10/20/2009

Trolls, Sheoples, and Arrogant Hostility

Kirby has a new post on Huff/Age of Autism on Landis's resignation from the IACC. In it he assumes an innocent position of surprise on many fronts, and professes regret that she's resigned. On the other hand, folks over at AoA are in the midst of a rather vindictive and hostile happy dance over the resignation. Anyone who disagrees with them, anyone, is fed to the sharks.

The hostility seems to grow exponentially, as well. I understand that it's not a lot of fun to have people disagree with you, but this hostility that these particular parents feel towards anyone who isn't with them totally is unreasonable. And it's directly fostered and encouraged by Age of Autism's managing editor.

She comments at Kirby's article at Huff, and in doing so explains readily the hit pieces on Offit: "As long as Alison Singer is on the IACC, Dr. Paul Offit is on the IACC. You can take it from there."

She then sees the need, and I have no idea why she does, to post this, in short seemingly making the claim that if you post on there and disagree with them, you're a troll:

"David, did you omit the keywords that open the troll floodgates on this post? Is this post too much about human beings and not enough about vaccinations for them? Did the dog eat their talking points? Perhaps it's a just a busy Warcraft day." 

Of course, the most loyal of AoAers who also Huff comment weighed in, showing off their various layers of hostility. So where are the folks who typically post on the Huff stuff by AoAers and the other autism articles? For example, why don't I post over there as often as I used to? First, I have a blog, and I know that if I write it here, it's going up. No censorship here.  Huff moderation is a pain in the ass. It's not as bad as AoA, where I know it's not going on. Second, well, I swear I have a law over there somewhere about arguing with people who have demonstrated a lack of connection to reality. 

Debate, reasoned argument, discussion can only occur where there is some level of consensus on the basic facts. Increasingly, there are fewer and fewer points of facts that can be agreed on. It's not nearly as polarized as AoAers would have people believe; there aren't extremists on the vaccines-are-better-than-dying side that don't aknowledge the reality of adverse effects from vaccination. For example, I absolutely acknowledge that adverse reactions occur in an unfortunate minority. I think continuous research on making vaccines as safe as possible and identifying individuals at risk are necessary things.

I do not believe in the validity of claims made of adverse reactions weeks and months after a vaccine. Everything I can find on vaccine adverse reactions suggests that adverse reactions happen either immediately or within several hours, not days, weeks, and months later. The whole GBS fearmongering, for example, my friend Thelma was able to find out, is distorted beyond reality. The flu vaccine does not and can not cause a viral infection. It may reactivate it.

AoAers claim to have a special hold on reality. They know what autism is and us sheoples and trolls have it all wrong. They know the danger and evil that vaccines are and any science we have to offer to counter their knowledge is met with arrogance and hostility, as well as accusations of being paid to argue against their outright ludicrous positions. And if we fail to give them the attention, that's just as bad.

What Katie Wright and AoA did with Landis's notes was in poor taste. They aren't interested, apparently, in ethical behavior or in anything other than controlling the whole show and in foisting their view of reality of everyone else. Sounds like a cult to me.

AoA isn't about finding the truth about autism, wherever that truth is. It isn't about support or adaptive coping. It's about right-fighting, bullying and intimidation. That's what they did to Landis and Landis capitulated. Who needs that kind of continuous villification? I don't have a problem with her notes, over all. of course the anti-vaccination AoAers did. And you don't get to say you are for safer vaccines and repeatedly put the anti-vaccination propoganda and misinformation on your site and have anyone take you seriously. You don't. People who are for safe vaccination say that first, confirm and verify their stories of adverse reactions, and get the science right. AoA does none of that. NONE.

Kirby's conciliatory piece is an attempt to soften up what they did. It's damage control. Maybe not for AoA itself, but for Kirby.

For comments by Stagliano, see:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/nih-agency-head-backs-vac_b_325221.html?show_comment_id=33042662#comment_33042662

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/nih-agency-head-backs-vac_b_325221.html?show_comment_id=33041475#comment_33041475

1 comment:

kathleen said...

"AoA isn't about finding the truth about autism, wherever that truth is"

Hit the nail on the head...the more I read over there-the more I wonder exactly what it is they are trying to do.