Again, the religious postion is HARMFUL

[Moai]

I have read several times statements about logic or rationalism that it is somehow cold or lacks beauty, or lacks hope. Not only is that not true, the opposite position is objectively harmful.

 

First, let us consider the smallpox vaccine. The vaccine is the result of science, and it is probably the single greatest creation for mankind ever. Nobody will ever get smallpox and die a horrible, screaming death ever again--if such is cold and soul-less I'll take it, all day long.

 

Let's look at the measles vaccine. Melanie Phillips, a columnist for London's Daily Mail (and a Creationist) wrote a tract about how the MMR vaccine causes autism. She based her article on the work of a quack named Dr. Andrew Wakefield, and she made it seem as if his work was supported by evidence. It wasn't.

 

So now, because frightened women (who themselves are tragically uneducated regarding science) didn't vaccinate their children, 50 to 100 British children will die from the measles. THE MEASLES. The measles is horrible, but people forget because it has been virtually eradicated in the West.

 

If we look at the flu virus, the booster you get is different than the vaccination for the 1918 flu variant, simply because the virus has evolved. Right before our eyes. Ms. Phillips says that virologists are just "beating the drum for Darwin" in pointing this out. She actually suggests that god tweaks the virus every year. One wonders what would make god such a sadist...

 

The only reason anyone anywhere listens to this raving lunatic is because she parrots the Creationist view, and that has traction amongst people who lack a good foundation of scientific thought, and death is the result.

 

And look at Mullahs in the Middle East. We were on the cusp of eradicating polio, until Mullahs heard about it. In Northern Nigeria Mullahs told their followers that the polio vaccine was really part of a plan by the West to sterilize their children. As you might imagine, they stopped giving their children the vaccine and polio is rampant.

 

Realize that these people arrived at their opinion because of their belief in god. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

[sb129]

There are quite a few diseases that could have been successfully reduced almost to the point of eradication that are now on the increase as a result of such disastrous journalism/ hearsay as you have described above.

 

TB is another one. HIV is still at high levels in Africa because of the missionaries discouraging use of condoms, etc etc etc.

 

I know people who didn't let their kids get the MMR injection.

 

My partner had mumps as a child, but when he came to the UK, he picked up a slightly different strain of it and was VERY very sick. As an adult, it is not pleasant, a certain part of his anatomy swelled to the size of an orange which made sitting down impossible.

 

I am disgusted that the MMR vaccine has received such bad publicity in a country full of people who should have the resources to find out for themselves whether the preposterous claims were true or not.

[a4a]

Perhaps God works through these people to help slow the overpopulation of the planet?

[Moose]

Perhaps God works through these people to help slow the overpopulation of the planet?

Nah....these are all cases of, "religious" people being ignorant.......

[curiousnycgirl]

Ignorance presented by any group, when given a voice, is dangerous. As Albert Einsteing said "science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind"

 

What you discuss are examples of extremist views which are bad, regardless of religious belief.

[a4a]

I don't think it is fair to blame religion or state as fact that all the UK women that chose not to have their children vaccinated because of a article written by a creationist or tie it to religious ignorance. Some may have been too lazy to get the vaccination for their kids...... who knows.

 

Side note to start a debate in another thread:

 

Now I caught a brief new clip about how a Christmas tree was to be placed on a vetrans memorial ...... just barley heard this on the news before dawn.

 

But made me wonder how do the Jewish, Muslim, atheist, and other people/families of fallen soldiers feel that this "christian symbol" (claimed to be christian symbol in our general society) feel about having that tree there?

 

I would be pissed if someone put a religious symbol on my grave.... and I really don't appreciate getting the "jesus christmas cards" either.

[sb129]

My friend who didn't let her kids have the MMR jab didn't do it for religious reasons, she is into homeopathy and all that stuff and is anti- western medicine for that reason.

 

But still....

[JamesM]

Moai, you bring up an excellent point regarding the fear of vaccines connected to autism and other possible syndromes/disease. Why this relates to a Creationist, a Christian or any theist is unknown. Simply because this author is a creationist and feels vaccines are connected to autism may be completely unrelated.

 

I would be interested if you could provide a link to this article written by Ms. Phillips.

 

I (as you may well guess) know many medical workers...doctors, nurses, surgeons, and psychologists who are creationists, yet they feel that vaccines are good for children. My wife is an RN and our children have had all of their vaccinations. While she has hesitated on certain ones based on some studies done, this had nothing whatsoever to do with her religion or belief in how the world began. It was totally related to her education and experiences in the medical field.

 

It is a common concern not limited to the Brits. Our own CDC has a page on its website answering the questions regarding autism and vaccinations.

http://www.cdc.gov/od/science/iso/concerns/mmr_autism_factsheet.htm

 

And here is a page that gives both the pros and the cons on this subject. Notice at the top that no one really knows if there is a connection.

 

http://specialchildren.about.com/od/autismandvaccines/i/vaccines.htm

 

Here is an organization founded by parents whose children were injured or died following DPT vaccine reactions. It doesn't seem to be connected to any religion.

http://www.nvic.org/Diseases/autismsp.htm

 

If you read the information presented here, then it can be seen that there is evidence that supports the possible connection with mercury and autism.

 

http://www.know-vaccines.org/controversy.html

 

And here are a few more links that talk of this well known controversy....

http://www.newstarget.com/011764.html

http://www.autismwebsite.com/ARI/vaccine/vaccine.htm

http://www.westonaprice.org/children/autism.html

http://osiris.sunderland.ac.uk/autism/vaccine.htm

http://www.garynull.com/documents/autism99b.htm

 

And I could go on and on with websites that discuss this controversy. What struck me was that very few had a religious connection and not one that I noticed mentioned that the fear of vaccinations was related to their belief in how the world began.

 

But you may want to notice that.....this article is written by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, not exactly a creationist or "raving lunatic."

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0616-31.htm

 

Here is a list of books one can purchase that discuss the risks of vaccinations. Many mention the connection between mercury, thimerosol and vaccinations...

http://books.google.com/books?q=autism+vaccines&source=citation&ots=wOqRWVc216&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=bottom-3results&hl=en

 

The only reason anyone anywhere listens to this raving lunatic is because she parrots the Creationist view, and that has traction amongst people who lack a good foundation of scientific thought, and death is the result.

 

I hardly think this connection is why people listen. The literature out there regarding the risks of vaccinations is voluminous. Much of it (as I have shown) has been written by medical professionals, parents, and attorneys. While Ms. Phillips may have struck a nerve, I doubt it was because she was a creationist.

 

Having been married to a nurse for so many years, this is one of the issues we have discussed quite thoroughly. Since she sees the children/people who have had a negative reaction to vaccinations (obviously, because the healthy ones do not need a physician), then it made her wary of what could go wrong. Thankfully, we had no adverse reactions.

 

So now, because frightened women (who themselves are tragically uneducated regarding science) didn't vaccinate their children, 50 to 100 British children will die from the measles.

 

This is tragic, but yet we need to research thoroughly why Wakefield reached his conclusions. To simply dismiss him as a quack with no followup research to dispel the "myths" will not solve the problem. To dismiss the naysayers as some sort of religious raving lunatics appears not to be credible.

 

But in this statement I think is the key...as you said, these parents are uneducated in the low risks of vaccinations. Since most people never even think of vaccinations until their first child is born, we have this lack of education, They first hear of what can go wrong from people like this. While there may be some truth in the risks, the benefits far outweigh the risks. This is hardly questionable. Even if one considers the cold statistics, a much smaller percentage of children get autism with vaccinations as compared to how many children would get measles without any vaccinations.

 

However, I think the main concern regarding the vaccinations is not that we have vaccinations, but it is how the vaccinations are made and what toxins may be contained in them.

 

As with any medical procedure, there are possible risks. What one needs to do is weigh the benefits with the risks before making a decision. Personally, my opinion has been since a teenager that vaccinations are a blessing and a life saver for many, many people on this earth. Our hesitation as parents was not because we were Christians or Creationists, but our hesitation was simply regarding the possible links to autism and other possible syndromes. As a parent, the children's immediate health becomes more important than the vaccination for a possible disease with which they may never come in contact.

 

Good topic for discussion, but I think it should be broadened into the area of whether there is a risk of diseases that outweighs the benefits of vaccinations.

[Moai]

Moai, you bring up an excellent point regarding the fear of vaccines connected to autism and other possible syndromes/disease. Why this relates to a Creationist, a Christian or any theist is unknown. Simply because this author is a creationist and feels vaccines are connected to autism may be completely unrelated.

 

She published her information in an attempt to undermine vaccinations, which she is against because she is a Creationist. Therein is the connection.

 

I would be interested if you could provide a link to this article written by Ms. Phillips.

 

I'll have to check the Daily Mail archives. This goes back to the year 2000, so I am not sure if it is available online.

 

I (as you may well guess) know many medical workers...doctors, nurses, surgeons, and psychologists who are creationists, yet they feel that vaccines are good for children. My wife is an RN and our children have had all of their vaccinations. While she has hesitated on certain ones based on some studies done, this had nothing whatsoever to do with her religion or belief in how the world began. It was totally related to her education and experiences in the medical field.

 

I got all mine without reservation on the part of my parents.

 

It is a common concern not limited to the Brits. Our own CDC has a page on its website answering the questions regarding autism and vaccinations.

http://www.cdc.gov/od/science/iso/concerns/mmr_autism_factsheet.htm

 

The concern here arose from the articles and concern in Britain.

 

And here is a page that gives both the pros and the cons on this subject. Notice at the top that no one really knows if there is a connection.

 

http://specialchildren.about.com/od/autismandvaccines/i/vaccines.htm

 

Terri Mauro has a degree in literature. Are you serious about posting what she has to say on this issue? According to the CDC there is no connection whatsoever between the MMR vaccine and autism. Yet Terri claims that nobody knows. Hmmm, who to believe....

 

Here is an organization founded by parents whose children were injured or died following DPT vaccine reactions. It doesn't seem to be connected to any religion.

http://www.nvic.org/Diseases/autismsp.htm

{/quote]

 

I couldn't find any information on that website about the qualifications of its members. I saw one is an Phd and an RN. The others list no qualifications at all. One lists her efforts as a consumer advocate as a qualification of something, I am not sure what. Given one of the quotes I saw at the top, I am less than enthusiastic about any claims found on that site.

 

If you read the information presented here, then it can be seen that there is evidence that supports the possible connection with mercury and autism.

 

http://www.know-vaccines.org/controversy.html

 

Uh-huh. I hope others reading this thread visit that site in particular. According to their website, "All vaccinations are in violation of God's word." Given that, do you think that ANY information on that site is worth anything? Do you actually read those sites, or did you type in a search and post some links? That site is a political site that explains to religious wackos how they can keep their children in school without vaccinating them. Thank you for a link that proves my point for me.

 

And here are a few more links that talk of this well known controversy....

http://www.newstarget.com/011764.html

http://www.autismwebsite.com/ARI/vaccine/vaccine.htm

http://www.westonaprice.org/children/autism.html

http://osiris.sunderland.ac.uk/autism/vaccine.htm

http://www.garynull.com/documents/autism99b.htm

 

Forgive me for being underwhelmed. The last link is almost un-navigable. Newstarget is yet another paranoid anti-science site of special interest is the group of HPV articles. Why are they against the HPV vaccine, I wonder? Oh yeah, because it might make young women promiscuous. They also quote the Daily News (go figure) and assert that men in Britain have invented a perpetual-motion machine.

 

And I could go on and on with websites that discuss this controversy. What struck me was that very few had a religious connection and not one that I noticed mentioned that the fear of vaccinations was related to their belief in how the world began.

 

You didn't read very closely. In just checking the "about us" links the religious nature of most of those sites was front and center.

 

Just because wackos on the web right a bunch of articles about a "controversy" it does not follow that there is one. There are probably thousands of websites about the Kennedy assassination and that the "conspiracy" involved, but that doesn't mean the claims found have anything to do with reality or the Oswald didn't act alone.

 

I have a website for you: http://www.davidicke.com/index.php/

 

He claims that there are lizard-people running around, controlling the world. They are behind the Illuminati and Freemasons. Should I take what he says seriously? Why or why not? Given the links you posted, I am very curious about your answer.

 

But you may want to notice that.....this article is written by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, not exactly a creationist or "raving lunatic."

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0616-31.htm

 

No, he is a lawyer hoping to cash in on a huge class-action lawsuit. He hasn't filed one (yet) because he has no evidence, but that didn't stop him from writing what he did. I find the fact that it is "endorsed" by Ralph Nader rather telling. Again, just because there are fringe groups saying there is a problem doesn't mean there is one, and you are actually making my point for me. How many people who take what those websites say at face value will not immunize their children, and how many will get polio, measles, mumps, or countless other horrible diseases that are so easily preventable?

 

Here is a list of books one can purchase that discuss the risks of vaccinations. Many mention the connection between mercury, thimerosol and vaccinations...

http://books.google.com/books?q=autism+vaccines&source=citation&ots=wOqRWVc216&sa=X&oi=print&ct=title&cad=bottom-3results&hl=en

 

Uh-huh. Remember "alar"? It was all over our apples, and it made children horribly sick! Meryl Streep testiied about it before congress. The FDA let everyone down! Well, it turns out that alar had nothing to do with childhood illness, yet the response and evidence of that fact was page six because no celebrity came out with that data, I suppose.

 

THe last book on that page, one written by a physician, debunks al the claims of the others on THE FIRST PAGE LISTED.

 

Look at the umber of crack[pot books written about something THAT IS NOT HAPPENING all based on the findings of one quack, quoted by one idiot in a tabloid.

 

I hardly think this connection is why people listen. The literature out there regarding the risks of vaccinations is voluminous. Much of it (as I have shown) has been written by medical professionals, parents, and attorneys. While Ms. Phillips may have struck a nerve, I doubt it was because she was a creationist.

 

Yes, there are a lot of books about it, and I only gave a cursory look at some of them and they are all CRAP. And it did more than strike a nerve, it is sad and depressing, and more than that DANGEROUS.

 

Again, thank you for making my point for me. People who take things at face value and do not think critically are certainly susceptible to all sorts of fringe claims, but in this case it is tragic because the health of children--who can't decide for themselves--is at risk.

 

Having been married to a nurse for so many years, this is one of the issues we have discussed quite thoroughly. Since she sees the children/people who have had a negative reaction to vaccinations (obviously, because the healthy ones do not need a physician), then it made her wary of what could go wrong. Thankfully, we had no adverse reactions.

 

Most people don't. A very small percentage of people do. What's the big deal? Some people are allergic to latex. Does that mean latex is bad? One child in 10,000 having an adverse reaction to a vaccine (which is less life-threatening or painful than measles, say) is better that 50% of children dying of the measles.

 

Do you know of anyone who has had smallpox? I rest my case.

 

This is tragic, but yet we need to research thoroughly why Wakefield reached his conclusions. To simply dismiss him as a quack with no followup research to dispel the "myths" will not solve the problem. To dismiss the naysayers as some sort of religious raving lunatics appears not to be credible.

 

I didn't dismiss him as a quack, the General Medical Council in Britain did. He conducted a study of 12 families with autistic children, found they all had the MMR vaccine, and claimed a relationship. When actual studies have been done, there has been no correlation shown. A study in Finland, for example, studied 1.8 million children (not 12) and found autism rates remained the same after introduction of the MMR vaccine.

 

Wakefield was actually indicted by the General Medical Council, but the damage had been done. And look at the pages you linked that resulted.

 

But in this statement I think is the key...as you said, these parents are uneducated in the low risks of vaccinations. Since most people never even think of vaccinations until their first child is born, we have this lack of education, They first hear of what can go wrong from people like this. While there may be some truth in the risks, the benefits far outweigh the risks. This is hardly questionable. Even if one considers the cold statistics, a much smaller percentage of children get autism with vaccinations as compared to how many children would get measles without any

vaccinations.

 

Exactly. However, there is no data to suggest that vaccinations cause autism. There are certainly risks with immunization, but as I mentioned before, they are far, far less deadly and harmful as the diseases they combat.

 

However, I think the main concern regarding the vaccinations is not that we have vaccinations, but it is how the vaccinations are made and what toxins may be contained in them.

 

Uh-huh. I just got an MMR booster so I could go back to school. I'm fine. In fact, I got the vaccine without a moment's hesitation.

 

As with any medical procedure, there are possible risks. What one needs to do is weigh the benefits with the risks before making a decision. Personally, my opinion has been since a teenager that vaccinations are a blessing and a life saver for many, many people on this earth. Our hesitation as parents was not because we were Christians or Creationists, but our hesitation was simply regarding the possible links to autism and other possible syndromes. As a parent, the children's immediate health becomes more important than the vaccination for a possible disease with which they may never come in contact.

 

First, they will come into contact with it. That is why you have to vaccinate your children before they go to public school. Do you travel? then shots are in order.

 

Of course parents should be concerned about their children, but there is a enough REAL danger to be concerned about other than the claims of fringe whack jobs with no evidence at all.

 

And children get the measles and die FOR NO GOOD REASON.

 

Good topic for discussion, but I think it should be broadened into the area of whether there is a risk of diseases that outweighs the benefits of vaccinations.

 

Which is a separate issue. My post showed (and your links support) the fact that people making scientific choices based on religious reasons is wrong and dangerous. And children die. CHILDREN.

[Moai]

Ignorance presented by any group, when given a voice, is dangerous. As Albert Einsteing said "science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind"

 

What you discuss are examples of extremist views which are bad, regardless of religious belief.

 

Well, the author in question claimed that immunologists were just "banging the drum for Darwin" and does whatever she can to undermine modern science. I agree that is extremist, but 60% of people in the US reject evolution as an explanation for the biological diversity we see.

 

Does a belief stay "extremist" when a majority believes it?

[JamesM]

Moai, your long post in response was unnecessary. I don't have time to respond to each point right now, but many are taking my points and misinterpreting them. While religious people may have an issue with vaccinations (and this is not new), the concern that you brought up regarding the connection to autism is not religion oriented. It is in fact an unrealistic fear that has been propagated by many individuals...some religious, some attorneys, and many parents.

 

I actually agree with you. Rejecting vaccinations for any reason that does not take children's health in consideration is wrong.

[quankanne]

when I saw the slug on your post, " the religious position is HARMFUL," my first thought was "ooh, someone's having problems with the missionary position?!!"

 

however, the subject of vaccines and childhood autism calls to mind Jenny McCarthy's new book dealing with her son's autism, which she suspects was triggered by a combination of an early childhood vaccine and food allergies. Interestingly enough, Jenny doesn't mention anything about faith other than it helped her get through this horrific episode, but looks at it from a practical mommy viewpoint that questions the effects of certain vaccines and allergies on certain children. Which I find really interesting, considering she's a lapsed Catholic who could have pointed fingers either way in dealing with the issue, but hasn't. Methinks the people OP refers to are a small, if vocal group, whose opinions are being touted as fully representative of ALL religious minded folks. You can't keep using these extreme examples to paint such a broad picture of the dangers of religion, because most people fall somewhere in the middle and you're only damaging your own creds by repeatedly doing this to prove your point.

[a4a]

Interestingly enough in the companion animal world vaccinations have now been looked at again because of the side effects on the animals.

 

I don't get vaccinated..... and never did have all my childhood vaccines.

I got nailed a few times to travel...... but otherwise I just won't do it.

 

Premarin and Prempro (HRTs) were also dished out for years... now studies show that they "can" cause cancers. Bla bla blah....

 

I don't have a god telling me to not get vaccinated, I tell myself. Just because a drug company say "it's safe"...... well, we could pull up all kinds of facts about that too.

[NoIDidn't]

Stupid question.

 

Based on the title of this thread, I thought it was about religion itself being dangerous.

 

Is this thread about that or vaccinations?

[Enema]

Stupid question.

 

Based on the title of this thread, I thought it was about religion itself being dangerous.

 

Is this thread about that or vaccinations?

 

Moai is saying that religion is dangerous because it causes some people to reject life-saving vaccines.

[Moai]

Moai is saying that religion is dangerous because it causes some people to reject life-saving vaccines.

 

Yep.

 

And it causes other people to lie and say that condoms cause AIDS. This is happening in Africa right now. I just came across the vaccination thing d thought I'd share. There is example after example. So sad.

[NoIDidn't]

Then I guess I disagree with that conclusion.

 

I don't think that decision has much to do with religion in the vast majority of cases. Not all people making that decision even practice any kind of religion. They may be into that "natural" lifestyle craze. I think the organic and natural eco groups probably make the most noise about the vaccination issue far more than any religious fringe group does.

[JamesM]

Well, it seems that my post on Saturday was deleted. I will attempt to repost it again.

 

She published her information in an attempt to undermine vaccinations, which she is against because she is a Creationist. Therein is the connection.

 

The connection is a coincidence which my many links actually show. And I notice that many people (whose posts have also been deleted) have stated. Personally, I have had long discussions with individuals who were into the "natural health food" craze about the safety of vaccinations. I know that they were certainly not creationists and maybe even not Christians.

 

As for your link to this story, you have not provided it yet. For someone who is a stickler for links or sources, I am surprised. However, I am going to take the liberty of helping you.

 

Melanie Phillips has her own website.

 

Here is the link......

http://www.melaniephillips.com/

 

Now others can see what a raving lunatic she really is. Below is her biography from her website.

 

Biography

Melanie Phillips is a British journalist and author. She is best known for her controversial column about political and social issues which currently appears in the Daily Mail. Awarded the Orwell Prize for journalism in 1996, she is the author of All Must Have Prizes, an acclaimed study of Britain's educational and moral crisis, which provoked the fury of educationists and the delight and relief of parents. Her ideas have influenced politicians in both government and opposition, who follow her battles in the culture wars with fascination. Styled a conservative by her opponents, she prefers to think of herself as defending authentic liberal values against the attempt to destroy western culture from within.

 

Born in 1951, Melanie read English at St Anne's College, Oxford before training as a journalist on the Evening Echo, Hemel Hempstead. After a short period on New Society magazine, she joined the Guardian in 1977 and soon became its social services correspondent and social policy leader writer. After a stint as the paper's news editor, she started writing her column in 1987, taking it to the Observer and then the Sunday Times before starting to write for the Daily Mail in December 2001.

 

She began writing a series of penetrating commentaries on this website in October 2003, at a time when "blogging" was relatively unknown. Four years later, she accepted an invitation to move her blog to the Spectator website.

 

Her book Londonistan was published in the US and UK in 2006 and immediately became a best-seller. Updated paperback editions were published in 2007.

 

Among her earlier books is All Must Have Prizes, a devastating critique of Britain's education system. She is also the author of The Sex-Change Society: Feminised Britain and the Neutered Male, published by the Social Market Foundation, America's Social Revolution, published by Civitas, and The Ascent of Woman, a history of the ideas behind the female suffrage campaign, published by Little, Brown. She also wrote a play, Traitors, which was performed at the Drill Hall in London in 1985

 

It says nothing of her religious affiliation or creationists connection, but perhaps one of her articles will. I am guessing that the raving lunatic part is directed at her because she dares to think that the human race could have been created. Here is the link to four articles she has on her website that are about vaccinations. One is an article about the "smear job" being done to Andrew Wakefield.

 

http://www.melaniephillips.com/articles-new/index.php?s=vaccinations

 

 

Perhaps we can now have a better idea how autism and vaccinations is linked to the belief of God and Creationism. From what I have posted and will now respond again, it is clear that Christianity and creationism are not connected to the fear that autism is linked to vaccinations.

[JamesM]

Continuing on....

 

Terri Mauro has a degree in literature. Are you serious about posting what she has to say on this issue? According to the CDC there is no connection whatsoever between the MMR vaccine and autism. Yet Terri claims that nobody knows. Hmmm, who to believe....

 

If you will notice, I posted links to individuals who raised concerns about the autism/vaccination issue. The striking thing is that they are not all Christians or even religious. As you noted, some are medical professionals, parents, and more. Very few mention that they are concerned about vaccinations due to their belief in Christianity, and unless I am wrong, none mentioned it in connection to a belief in creationism.

 

I am in no way supporting anyone's views in this. I told you my personal background with vaccinations. As a Christian who tends towards creationism, all of my children are vaccinated with all shots. Our hesitation was erased with research. But we did hesitate because these concerns were mentioned to my wife by medical professionals...not Christians.

 

Forgive me for being underwhelmed. The last link is almost un-navigable. Newstarget is yet another paranoid anti-science site of special interest is the group of HPV articles. Why are they against the HPV vaccine, I wonder? Oh yeah, because it might make young women promiscuous. They also quote the Daily News (go figure) and assert that men in Britain have invented a perpetual-motion machine.

 

Again, these sites raised medical concerns. I agree. They are not where I would go for information, but remember, your premise was that this article written by "the raving lunatic" (who is a nice looking lady aged 51 years) has resulted in many parents ignorantly avoiding vaccinations. My rebuttal shows otherwise. This scare has been around long before this article. Wakefield's study was done in 1998 because the concern was out there before his study.

 

I am not sure why you bring up HPV unless you are heading a different direction. But sexual promiscuity concerns more than just Christian parents.

 

Oh, if anyone wants to check out the so maligned Daily Mail from the UK, here is THEIR website.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/dailymail/home.html?in_page_id=1766

 

I couldn't find any information on that website about the qualifications of its members. I saw one is an Phd and an RN. The others list no qualifications at all. One lists her efforts as a consumer advocate as a qualification of something, I am not sure what. Given one of the quotes I saw at the top, I am less than enthusiastic about any claims found on that site.

 

The point is...they are medical professionals, not simply Christian creationists. Again, I am not supporting anyone to whom I link.

 

According to their website, "All vaccinations are in violation of God's word." Given that, do you think that ANY information on that site is worth anything? Do you actually read those sites, or did you type in a search and post some links? That site is a political site that explains to religious wackos how they can keep their children in school without vaccinating them. Thank you for a link that proves my point for me.

 

You are referring to KNOW. Here again is the link for others to see for themselves. http://www.know-vaccines.org/controversy.html

Nice try, but they cover much more than religious exemptions. I knew what you would do as you are predictable. This site (as the link shows) covers all problems with vaccinations. Its purpose is to demand that government mandated vaccinations be stopped. Again, I am not in agreement.

 

You didn't read very closely. In just checking the "about us" links the religious nature of most of those sites was front and center.

 

Perhaps I missed it. Feel free to show me. I am confident that the links provided actually do not have a religious nature, but please link me to each site and the page that states this. I may certainly be wrong.

 

The point again is...religion is not the basis for the vaccination scares.

 

Just because wackos on the web right a bunch of articles about a "controversy" it does not follow that there is one.

 

I agree. You are preaching to the choir, Brother Moai.

 

I have a website for you: http://www.davidicke.com/index.php/

 

He claims that there are lizard-people running around, controlling the world. They are behind the Illuminati and Freemasons. Should I take what he says seriously? Why or why not? Given the links you posted, I am very curious about your answer.

 

Are you derailing your own thread? Or is he a Christian creationist? I am familiar with him. I would not call him one.

 

No, he is a lawyer hoping to cash in on a huge class-action lawsuit. He hasn't filed one (yet) because he has no evidence, but that didn't stop him from writing what he did. I find the fact that it is "endorsed" by Ralph Nader rather telling. Again, just because there are fringe groups saying there is a problem doesn't mean there is one, and you are actually making my point for me. How many people who take what those websites say at face value will not immunize their children, and how many will get polio, measles, mumps, or countless other horrible diseases that are so easily preventable?

 

Too many people believe these sites. But no, I am rebutting your point. Your point is that this scare is caused by Christians or religious people. Once again, I am showing that this is not the case. Nader is not a creationist, and I doubt Kennedy is. Kennedy is not stupid enough to write a letter unless he thinks he CAN make money. I doubt he would do that if it were only religious people behind the whole phenomenon.

 

THe last book on that page, one written by a physician, debunks al the claims of the others on THE FIRST PAGE LISTED.

 

Look at the umber of crack[pot books written about something THAT IS NOT HAPPENING all based on the findings of one quack, quoted by one idiot in a tabloid.

 

Yep, I agree. Notice the variety of people who authored these books. Actually, there have been reports without studies out many years before Wakefield. If you take the time to read some of the links I posted, you will find this. And his being quoted by "one idiot" (man, you DO like to label people...how sad) had nothing to do with all of these books.

 

People who take things at face value and do not think critically are certainly susceptible to all sorts of fringe claims, but in this case it is tragic because the health of children--who can't decide for themselves--is at risk.

 

Again, I agree. This is a problem of a lack of education. There is no connection to a lack of education about evolution however. My own experience has shown me that. And looking at the authors of these books reaffirms that.

 

One child in 10,000 having an adverse reaction to a vaccine (which is less life-threatening or painful than measles, say) is better that 50% of children dying of the measles.

 

Do you know of anyone who has had smallpox? I rest my case.

 

The point being is (and I do not know if you are a parent) is that if you have the one child who gets autism and it IS linked to the vaccination, the parent will never forgive him or herself. As a parent, I cannot make rash decisions no matter how obvious they seem to someone else. That is why we need education about vaccinations. If we include only Christian creationists, then this will never change. Parents never think about vaccinations until their first child is born. THEN they become educated. We need to have the literature available to refute these "crackpot" claims. On the other hand, we cannot ignore such claims if there is some truth to them simply because the government says everything is okay.

 

It is too personal....children's lives are at stake.

 

Of course parents should be concerned about their children, but there is a enough REAL danger to be concerned about other than the claims of fringe whack jobs with no evidence at all.

 

I agree.

 

My post showed (and your links support) the fact that people making scientific choices based on religious reasons is wrong and dangerous. And children die. CHILDREN.

 

No, my links and post show that people making life and death decisions do so without the proper education. I do agree that people make many such decisions ignorantly, but while some may do so for religious reasons, the number is very, very few. However, many, many people make these same decisions based on poor information.

 

Incidentally, I noticed that in LA, a teenager died after the insurance agency refused to pay for a liver transplant.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-transplant22dec22,1,3777077.story

 

How many more children must die before we get to the real problems...instead of blaming religion for things that cannot be blamed only on religion?

[JamesM]

So, to sum it all up for anyone who does not want to read all of the above, the evidence shows that the article was not written by "a raving lunatic" nor are the religious people instigating fears about vaccinations.

[shadowofman]

I think the point is that faith clouds reason. By definition really. Moai's example is a great one, dealing with a life and death issue, but you could make the same case for more mundane aspects of reason and rationality and how faith, being that it requires no evidence, will increase the chances that you are dead wrong about any question in particular.

If you are talking about a harmful situation, religious dogma might literally kill you. If you are talking about some other, maybe lesser moral dilemma, like homosexuality, you are really just demonizing in the name of your faith. A belief with no foundation in reality. Maybe you are a homosexual, but because of your Christian dogma, you believe that homosexuality is a sin. This belief hinges upon your faith in "the word" (or the word as interpretted by your elders), and could cause you to ignore, supress, and mentally torture yourself for the rest of your life (that is until you have a breakdown like Ted Haggard).

Having faith in anything is the opposite of virtuous and in some extreme cases, it could actually be concidered insane.

[JamesM]

I think the point is that faith clouds reason. By definition really. Moai's example is a great one, dealing with a life and death issue,

 

 

Having faith in anything is the opposite of virtuous and in some extreme cases, it could actually be concidered insane.

 

Actually, unless you posted this on the wrong thread, it is quite clear what Moai's premise is. It is that this "raving lunatic" is only being listened to about autism and vaccinations because she is a creationist. And then seems to think that only Christians/creationists or religious folks in general have issue with vaccinations. This is not a good example from what my research shows and from what my experience shows. Nor do others here seem to agree with you that it is a good example.

 

I think from my post it is clear that this is not the case. As Christian and one who leans creationist...I am not the only one of "us" who feels that vaccinations are a blessing and gift from God. Vaccinations prevent illness...this is good. Almost everyone I know who is a Christian/creationist has zero problems with vaccinations. It is not even an issue we need to discuss. I have only really ran into a discussion when I have encountered paranoid medical professionals or natural health enthusiasts.

 

If you are talking about a harmful situation, religious dogma might literally kill you.

 

The fact is...if you are talking abut any harmful situation, being UNEDUCATED can kill you.

 

Having faith in anything is the opposite of virtuous and in some extreme cases, it could actually be concidered insane.

 

Interesting take. However, by your statement, you have included 99.9% of the population. Everyone (almost) has faith in something. In fact, you have faith in the scientists that give you the vaccinations. You have faith that they have done their research properly. You have faith that they have read the results correctly. And you have faith in the doctors/nurses that administer the shots. You have faith that the proper amount is put into the needle. You have faith that the needle is sterile. And on and on it goes. Faith is a good thing...it keeps us sane.

 

But yes, in extreme cases, that faith can kill you if they do not do their job as you trust they will. I think this is where the controversy stems...people do not have faith that the scientists are doing their jobs when it comes to vaccinations. But that mistrust is not just exclusive to religious folks or creationists. In fact, I am guessing that the percentage of religious folks versus agnostic or atheistic folks is about the same. It does however include the uneducated and paranoid. And above all, it includes the parents who want to do the right thing for their children.

 

So, while autism may be linked to vaccinations, it is an issue that encompasses many diverse cultures, religions, and countries. It is not an issue of the religious, but it is an issue of all parents.

Edited December 24, 2007 by JamesM

[Moai]

So, to sum it all up for anyone who does not want to read all of the above, the evidence shows that the article was not written by "a raving lunatic" nor are the religious people instigating fears about vaccinations.

 

For brevity's sake, I will address a couple of your comments here, and not go through your entire posts. I appreciate the effort you put into them, but if I were to respond in kind it would be unreadable.

 

I came across Ms. Phillips autism columns in an essay that referred to it. I have tried to find the column itself, but I do not subscribe to the Daily Mail. The essay that I read, which refers to hers was written by Johann Hari, a columnist for The Independent. His stuff is available online for free.

 

One can be an award-winning journalist AND be a crazy whack job.

 

I do not think that her crusade against vaccinations and her Creationism is a "coincidence", any more than priests lying about condoms causing AIDS is coincidental with their position on birth control.

 

And while there are those who are concerned about vaccines who aren't religious, they certainly aren't rational.

 

Why wouldn't I find the KNOW link to religion interesting, or compelling? If I read a story on "Socialist Worker" I take their position with a grain of salt, considering their Marxism. It is all part of thinking critically.

 

My point wasn't that "Religion is responsible for vaccination scares". My point was that a woman who has issues with science in general saw an opportunity to undermine HER enemy, and now children will die of the measles for no good reason.

 

Religion is not responsible for homeopathy, magnet therapy, or dowsing--irrationality is.

 

Yes, there are more people concerned with promiscuity than just the religious, but the claim that the HPV vaccine will make girls more likely to sleep around not only has no evidence, it is a stupid reason to not have the vaccine. Preventing a painful death is less important than some moral position on sexuality? Puhleeeze.

 

The majority of comments in the negative about HPV are from the religious.

 

David Icke is a nut, and claims all sorts of conspiracies are happening. I linked to him as an example of someone to support that just because there is an assertion of a controversy or conspiracy it does not follow that there is one.

 

I don't know if Nader is a Creationist or not, but he definitely has an agenda and I disagree with his politics so vehemently you could say I probably hate him. Noam Chomsky, too.

 

I completely agree with your last statement about children dying and real problems. I am not the one derailing true efforts to alleviate suffering, but Ms. Phillips is, IMO.

 

As far as labeling goes, I just call a spade a spade.

[Moai]

Interesting take. However, by your statement, you have included 99.9% of the population. Everyone (almost) has faith in something. In fact, you have faith in the scientists that give you the vaccinations. You have faith that they have done their research properly. You have faith that they have read the results correctly. And you have faith in the doctors/nurses that administer the shots. You have faith that the proper amount is put into the needle. You have faith that the needle is sterile. And on and on it goes. Faith is a good thing...it keeps us sane.

 

You are equivocating. The kind of faith one has in science or in professionals doing there job is quite different from having faith in a supreme being.

 

I have faith in science because it has been shown to work, and because I know HOW it works. It involves peer review, research, and experimentation. Does it change, and has it been wrong (and probably will be again)? Of course. Humans are the ones doing science. But it is by far the best way of knowing we have come up with.

 

When I go and get a shot or a check-up, I have faith in the doctors and RNs because I know that they are certified, and that there are associations that provide oversight over their profession and practices. That is why those organizations exist, so I do not have to just "trust" that this guy is a doctor and is qualified. Doctors make mistakes, of course. But that doesn't mean that the "faith" I have in them is misplaced, or not based on reasonable evidence.

 

To have faith in a supreme being is quite different. There is no objective evidence for one, those who believe in one have an exhaustive, contradictory list as to what said being wants or how he/she/it behaves.

 

These two types of "faith" are often at odds, and when one sides with the miraculous kind over the rational kind, sickness and death often result.

[JamesM]

Moai, you and I agree on the vaccination issue more than you realize. Having researched it quite thoroughly back in 1996, I am aware of the controversies that have surrounded them. And having a wife in the medical field, I again am made aware of what can go wrong and how often. My only point as you have realized and conceded is that this irrational concern has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with ignorance and fear.

 

I do not think that her crusade against vaccinations and her Creationism is a "coincidence", any more than priests lying about condoms causing AIDS is coincidental with their position on birth control.

 

No, I disagree. You have made a jump in conclusions here. While I do not agree with the RC Church's stand, priests and condoms associated with AIDS and birth control have to do with an official stance. Ms Phillips is one person who according to you (since I have not seen the article in question) is connecting HER personal position to the fear of vaccinations. Her position regarding vaccinations is nowhere any official position of Christians or creationists. Here in lies the difference. A priest by definition of his office speaks for his Church. Ms Phillips speaks for herself and her paper. She does not speak for other Christians or creationists. As a Christian, you have read my position...it is for vaccinations as is your position. While we may disagree in other areas, this one we are in complete agreement.

 

One can be an award-winning journalist AND be a crazy whack job.

 

Agreed. I do not support her position as told to me by you.

 

The majority of comments in the negative about HPV are from the religious.

 

the claim that the HPV vaccine will make girls more likely to sleep around not only has no evidence, it is a stupid reason to not have the vaccine. Preventing a painful death is less important than some moral position on sexuality? Puhleeeze.

 

Since this vaccination will not affect our family, I doubt I will do much research into it, but in my quick search of the web, I see that it again is mixed as to who is against it. You are right in one sense....many religious folks are against it because it assumes that preteens need it. On the other hand, we have a group who is against it because they feel that the safety has not been proven for young girls yet. Again, beyond that I cannot comment.

 

Your comment seems to imply (as does this thread on vaccinations) that religious folks as a whole will put their convictions ahead of the safety of their children. I have never met one who did that. While some have had concerns about issues that affect their children, I have seen the exact opposite.

 

As some info to consider, I will again link you to the NVIC website. While you may think the fact that they are against vaccinations is a reason to avoid them, many of us would use this as a way to check out the possible dangers that our children could face if vaccinated. Further research at more reputable sites would either confirm of deny such findings here.

http://www.nvic.org/PressReleases/pr62706gardasil.htm

 

just because there is an assertion of a controversy or conspiracy it does not follow that there is one.

 

I agree. Remember the movie "Conspiracy?" Yet often there is an element of truth. And as parents, it is our mandate and duty that we be certain that our children's safety is foremost in our decisions. This is a command of God to all parents.

 

I don't know if Nader is a Creationist or not, but he definitely has an agenda and I disagree with his politics so vehemently you could say I probably hate him. Noam Chomsky, too.

 

I cannot believe how many times we have agreed on this issue and thread. This may be a record.