Tuesday, May 4, 2010

To Someone I Used to Consider a Friend

There's been a discussion on the Jay Gordon piece (here) that garnered my interest. The gist of the comment is that anyone who is "anti-vacc" is comparable to a Birther or Tea-bagger. Gotta love that Medieval Catholic Church mindset.

My response was my usual; mocking and sarcastic. In it, I accused people like him as being akin to the Medieval Catholic Church accusing anyone who disagrees with them of being a heretic (this is all just a recap, mind you).

The whole point of my comment was mockery. First of all, if you're going to demonize parents who have reason to believe that their children may have been injured by vaccines, you'd better expect someone to say something. I've come up with my own way of demonizing these people in the same vein that they demonize people like me; by calling them Vaccine Injury and Death Promoters. Is it a tu quoque fallacy? Yep. Two wrongs don't make a right? You betcha. Do I care? Nope, not a fucking bit. I'm tired of dealing with people who have no concept of common courtesy or who have no intention of being courteous. If you want to speak to me like a human being, then I'm all for it. And, I can often have very pleasant disagreements as a result, like I did with Cable1977 on the Jenny McCarthy HuffPo piece.

Essentially, to these people, it doesn't really matter that some children are potentially getting injured by vaccines. It's all necessary, you see....for the good of the herd. The studies they pray to are riddled with Conficts of Interest and bias; so riddled, in fact, that the prestigious Cochrane Review was appalled. But it's ok...they defend vaccines. The VIDP's always get so bent out of shape when you bring this up to them, you see, because the Vaccine is Sacred! It's Holy! It's the Mohammed of the Medical world...how DARE you question it!

So, in response to my mocking retort about how everyone has the right to choose what to put into their bodies or their children's bodies, a former friend went into histrionics about how horrible and over the top my comment was. The whole, "Oh no, he di-nt!!!" And then, I'm sure she slithered over to her own blogsite and said something scathing and derogatory toward me. Really, Kim....I would be wounded, but all I have to do is consider the source. The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Kim, my grandmother once told me that if you're gonna wallow with the pigs, don't be shocked when you get dirty.

You see, Kim, you give the impression that you're above all of that. You come across as being superior to the unwashed masses, when in truth you are simply one of them. You get all appalled and melodramatic when a person whom you disagree with says something that you perceive as over the top; but it's ok when someone you agree with says something just as bad or worse. Because, as your comment on Huffpo implies, since you are "Science-Based," you and people you agree with get to make off-color comments without fear of retaliation. Because, by golly, you're "Science-Based!"

You get to mock and ridicule fathers who write about how they felt when their non-verbal child said their first word in 5 years. You get to make off-color comments about how all of these stories about vaccine injuries are similar. This is the very reason I quit visiting your site. I saw the comment about me by Kathleen, and I saw your response. That told me everything I needed to know about who you really are. But when I call you out on it, you get all huffy about it? Riiiight. Smell the shit you're shoveling, dear.

1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion

2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings.
You claim to be a critical thinker. Well, you give the impression that either I agree with you, totally, or I'm anti-science. The world doesn't work like that, Kim. If you truly were able to think critically, you'd know that.
You know you're right, and that's all that matters to you. Which is exactly what you accuse me of. The thing is, I accept the possibility that I could be wrong, and it's obvious that you do not do the same thing. I don't WANT to be right, you see? I would give ANYTHING to not be right. But, seeing what happened to my son within 6 hours of his vaccinations kind of gives me the impression that I might be right. And, the fact that science refuses to look at children like my son further enforces that belief. And such vehement and vitiolic attacks from people who claim to be "science-based" enforces that belief even further. Science should never be defended so religiously. It's not science anymore when that happens.
I just don't want any other children to end up like my son. If there's even a small chance that vaccines can cause injuries like my son's, then people need to know.
Oh, and Kim...Orac is about the furthest thing from being "Science-based" as John Best. You see, being science based means that you don't make such definitive claims as he does without having all available evidence. You don't make these sweeping generalizations about a person or a condition without evidence. You don't pretend to be an expert in something when you really are not. You also admit when you're wrong. You know, like he did with Hannah Poling?
Where did he admit his error there? Has he admitted his error about Dental amalgams? No? What about admitting the error about his claim that Dr. Wakefield was fired from Thoughtful House?

Look, if you want to be looped in with the Westboro Baptist Church of the scientific community, be my guest. But, I guaranty you that it isn't a compliment.


  1. On facebook, I was debating someone in the Paul Offit love group and he said he would stop because he got offended by my calling "studies" defending mercury in childhood vaccines what they are - tobacco science!

  2. Jake,
    Not to toot my own horn, but I think the analogy I made in my post is quite appropriate.

    Vaccines are the Mohammed of the Medical world. They are above criticism or scrutiny. They are above investigate or inquiries. If you don't trust in them fully, then you are an infidel.

    These people aren't scientists....they are religious fanatics.

  3. Oh no, I completely agree with you. I was just mentioning my own experience where I feel your analogy aptly applies.

    Speaking of fanatics, I've been having quite a bit of fun with commenters of the "Science"Blogs lately. Feel free to join the party.


  4. Jake and Craig, I wrote a little something a while back I bet both you guys will dig...


    These jokers are extremists. And at the core I don't think it's really about vaccines, or yoga, or natural health, or "quackery," or "pseudoscience." It's about getting attention and a strange obsession with with the art of argument loaded with personal attacks/condescension/arrogance. Opinion does not exist in their world. Only consensus and group-think.

    In the end, they're trolls. Immaterial and annoying -- grown-up classroom know-it-alls.

    They should be treated with mockery and the utmost derision, which they ladle out to anyone who disagrees with any platform of theirs. That is if they should be engaged at all, which IMO is pointless, though fun at times because it's like Skeptic kryptonite--their own shit flung back at them with even greater force.

  5. Jesus, Jake, I followed your link. What a bunch of morons and tools. The visceral hate over there is palpable. They'd just love to line us all up against a brick wall and slash our throats. Charming people.

  6. Hey Josh, thanks for stopping by!

    Your article is excellent, btw. These people claim to be skeptics, but the skepticism only goes as far as what experts say. They aren't in the least bit skeptical of the science that the Pharmaceutical industry is using. An industry, I might add, that has been caught REPEATEDLY faking their studies. Ah, but no...they wouldn't do that with vaccines...nope. It's really quite pathetic, to be honest.

    I don't go to Respectiful Insolence much anymore. I also don't link him. Every time I go there, I come away feeling like a need a shower. Keep in mind that these people are the same ones that are supposed to be doctors and scientists. These charming people are the ones in charge of our health care....most of them, at least.

    I bet you're going to sleep good tonight, aren't ya?

  7. Craig, I wanted to shoot you an email, but I can't seem to find your email address. This is quite understandable, given the circumstances and subject matter of your blog. Though I feel pretty sad as a fiendish marsupial was clearly able to track you down... a big epic fail on my part as I'm on the Internet all day long. I guess I need to start honing my cyberstalking skills, huh?

    If you don't mind, could you email me?

  8. Josh, I don't really post my email on the site, simply because I have had people stalking me (read through some of my posts and you'll see who).

    Blogspot doesn't really give me the email addy of people who post here.

    If you want to post your email here, I'm pretty good about keeping an eye on who posts. I'll immediately delete it as soon as I see it to reduce the chance of some of my more unsavory lurkers getting it.