Kudos to Slate for running an article that doesn't even attempt a neutral point-of-view when someone's spouting harmful, psychotic bullshit from a bully pulpit and expecting the idiot masses to follow along.

My title for this rant may elicit a knee-jerk reaction from the sorts of people who believe that once information becomes generally accepted (i.e. vaccines save lives and they're the big difference as far as why the First World is healthy and lively while people in Third World shitholes die of easily preventable diseases), there must be some sort of catch, some hidden conspiracy that "they" aren't telling us about (whoever the fuck "they" are supposed to be). These nutballs think that once "everybody knows" something that it's iconoclasm rather than stupidity to hold a different opinion. These morons would have you believe there's a secret government cabal suppressing the "truth about two plus two" and that it's actually SEVEN! And if you get someone who combines a vacuous personality, a tenuous grip on reality, and really nice tits to go on Oprah, suddenly every middle-class RealDoll in her kitchen will start believing it. You know these people by their children, who are failing math while eating soy-based vegan whole foods snacks and getting imprisoned in the house because that nice man next door, you know, the Presbyterian minister with the cardigan and the even-keeled voice? He must be a child sex offender! He couldn't be a nice guy who's generous with his time, always returns the lawn mower, and gives homespun wisdom while never showing his face over the fence...wait a minute, I'm getting my references mixed up. But I digress...

Fuck 'em all. I'm in agreement with Jenny McCarthy on one of her points; that crippling, horrible, deadly childhood diseases need to make a comeback. Maybe if some of these soccer moms see that their kids are looking like Jimmy on South Park because they got polio or tetanus, maybe if they see that people who don't watch Oprah and ignore celebrity bullshit have healthy, intelligent children who understand that undermining authority "just because" is a bad idea and who save their critical thinking for actual multiple-correct-answer decisions (or perhaps their evil twin, the catch-22), once they see that all listening to celebrities gets you is a nice steaming cup of Shut the Fuck Up, maybe they'll realize that Jenny McCarthy is a fucking moron who needs to go back into porn and maybe they'll realize that Jim Carrey's only worthwhile for the 90 minutes it takes to watch one of his movies (I recommend Man on the Moon, but that's because I'm a huge Andy Kaufman and Milos Forman fan.)

I don't have kids (not until I'm done with my professional degree) but you bet your ass my kids will be fully vaccinated so when little Madysyn Hope McFuckwit dies a horrible, horrible death I'll turn to my healthy, meat-eating, sports-playing son and say "See, Dave? That's why your old man doesn't own a TV. Now get your jacket, let's go outside and play catch. I'm gonna teach you that two-seamer."

Thank you Mr. Monster...or is that Mr. Dog?

I had to look up Jenny - but then I remembered her nonsense from a newspaper article a couple of years ago. It's as dumb now as it was then, just more high profile. Then you reminded me of the Candie's ad.

I have never sat through an entire Oprah show.

I have never sat through a whole movie with Jim Carrey.

I have HAD measles, chicken pox, mumps (twice), flu, and all of the other common nasties. None of the kids in the family suffered any aftereffects of the actual illnesses (we don't know about shingles yet), but I simply cannot understand why it is that a parent would WANT to watch their child become that sick. My mother is a nurse. Every time one of us got sick, the next one would start incubating and become ill as the previous one was recovering. There were three of us. She said that working 12 hour shifts in the emergency room was less tiring than coping with three kids running fevers at the same time.

The only one that had aftereffects from getting one of these was my father. He had never had mumps before I brought them home from school. No only did he end up spending a week in the hospital, the disease rendered him sterile. Something else the morons who don't want to vaccinate are seemingly willing to visit on their sons.

Now that you CAN vaccinate against these things, why the hell wouldn't you? I suspect that the parents that are freaking out now WERE vaccinated - they have not only never had these illnesses, they have never SEEN them. More fool they.

My first reaction to this was "I want him to father my sons."

Well (if somewhat crudely) said.

Your awesome! You didn't happen to grow up in Marshall's Creek, PA did you? Gleason is that you?

Cat804:

My first reaction to this was "I want him to father my sons."

Well (if somewhat crudely) said.

Your reply says a lot more about the pussified state of modern men than it does about me. Considering I've been compared to Richard Karn and Neil Young looks-wise, maybe that will be suitable Brain Bleach to wash any deviant thoughts from women's minds.

Zarasophist:

Your awesome! You didn't happen to grow up in Marshall's Creek, PA did you? Gleason is that you?

Nope, as the cap on my head right now clearly advertises I'm originally from Boston (well, the suburbs---Wakefield, MA) and a baseball fan. But this dude Gleason sounds like a candidate for a free beer if he and I ever cross paths.

I don't have kids, and I was fully vaccinated as a child (except for chicken pox; that wasn't available at the time). If I did have kids I would hit all the key innoculations. But at the end of the day, it comes back to people need to do their own research. Why anyone would put their child's health in the hands of a celebrity is beyond me. At least do your homework before you come to that decision.

I dunno though, even if the parents who believe all these conspiracy theories have their children get infected with preventable diseases, they're still stupid enough that they'll claim it's just some other food additive causing the illness. I mean, if you're willing to believe stuff based on no evidence, you're logically going to pick the explanation that doesn't make you look like a bad parent...

I know a 3-year-old who had a liver transplant after liver cancer and cannot be vaccinated because she's on immuno-suppressant drugs. She relies on "herd immunity" -- what these non-vaccinating leeches also rely on, the fact that these diseases can't gain footholds as long as enough people are vaccinated. Anyway, I don't hope for the comeback of these diseases, because some kids can't be vaccinated for medical reasons.

And also, the kids of anti-vaccine moonbats aren't to blame for their parents' idiocy.

ofi1992:

I know a 3-year-old who had a liver transplant after liver cancer and cannot be vaccinated because she's on immuno-suppressant drugs. She relies on "herd immunity" -- what these non-vaccinating leeches also rely on, the fact that these diseases can't gain footholds as long as enough people are vaccinated. Anyway, I don't hope for the comeback of these diseases, because some kids can't be vaccinated for medical reasons.

And also, the kids of anti-vaccine moonbats aren't to blame for their parents' idiocy.

I will certainly concede that it's not the kids' faults their parents have shit for brains, but I also believe that you can't make an omelette without cracking a few eggs. The concepts of zero tolerance and no child left behind are ultimately harmful to the greater mass of people who aren't raving idiots. I know not what others may believe, but my gods are not so cruel as to find a path to a good life or afterlife for those who would hurt many while protecting some.

I posted this as a separate thread, but you really need to get informed so here it is again:

Why is that when the vaccine defenders spout off, they cowardly ignore the case of Hannah Poling?
The same court that Art refers to as having "dismissed...in a most definitive way" the vaccine/autism connection ALSO CONCEDED THAT HANNAH POLING'S AUTISM WAS CAUSED BY VACCINATION. The prevalence of the mitochondrial disease that Hannah has is UNKNOWN because it is such a difficult condition to diagnose. And, it is well known that children with the disease are at risk for autism after vaccination. Julie Gerberding of the CDC ADMITTED this when interviewed by Sanjay Gupta after the Poling verdict was delivered. (go to youtube, search Gerberding and Hannah Poling)
So...........after years of denials about a relationship between vaccines and autism, it turns out that there is in FACT at least one situation where vaccines cause autism. How many more will be discovered in the coming years? Vaccines are so safe that there is a special court that awards damages to those injured by vaccines? Hello!!

yurmom:

I posted this as a separate thread, but you really need to get informed so here it is again:

Why is that when the vaccine defenders spout off, they cowardly ignore the case of Hannah Poling?
The same court that Art refers to as having "dismissed...in a most definitive way" the vaccine/autism connection ALSO CONCEDED THAT HANNAH POLING'S AUTISM WAS CAUSED BY VACCINATION. The prevalence of the mitochondrial disease that Hannah has is UNKNOWN because it is such a difficult condition to diagnose. And, it is well known that children with the disease are at risk for autism after vaccination. Julie Gerberding of the CDC ADMITTED this when interviewed by Sanjay Gupta after the Poling verdict was delivered. (go to youtube, search Gerberding and Hannah Poling)
So...........after years of denials about a relationship between vaccines and autism, it turns out that there is in FACT at least one situation where vaccines cause autism. How many more will be discovered in the coming years? Vaccines are so safe that there is a special court that awards damages to those injured by vaccines? Hello!!

Congratulations. You found one exception. See comment above about omelettes and cracked eggs. If you look hard enough you can find one exception to any piece of conventional wisdom under the sun---in fact, that's how shit like this gets started in the first place---"well, what about so-and-so?"

If you really believe that the very real threat of loss of herd immunity is worth one freak accident/outlier/coincidence, then I'd like you to tell the parents of that immunocompromised three-year-old referenced earlier in this thread your opinion to their faces.

The true mark of integrity and intelligence is admitting what you don't know. It is very obvious by your post that you are clueless about the Hannah Poling case. You are so far to one side that you are unwilling to make an honest evaluation of the evidence. The case of Hannah Poling does NOT represent a single exception. It is the first case of its kind to reach the court and there will be more. The most recent data I've read about mitchondrial disease and autism reported that approx. 20% of children with autism have mitochondrial disease. As I stated earlier, it is difficult to diagnose. Patients can have both affected and unaffected cells at the same time and symptoms range from severe to nonexistent.; diagnosis is a clinical judgement. That means that there are MANY undiagnosed cases.

"Shit like this" does not get started by the observance of one exception. It is started by fanatics like yourself who move to an extreme; Yes, your position is just as extreme as the antivaxers because you have chosen to deny that there is any potential of harm for vaccination and that is FACTUALLY false.

Have you taken a moment to consider the possibility that there are options other than vaccinate versus don't vaccinate? Adjust the vaccination schedule perhaps? It's so obvious that changing the schedule could decide the issue once and for all, so why hasn't that been done?

As for the parents of the 3 year old - I would tell them that they should make their childs health decisions based on their best judgement, not mine; and they should respect my right to do the same for my child.

Show us the data. Show us the long term study that "proved" this case. To qualify, it must be conducted over a period of years by physicians and/or scientists who have real degrees from real universities.

Hannah Poling has a mitochondrial disorder that is present in virtually NONE of the children on the planet that have autism-spectrum disorders. It is so rare that no one bothers testing for it. There was never any proof that vaccination did anything to this kid except prevent her from getting infectious diseases.

The "winning" of the lawsuit consisted of a payoff to get rid of a pair of parents who had chosen to nurture their lawsuit rather than their child. It was a waste of the court's time, particularly since her PARENTS clearly agreed with the government that there was no causal link proven between their child's disorder and the vaccinations. If they had not agreed, they would not have grabbed the settlement.

In order for you to "prove" your incoherent rantings, you would have to show us definitive proof over thousands of cases that Hannah's identical disorder, coupled with standard vaccinations is the cause of autism. You can't do that. No one can. That's because there is no causal link.

The disorder this person has is so vanishingly rare that it is meaningless in this debate.

I adore you, MessyONE. You made that counter-argument far better than I could!