Some Irrationalities Are More Equal Than Others

A measles epidemic is being blamed on anti-vaccine activist parents who refuse to have their kids vaccinated with the MMR shot. Liberals are decrying these people as irrational science deniers, yet are willing to grant exceptions to people who oppose vaccines due to their religious beliefs.

5 thoughts on “Some Irrationalities Are More Equal Than Others

  1. Why have I never seen an answer to the question: how many of the people who contacted measles in Disneyland had been vaccinated? If it was most of them, doesn’t that call into question the effectiveness of the vacccine? And, if not, doesn’t that justify people like Dr. Rand Paul who vaccinate their children but leave it to other parents to choose what risks they want their children to undergo?

    Another question: The presence of mercury, unquestionably toxic, in the vaccine has been raised as a reason not to vaccinate. What is the result of the before vs. after comparison of mercury content in the tissues of vaccinated people? And if no such study has been undertaken, isn’t that in itself cause for suspicion?

  2. @ fosforos – Cause for suspicion? Right to choose risks, when the results may affect other people around you? You’ve got a computer, why not google and check some of the issues you’ve raised for yourself instead of simply reacting to the soundbites you’ve been digesting? Did you forget that measles was fairly well stamped out many years ago? Do you know how that was achieved?
    If you really want to know – go look – satisfy your suspicions and get a little more educated by the history behind the measles, the vaccinations, etc.

  3. The FDA is supposed to make American’s feel confident about the — not too infrequently mandatory — foods and drugs consumed in America ~

    Who’re you gonna’ believe? The pharmacist/doctor/”health” official who’s paycheck (also) depends on public compliance with the economic strategy of established medical dogma? Or conspiracy
    theorists who have the temerity to say, “Look at the (mostly suppressed, or at least not discussed too much) documented evidence!”

    Parents will use whatever tools left to them … but it’s wrong to summarily presume that they are all “anti-science” simply because they don’t want to become a part of a lemming die-off.


    • What that graph (taken from the Health Sentinel, which may not be the most objective source) says to me, Dan, is that measles mortality rates were declining prior to the introduction of measles vaccine in 1963 – presumably due to better general levels of hygiene and health, less crowding, etc, and, not least, that they continued to decline thereafter. I should certainly not interpret it to mean that it is advantageous for one’s children – or those of neighbours and acquaintances – to refuse to vaccinate them against this disease, which can, infrequently but devastatingly, lead to serious consequences indeed….

      Another graph using data from the CDC which show reported measles cases in the United States between 1944 and 2007 ( would seem to indicate a very strong temporal correlation between the introduction of the vaccine and a great reduction in the incidence of measles case in the that country. Of course, as we all know, correlation is not the same thing as causality, but it would be a bold physician who ignores the correlation when deciding whether to recommend vaccination or not.

      Disclaimer : While I must confess to having,in addition to training in mathematics, a medical degree, being now retired my paycheck does not depend «on public compliance with the economic strategy of established medical dogma». My own understanding of the statistics involved leads me to believe that vaccination against measles is an effective means of controlling the disease which benefits both vaccinated individuals and the general population, but for the latter to be true, it is calculated that some 93 % of the population at risk must be vaccinated….


  4. Ted, you know very well that «religious reasons» for sheer idiocy trump all other reasons – that’s obviously what the First Amendment to the US Constitution means when it states that «Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ….», as that conman and wannabe science fiction writer Lafayette Ronald Hubbard learned to his immense profit….


Leave a Reply