AM
But . . . I *believe* the Kennedy assassination conspiracy. (I come by it honestly - my mother was way ahead of the Kennedy conspiracy crowd).

Vincent Bugliosi wrote a book with ~1,000 pages concluding there was no conspiracy. I love that guy and may read the book one day but I still think there had to be more than Oswald.

Although folks are mightily attached to their beliefs, it is easy to show that belief is not a way of knowing. Just pause for a minute to consider all claims that rest on belief that are mutually exclusive. Yet they are all claimed true and are all held on the basis of belief only. Q.E.D.

Pooka1
09-25-2010, 08:51 AM
I wrote:


That is the Robert Kennedy piece. Someone associated with Kennedy who was on this bandwagon with him has since abandoned it. Can't recall the guy's name. The data rule out a connection between EtHg and autism and his buddy admitted it. Why Kennedy doesn't also admit it is a mystery and it undermines his credibility on everything because of it.

I still can't remember his name but I remember his new position a bit... while he abandoned Hg in vaccines as causative of autism he did not abandon Hg per se as causative. I think his claim became atmospheric Hg is rising and therefore causing the rise in autism rates.

But the bottom line is anyone who is familiar with the data must abandon the hypothesis that EtHg in vaccines is linked in a detectable way with autism.

mamamax
09-25-2010, 09:26 AM
So there we have it ... based on this thread: there can be only one of two conclusions from which to draw, either (1) nobody knows, or (2) everybody knows :-)

This would be amusing were it not for the lives touched by the tragedy of not knowing which "organisms" cannot tolerate certain substances.

Anyway - is this a "sandbox" or, a mental institution without medication? I wonder sometimes - and freely admit that when those times appear, that it is time to adjust my attitude which typically involves simply walking away from a debate which obviously cannot factually be won - outside of some pretty glorious pontification and amusing one line zingers. And yeah, I can be just as "mental" as anyone else :-)

Truth is, in the end, most all would like to see a world free of suffering - in a world which holds no lack thereof. Science holds an important place - but until it can provide cures and avoid sufferings - hey, it's in its infancy and actually suffers from its own brand of - folk science and experimentation through trial and error.

That's all I know about this - I'm trying to figure out what this thread taught me about the darker side of vaccination. I guess it would be - that some whose lives have not been touched by it - cannot fully understand that something, is amiss. Again a forest not seen for the many trees. Wondering if there is something in my medicine cabinet for this. Wish I had a body that would allow me to jog - feeling like a three mile run would be quite beneficial :-)

Pooka1
09-25-2010, 10:36 AM
So there we have it ... based on this thread: there can be only one of two conclusions from which to draw, either (1) nobody knows, or (2) everybody knows :-)

Experts have the best chance of knowing. Lay, untrained people who don't even have a rational guess as to how much time and effort it would take to truly get their arms around this subject, not so much.

No need to unduly complicate matters beyond that.

mamamax
09-25-2010, 11:00 AM
I would agree that experts have the best chance of knowing - or should have the best chance of knowing (anything in their given field with rare exception). Sometimes however, expert knowledge can be blinded by its own brilliance.

The lay, untrained people with a passion for learning should not be discounted. Case in Point: Agusto Lorenzo http://www.myelin.org/

Generally speaking - proof, truth, evidence: is constantly changing, and evolving, and is obviously (given the world we live in) ... elusive.

Making science - both elegantly simple and complex at the same time .. something which is supposed to be physically impossible, according to the laws of physics :-)

Pooka1
09-25-2010, 11:07 AM
The lay, untrained people with a passion for learning should not be discounted. Case in Point: Agusto Lorenzo http://www.myelin.org/


Yes he put in the time and effort and most importantly worked with an expert. That is in distinct contrast to the great run of lay, untrained people who do none of that and don't even realize the magnitude of effort required nor even the scope of the problem in some cases.

Anyone can boot themselves up. Most people never put in the effort required. Odone is a rare exception. The world is not crawling with these folks.

skevimc
09-25-2010, 11:23 AM
When we find out our soap-box (or research paper) is factually incorrect, we should all take a lesson from Rosanne Rosannadanna and learn this phrase. "Never mind".

That should be Emily Litella. Not Rosanne Rosannadanna. Whew. Glad I got that off my chest.

mamamax
09-25-2010, 11:28 AM
Yes he put in the time and effort and most importantly worked with an expert. That is in distinct contrast to the great run of lay, untrained people who do none of that and don't even realize the magnitude of effort required nor even the scope of the problem in some cases.

Anyone can boot themselves up. Most people never put in the effort required. Odone is a rare exception. The world is not crawling with these folks.

Yes Odone was/is a rare exception - given his accomplishments and his ability to surround himself with experts to fill the gaps in his own knowledge. But I don't think the Odone-spirit is so rare, as evidenced by those like yourself, Dingo, Ballet Mom and a host of others here that I am forgetting to mention (my apologies).

This makes the only real difference - one of opportunity, dedication, cooperation and coordination. Here is the rarity, in my opinion.

Pooka1
09-25-2010, 12:37 PM
[But I don't think the Odone-spirit is so rare, as evidenced by those like yourself,

No not me. Other than needing to know the minuscule amount to deal with my daughters, I have no scientific curiosity about this field. It is just anther incredibly complex medical issue along with a million others.

If I wanted to go into medicine I would have done so. Knowing what I know now about the limitations of medical research, I am glad I didn't go into it... too much work for too little explanatory power. Seems frustrating.

Actually if I had to do it over I might have gone into brain research because controlled studies can be done. These researchers are going to "solve" a lot of things that many people don't even realize (or won't admit) need solving. It is way too exciting.

mamamax
09-25-2010, 12:51 PM
Pooka1 -

In part, the Odone-Spirit, as I call it - has to do with a passion to do all that he could as a parent for his child. You did this. So there is in part, some Odone-Spirit in you. In my opinion.

Brain research is a fascinating topic - and for all we really know, may one day hold some very important keys for those of us who must live daily with scoliosis - who knows?

A pity that you have no interest or curiosity in the field of scoliosis research (unless I'm reading you wrong), your input on that could be supportive to those of us who do have a passionate interest and curiosity.

Pooka1
09-26-2010, 08:02 AM
Yes, I see the conflicting reports.

By the way, there are no conflicting reports to my knowledge. The people familiar with the data say one thing and other say something else. It is perverse to hold that EtHg causes autism given the data in hand.

In this regard it is no different that any number of other issue (the earth being a few billion years old, the fact of evolution, the earth not being flat, the Holocaust happened, etc. etc.).

There are "reports" that claim these facts aren't true but I wouldn't say they conflict with the data. They are simply nonsense.

hdugger
09-26-2010, 11:45 AM
Science can't prove a non-association. There are reports which suggest the two are not associated, but it can not be said to be "proven" in the way in which a positive link is proven. The way science would prove the non-association is to show what *does* cause it. That would end the discussion.

Without actually seeing the reports, then, I can't say how strong the suggestion (never a proof) is. When I had a first cursory read about scoliosis, it was "proven" that exercise had no effect on curves. Given my further reading, I can say that that claim is not altogether true.

I'm not saying that I doubt the vaccine studies. I'm just saying that I'm not taking them on faith - either faith in the government or faith in the researchers - the way I would take on faith a strongly proven *positive* association.

LindaRacine
09-26-2010, 11:55 AM
I find it hysterical that Dingo is being grouped with Odone.

Pooka1
09-26-2010, 12:24 PM
Science can't prove a non-association.

It can amass enough data in support and amass enough data disproving a claim that it would be perverse to say there is much of a possibility of an association. And example is the earth being a few billion years old. There is a boatload of independent data that are all mutually buttress dates in a tight range around ~4.55 x 10^9 a. There is no credible data for dates that are much different from that tight range.

But in general and in the strictest sense, you are correct that all claims are still tentative even things we elevate to facts. That is just the state of affairs. But also in general, it is easier to disprove something than to prove it. That's the way science is. So while it is a piece fo cake to disprove a few thousand year old earth (through simple inspection even) it is a tad harder to prove the true age of a few billion years. Nevertheless, the true age of a few billion years has been elevated to a fact due to the multiple lines of independent evidence all converging on a very narrow range of ~4.55 x 10^9 a. It strains credulity too much to suggest all these independent lines of evidence would coincidentally converge at all.


There are reports which suggest the two are not associated, but it can not be said to be "proven" in the way in which a positive link is proven. The way science would prove the non-association is to show what *does* cause it. That would end the discussion.

No. Proving something that ALSO might cause something is not a prove against something else. It could be BOTH things are causative.


Without actually seeing the reports, then, I can't say how strong the suggestion (never a proof) is. When I had a first cursory read about scoliosis, it was "proven" that exercise had no effect on curves. Given my further reading, I can say that that claim is not altogether true.

You have to carefully sort out the terminology of the experts versus the unwashed masses if you are going to go down that road. Scientists, hopefully, are careful with wording.


I'm not saying that I doubt the vaccine studies. I'm just saying that I'm not taking them on faith - either faith in the government or faith in the researchers - the way I would take on faith a strongly proven *positive* association.

No rational person would ask you to accept that or anything on faith. A rational person demands evidence which in the present case is there.

And in general, I am more likely to believe a disproof than a proof. Science is just stronger in disproof than in proof.

hdugger
09-26-2010, 12:24 PM
Dingo is fighting the good fight for his son, and is managing to almost single-handedly hold open the discussion of non-surgical treatment. I consider him heroic, in his own small sphere.

Pooka1
09-26-2010, 12:25 PM
I find it hysterical that Dingo is being grouped with Odone.

I think this completely discounts the efforts over years and years that Odone brought to bear. There is no commonality between the two.

Now Odone was working with a MUCH more defined malady than scoliosis so there is that.

Pooka1
09-26-2010, 12:28 PM
Dingo is fighting the good fight for his son, and is managing to almost single-handedly hold open the discussion of non-surgical treatment. I consider him heroic, in his own small sphere.

I consider him an armchair biochemist who largely posts counterfactual information and routinely makes unsupportable claims.

I'm not saying someone can't pick up biochem and come up to speed on this. I'm just saying he doesn't have the first clue about how much he is missing in achieving that and how his near random ideas on the subject don't map to reality.

mamamax
09-26-2010, 02:04 PM
To those who wish to laugh at patients and parents who have a real and passionate interest in scoliosis research .....

I wonder if you realize how often (when you decide to "rag" on Dingo and others), that generally speaking - you seem to be describing .... yourselves!!

Guess that's called projecting. ;)

Pooka1
09-26-2010, 02:17 PM
Exsqueeze me but I am exquisitely aware that I am not a biochemist.

Ask me how I know.

LindaRacine
09-26-2010, 02:23 PM
Exsqueeze me but I am exquisitely aware that I am not a biochemist.

Ask me how I know.

Me too. I know what I don't know.

hdugger
09-26-2010, 02:24 PM
I consider him an armchair biochemist who largely posts counterfactual information and routinely makes unsupportable claims.

I don't read the biochemistry posts - it's not an area that holds much interest for me and I don't see much way of testing it on a small scale. The torso rotation posts, and the modifications he developed for his son, are first rate and the only reason I decided to post in this forum.

Likewise, Christian's explorations of exercise and its effects are also first rate.

When I went into epidemiology (lo those many years ago) it was because I saw a real gap in patients' ability to share their separate "experiments" and results with each other. To see that gap being bridged, here and on other forums, is one of the greatest successes of the internet, IMO.

So, folk science ho!

Pooka1
09-26-2010, 02:26 PM
Me too. I know what I don't know.

Socrates says that the beginning of wisdom is realizing what you don't know. Or something close to that. :)

Pooka1
09-26-2010, 02:27 PM
So, folk science ho!

:)

Good one. Made me smile.

LindaRacine
09-26-2010, 03:10 PM
Also, no one is comparing me to Odone.

Pooka1
09-26-2010, 03:44 PM
Also, no one is comparing me to Odone.

Yes.

It is completely understandable why some folks think Odone and Dingo are comparable. Dingo has an intense need to understand as apparently Odone did also.

I think Dingo would do better to tone claims like he can save an experienced researcher and past SRS president 20 years of work and things like that. It's as if he really thinks all these people are idiots and he can just sashay in and solve the problem. It's stunning actually.

If he did that then people would be more constructive in their responses I think. I have some sense of what these people did to get to a point of being able to do productive, contributory research and I just think it is unseemly and ignorant to trash them and their efforts as we have seen routinely from certain quarters.