The Anti-Vaccination Movement

[Gwazi Magnum]

Okay.

Really, vaccinations are there to help prevent certain diseases for your child. Like what on earth?

They're listing examples of what other people say.
The OP doesn't actually believe in that stuff. :P

Just had my last Hep B shot.
I got candy for it.
It's not that bad.

*Is Jelly* :3

 

[Mu]

They're listing examples of what other people say.
The OP doesn't actually believe in that stuff. :P

I meant why do other people even use this as an excuse. dgkjbdfk

*Is Jelly* :3

A lollipop for an aching right arm. Worth.

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

I meant why do other people even use this as an excuse. dgkjbdfk

Other than reasons detailed in the video Kaga shared?

The Gay one I imagine also has religious/homophobic roots to it.
Though in all honesty that Mothers of Autistic children aren't much better in this regard... :/
They might not blame vaccines for being Gay, but if they're child happens to be Asexual they blame the Autism and try to 'correct' it in therapy.

A lollipop for an aching right arm. Worth.

A lolipop is worth almost any sacrifice.

 

[Freyja]

I of course agree that the anti-vaccine movement and all "arguments" for it are bullshit, however, I don't think that trying to convince anti-vaccers that they're wrong -- at least the way we've been trying to convince them -- is really an effective way of doing things, as shown in this convenient little video;

And I think that maybe knowing and understanding those biases are a better way to try to end the whole anti-vaccine movement, since just shouting "vaccines don't cause autism" is apparently rather ineffective at actually changing anyone's mind.

Then how should we solve their ignorance else? Multiple organisations and groups , both non- and scientific based have made commercials, column, articles and shown debates explaining the what and hows of the vaccinations. Yes, including their ingredients. Due to a rise in autism and an overall distrust in larger corporations and governments, people have linked those together, spread the rumour and those of lesser intelligence believed it, because it sounded logical to them.

What I'm getting is that there is no 'friendly' way, especially since the decrease in vaccination has already had bad effects.

If they don't want a vaccine, it is their choice. Just that they won't be able to handle diseases that pop up and violently reproduce inside their bodies. Sometimes it takes such things to convince a person that 'yeah, maybe vaccines are good!'

Especially when discussing this topic all over the world. Anti-vaxxers have always been around, but the movement had a large grow spurt around 2010, allowing outbreaks of diseases like Measles, Whooping cough, Rubella and even Polio to rise again all over the world. Also, considering some anti-vaxxers simply do not vaccinate their kid because "If god wants them to become sick they will."

tl;dr: You can't reason with these people.

 

[Kagayours]

Okay.

Really, vaccinations are there to help prevent certain diseases for your child. Like what on earth? Plus the pain is only about one second long and then it's just light throbbing, though I do understand the fear of needles.

Just had my last Hep B shot.
I got candy for it.
It's not that bad.

It really isn't about the one-second pain. It's about parents having dumb suspicions about them causing autism, among other things.

...Or, like you said, there's the fear of needles thing. I have one friend, for example, who is deathly afraid of needles. She just cannot get a traditional vaccine, or else she might even faint cuz she's just so terrified. @_@ She still supports the idea of vaccines, though, and even manages to get some vaccinations through nasal spray rather than injection. ...Which is apparently a thing.

Also, my roommate is allergic to vaccines, so she can't get any, either. But uh... yeah. Kids like those are the exception rather than the rule.

The real issue is parents who don't want their kids to get any for stupid reasons... >.<

 

[Kagayours]

Then how should we solve their ignorance else? Multiple organisations and groups , both non- and scientific based have made commercials, column, articles and shown debates explaining the what and hows of the vaccinations. Yes, including their ingredients. Due to a rise in autism and an overall distrust in larger corporations and governments, people have linked those together, spread the rumour and those of lesser intelligence believed it, because it sounded logical to them.

What I'm getting is that there is no 'friendly' way, especially since the decrease in vaccination has already had bad effects.

Bolded: Yes, I know.

That's why I'm saying we should be spending maybe a bit more time focusing on that faulty reasoning instead of just the cold-hard facts as to why vaccines aren't dangerous, because we've already seen that that just isn't convincing anyone.

 

[Freyja]

Bolded: Yes, I know.

That's why I'm saying we should be spending maybe a bit more time focusing on that faulty reasoning instead of just the cold-hard facts as to why vaccines aren't dangerous, because we've already seen that that just isn't convincing anyone.

English is not my first language, so I am not entirely certain how to put this into words, but there just isn't any reasoning behind it. Like the video you showed, spoke about the negativity bias. Saying that when something bad happens (autism), they will automatically wonder how this happened and look for some kind of connection. There are more ridiculous theories behind the cause of autism, such as blaming the amount of carbondioxide in the air, the growth of the meat industry and just anything that they believe is harmful. Some people started to point at the vaccines and thanks to the confirmation bias that the video mentioned more followed.

That aside, knowing the cause doesn't mean the same as knowing the solution, since the whole cause is just idiocy and ignorance. We tried the cold hard facts, but they won't help thanks to ignorance.
Now, what do we do with sheep? We shepherd them.
Same with idiots.

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

English is not my first language, so I am not entirely certain how to put this into words, but there just isn't any reasoning behind it. Like the video you showed, spoke about the negativity bias. Saying that when something bad happens (autism), they will automatically wonder how this happened and look for some kind of connection. There are more ridiculous theories behind the cause of autism, such as blaming the amount of carbondioxide in the air, the growth of the meat industry and just anything that they believe is harmful. Some people started to point at the vaccines and thanks to the confirmation bias that the video mentioned more followed.

That aside, knowing the cause doesn't mean the same as knowing the solution, since the whole cause is just idiocy and ignorance. We tried the cold hard facts, but they won't help thanks to ignorance.
Now, what do we do with sheep? We shepherd them.
Same with idiots.

Maybe putting this under another light might help get across what Kaga is saying.

Let's look at something such as Religion.
More Specifically the fundamentalist Christians when dealing with:

a) Pushed laws to separate church and state
b) Individuals such as Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens
c) Gay people having the right to marry.

You'll get the occasional one to come out, listen to the arguments being shown and change their religious views as a result.
However, most of those cases have other elements above that either caused them to already be questioning, or simply have weak faith to begin with.
While the Majority of the Fundamentalists have gotten more stubborn, declaring stuff like there is a "War on God!" and then cry that they're being persecuted as a result.

Now translate this back to Vaccines, subsitute "War on God" with "Cover-up Conspiracy" and it's basically the same idea.
They had a certain belief, others showed them facts saying otherwise, they respond to this as if they're being attacked/denied.
Part of the problem here being once someone identifies strongly enough with a belief, they take any attacks or criticisms of said belief personally.
So when people simply barge in and say "Vaccine's don't Cause Autism!" they are going to be instantly defensive and think of any defense they can, even if completely non-nonsensical.

What approach would work better is easing them in, have them open and willing to at least hear the other side out.
And when the other side speaks, do so as if it's among two intelligent individuals. Not one person talking down to another.

Like once again putting it under the other light.
How many times is someone converted to a Religion by being bashed over the head with a Bible being told their evil?
How many times does someone become an atheist after being exposed to enough friendliness and kindness from other Atheist?

 

[Jorick]

I think the anti-vaccine people are idiots, but I'm also a firm supporter of freedom and liberty and all that good stuff. Freedom to make your own choices means that people are allowed to make horribly ignorant choices. It's just how the system works. Forcing people to make the choices you prefer is a concept that has all sorts of fun words related to it: tyranny, oppression, despot, dictator, etc. I do not support anything that unequivocally forces people to vaccinate their children, because I do not support tyranny. In a democratic society we do not forcefully control the actions of others, we let people make their choices but outline things that are not acceptable because of the harm they cause, and those transgressions are met with punishments or restrictions. Think of it like registering your car and having car insurance: the rules say you should have these things, but the government does not automatically pull money from your paychecks to ensure that you have these things; if you're found driving without these things, you can be fined or even have your car impounded until you get them in order. For vaccinations, the equivalent to the automatic money taking would be something like sending a doctor and some cops round to anyone who fails to bring their kids in by mandatory vaccination day, then the cops hold the parents aside while vaccines are given. Sounds pretty fucked up, yeah? That's how it would have to work, and that's not at all a good thing. There's just no good, non-tyrannical way to force people to vaccinate their kids.

However, that freedom of choice thing comes with a logical caveat: you're free to do as you please unless it harms other people. What I do support is making use of restrictions to strongly encourage them to make the least harmful choice. For instance, most places already have laws saying kids who aren't up to date with their vaccines cannot attend public school because they pose an unnecessary risk of spreading harmful illnesses to kids who have medical reasons for being unable to get vaccines. The only problem is that they also allow parents to opt out due to religious and philosophical objections. To that I say fuck off, your objections do not trump the health and well being of children (and the courts so far largely agree, as seen in cases like parents being ordered to get real medical treatment for their kids with cancer or other serious illness instead of trying to pray it away). There have been recent moves in some places toward removing those exceptions from the law on the books, and I support them entirely. If these people want their child to be a serious health risk, then they can do homeschool or find a private school that's okay with parents putting their kids at risk of catching entirely preventable diseases. If they can't do those things, then that's a damned shame for them, looks like they'll have to get over their objections to vaccines if they want their child to have access to public school.

Anything more extreme than that? Nah man. Best you can do is try to educate people as to why anti-vaccine stuff is nonsense, but that's not going to change many minds. The sad fact of the matter is that when people hold an opinion and are confronted with contradictory facts, they tend to dig in rather than changing their mind. People are weird like that. We can work to minimize the impact of these dolts and try to convince them to stop being dolts, but anything more than that would violate all sorts of rights, and that's just not a road we should walk down.

 

[Archwar]

Then how should we solve their ignorance else? Multiple organisations and groups , both non- and scientific based have made commercials, column, articles and shown debates explaining the what and hows of the vaccinations. Yes, including their ingredients. Due to a rise in autism and an overall distrust in larger corporations and governments, people have linked those together, spread the rumour and those of lesser intelligence believed it, because it sounded logical to them.

What I'm getting is that there is no 'friendly' way, especially since the decrease in vaccination has already had bad effects.

Especially when discussing this topic all over the world. Anti-vaxxers have always been around, but the movement had a large grow spurt around 2010, allowing outbreaks of diseases like Measles, Whooping cough, Rubella and even Polio to rise again all over the world. Also, considering some anti-vaxxers simply do not vaccinate their kid because "If god wants them to become sick they will."

tl;dr: You can't reason with these people.

I know a lot of these people cannot be convinced, but not all are like that. Some anti-vaccine people can be convinced with reason, but some others will simply need to be hit with a disease so bad that they will start taking vaccines. Like how some smokers are, they deny the bad effects of smoking until it happens to them. Unfortunately, those people often learn too late and the effects are already done.

 

[Rare]

"OH LAWD. THEY CAUSE KIDS TO GET AUTISM!"
"But, they help kids be protected against diseases, that can hurt or even kill them, and ensure them that they are going to have a good childhood."
"... BUT THEY STILL CAN CAUSE AUTISM TO KIDS AND THE GOVERNMENT USES THEM TO BREED THEIR FUTURE SOLDIERS TO FIGHT THEIR WARS!!1!!1!!!1!"

Man, this movement is one of the dumbest things that mankind has ever done.

 

[Kaddoc]

Man, this movement is one of the dumbest things that mankind has ever done.

We've done worst.

Scientology. NEXT!

Seriously though, I will not hold it against someone for religious purposes to reject vaccination and I do not think it is wholly ignorance versus the fact there is a growing trend of people distrusting government. Can we also not have such a white and black contrast on this "movement?" The people touting the whole "these people are idiots" or "these people are ignorant"; that maybe true to some but as a whole I think these people go on certain personal beliefs, religious or otherwise, that for such a tolerant and open society we are supposed to be should respect.

Alas there is legitimate concerns these people end up getting infected and will make the illness more communicable due to their rejection of the vaccines. A difficult subject this is and it is the cost in having a free society. Their argument maybe, as simple-minded as some may see it, if everyone else is vaccinated why even worry about them? I digress.

To be fair, you got the loonies like Alex Jones screaming conspiracies in his soup and enough sheople to follow his lunacy that the government is intentionally poisoning its people. As much as I despise government, that's bit too much into tin-foil hat levels for me to abide.

Personally I would not write off all vaccinations as common sense prevails there are some things my body cannot simply combat with wellness and strong immune systems alone. I have endured the flu so many times that my body shakes it off almost as a cold. I won't gamble that on some bird flu strain communicable to humans, however.

 

[Jorick]

Seriously though, I will not hold it against someone for religious purposes to reject vaccination and I do not think it is wholly ignorance versus the fact there is a growing trend of people distrusting government. Can we also not have such a white and black contrast on this "movement?" The people touting the whole "these people are idiots" or "these people are ignorant"; that maybe true to some but as a whole I think these people go on certain personal beliefs, religious or otherwise, that for such a tolerant and open society we are supposed to be should respect.

Alas there is legitimate concerns these people end up getting infected and will make the illness more communicable due to their rejection of the vaccines. A difficult subject this is and it is the cost in having a free society. Their argument maybe, as simple-minded as some may see it, if everyone else is vaccinated why even worry about them? I digress.

It is pretty much black and white though. It's the same level of nonsense as religious people deciding to pray their very treatable cancer away instead of receiving tried and true medical treatment. They have the right to make this choice and we cannot force them into it, but we have no obligation to respect it in any other sense of the word. That broader kind of respect is earned, and they don't earn it by endangering other people (specifically those with allergies and medical conditions that make it so they literally cannot get vaccines) with their poor decision making.

Their simple-minded argument also comes from a place of ignorance/stupidity. Herd immunity is a real thing, wherein if enough of a population is vaccinated then a disease can't really spread and propagate in any effective manner. Basically things like measles and polio can't jump around the population to effectively get to the vulnerable folks (those ones who can't get vaccinated) if the vast majority of others are vaccinated. The whole "nah everyone else is vaccinated, I'm fine" argument only works if the vaccination rates remain above the herd immunity threshold, but these people refusing to vaccinate their kids is making it so that threshold is not actually met in a lot of schools.

It's both selfish and self-defeating, and that's why it's stupid. It is black and white.

 

[Kaddoc]

It is pretty much black and white though. It's the same level of nonsense as religious people deciding to pray their very treatable cancer away instead of receiving tried and true medical treatment. They have the right to make this choice and we cannot force them into it, but we have no obligation to respect it in any other sense of the word. That broader kind of respect is earned, and they don't earn it by endangering other people (specifically those with allergies and medical conditions that make it so they literally cannot get vaccines) with their poor decision making.

I take it you're an atheist?

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

I take it you're an atheist?

Should it matter?
Scientifically speaking faith healing has zero effectiveness.
Expecting it to make a kid get better is the same as saying "If I start singing while eating Jello, my kid will lose cancer".

 

[Kaddoc]

Should it matter?
Scientifically speaking faith healing has zero effectiveness.
Expecting it to make a kid get better is the same as saying "If I start singing while eating Jello, my kid will lose cancer".

No, it does not matter. I just wanted to know where he is coming from.

It is easy for people to marginalize the religious reasons where in the past those were the main opponents towards vaccines. In more recent times you have advocacy groups backed by people with deep pockets, celebrity clout and organizations spreading conspiracies and fear campaigns regurgitating dated information to an ill-informed portion of the population. Ignorance is not a crime but to marginalize religion as a whole and write off religious people as stupid and ignorant for rejecting vaccines is a wee bit condescending.

I personally see religious practice versus willful ignorance to be sacrosanct. Sure, it is easy to write off the religious reasons, however if a person is refusing because Jenny McCarthy told them vaccines makes people autistic we go from personal beliefs to conspiracy herd. That's the way I see it.

You cannot force or rationalize religious people by bashing into their heads they're going to die if they don't get the treatment. They think they're going to heaven, how can you argue that? Versus a person who is plain ignorant, the best plan from there is to show them the correct information then step back to let them make a decision to see if common sense prevails or they're another member of the tin foil hat brigade from where we enter a realm of psychology I lack the energy and sleep to get into at the interm.

 

[Gwazi Magnum]

No, it does not matter. I just wanted to know where he is coming from.

It is easy for people to marginalize the religious reasons where in the past those were the main opponents towards vaccines. In more recent times you have advocacy groups backed by people with deep pockets, celebrity clout and organizations spreading conspiracies and fear campaigns regurgitating dated information to an ill-informed portion of the population. Ignorance is not a crime but to marginalize religion as a whole and write off religious people as stupid and ignorant for rejecting vaccines is a wee bit condescending.

I personally see religious practice versus willful ignorance to be sacrosanct. Sure, it is easy to write off the religious reasons, however if a person is refusing because Jenny McCarthy told them vaccines makes people autistic we go from personal beliefs to conspiracy herd. That's the way I see it.

You cannot force or rationalize religious people by bashing into their heads they're going to die if they don't get the treatment. They think they're going to heaven, how can you argue that? Versus a person who is plain ignorant, the best plan from there is to show them the correct information then step back to let them make a decision to see if common sense prevails or they're another member of the tin foil hat brigade from where we enter a realm of psychology I lack the energy and sleep to get into at the interm.

I don't think anyone here is arguing that religious people as a whole are stupid or wrong.
Just that using one's religion as a reason to reject Vaccines is stupid.

In other words, people aren't being attacked for their Religion, but rather their line of reasoning as far as Vaccines are concerned.
I guarantee anyone who is religious but says "Vaccines are important" would not be getting labeled as an idiot simply for being religious.

I can get the concern about simply writing people off like "Oh, they're just religious nut jobs" though. That can be dangerous.
But in this case the reasoning for the vaccine rejection is being backed by religion, so we can't really argue against it without also arguing the religion.
Which doesn't mean we are hating anyone under said religion, just that we're arguing against the religious reasoning as far as Vaccines are concerned.

 

[Jorick]

I take it you're an atheist?

I am, of an agnostic bent, but that has no bearing on this. I used prayer healing as a comparison of another very nonscientific view on health matters, not to say that religious people are bad or that all anti-vaccine people are religiously motivated. There are plenty of people who are against them because they don't know anything about chemistry and are scared by the notion of putting something containing mercury in their child's body. I have similar disdain for those who believe homeopathy or crystal healing actually work beyond the level the placebo effect. It has nothing to do with religion, everything to do with people being foolish enough to fall for pseudoscience and quackery.

 

[Kaddoc]

I am, of an agnostic bent, but that has no bearing on this. I used prayer healing as a comparison of another very nonscientific view on health matters, not to say that religious people are bad or that all anti-vaccine people are religiously motivated. There are plenty of people who are against them because they don't know anything about chemistry and are scared by the notion of putting something containing mercury in their child's body. I have similar disdain for those who believe homeopathy or crystal healing actually work beyond the level the placebo effect. It has nothing to do with religion, everything to do with people being foolish enough to fall for pseudoscience and quackery.

Pseudoscience is not necessarily quackery although it is a culprit to many misconceptions and yes, conspiracies. Without getting into an argument in semantics, I can understand ones' frustration with people who use quackery and conspiracy theories to reject vaccines. I just find some of the religion reason arguments a little pretentious is all.

The point I am trying to make is where do we draw the line on a person's personal decisions versus their health? Do we force people to take vaccines? Do we make it mandatory everyone goes in for a 4 month checkup? A free society is a complicated creature.

 

[Jorick]

Pseudoscience is not necessarily quackery although it is a culprit to many misconceptions and yes, conspiracies. Without getting into an argument in semantics, I can understand ones' frustration with people who use quackery and conspiracy theories to reject vaccines. I just find some of the religion reason arguments a little pretentious is all.

The point I am trying to make is where do we draw the line on a person's personal decisions versus their health? Do we force people to take vaccines? Do we make it mandatory everyone goes in for a 4 month checkup? A free society is a complicated creature.

You're right that not all pseudoscience is quackery. Quackery is applied pseudoscience, generally for the purpose of monetary gain. :P

Generally speaking, the point at which you draw the line isn't actually all that complicated, because it's the same line drawn for every other freedom: you're free to do as you wish until that choice harms other people or infringes upon their rights. Mandatory medical checkups are a damned silly idea because not doing them only harms the person who chooses to not get them, and people are allowed to harm themselves all they like. Vaccines are on the border of the area of protected personal medical choices for two reasons: not vaccinating can potentially cause harm to others by way of allowing preventable communicable diseases to propagate and affect those who are unable to get vaccinated, and not vaccinating your child is potentially harmful to them. It's that "potentially" part that causes the trouble, because if you can't prove for certain that something will or will not cause harm then it comes down to a subjective judgment of just what percentage likelihood of harming others with your choice is acceptable and legally protected and what the tipping point is for that choice needing to be constrained.

Dealing with harmful behavior can take all sorts of forms, but generally the method to be preferred is that which is least harsh to the person at fault that also (hopefully) prevents that harm from occurring again. As far as not vaccinating can cause harm to vulnerable kids, the minimal harshness solution that prevents that harm is to completely bar kids from public school if they aren't vaccinated, no religious or philosophical objections allowed. As for the possible harm caused directly to a child that isn't vaccinated, well, the jury is still out on that one. In more blatant and obvious cases of this same nature that have gone to court, such as parents choosing to forgo real medical treatment for their child's treatable cancer or other serious condition, perhaps in favor of faith healing or homeopathy or other things that don't actually work, most often the courts have ordered that the child must be given real medical treatment because withholding it qualifies as child abuse and/or neglect. Some day in the future it's entirely possible that such rulings will extend to vaccinations. I currently don't think that's necessary, but, well, I wouldn't really object to it either.