Instead of the estimated 540 children dead since April of this year from the H1N1 virus. Forget the 3900 overall dead, the 98,000 hopsitalized, the 22 million ill. Frak that. What we want is to keep on hammering anything vaccine related, because perspective-r-us. After all, we're the people who also deny the holocaust.
Color me silly, but it really irks me when people die needlessly and others minimize these deaths. We don't mean to be glib. Of course you don't. Not you of the sheoples and trolls fame. Never that.
Seriously, we've covered this territory before, but let's say it again. GBS cannot be transmitted from the flu vaccine. A person already had to have the virus, and the flu vaccine can reactive it. But it isn't giving it. It isn't causing it. (See http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/11/msnbc-reports-teen-boy-contracted-neurological-disorder-hours-after-h1n1-vaccine.html to understand part of my current irritation, and then Handley's latest attack on Orac-- the comments are the worst, really. We already know who and what Handley is; after all he suggested a female reporter must have been slipped a date rape drug and intellectually raped by Offit to write the piece). No one, no one, no one (Godsamighty these people wouldn't know the truth if God spoke it to them and smacked them in the forehead and told them to pull their heads out) says vaccines are without risk. The risk is small compared to the risk of the disease, but you get the vaccine aware of the risk, just like you swallow your NSAID aware that 14,000 people a year die from NSAIDS. And if you don't do these thigs with some awareness of risks, then you're almost as big a dumbass as the people who think adverse reactions to vaccines happen months after the fact.
Damnit. I'm tired of their crap. Tired of seeing good people hoodwinked and suckered into their pseudoscience and fearmongering. Tired of their ugliness, their pettiness, and tired of trying to remember that beneath the incredible crap they put out there they are people who hurt, who feel, who get up in the morning each day and do their best to get through it. It's a frakking shame they have to do it with falsehoods and nastiness.
Age of Autism doesn't care about vaccine safety. Doesn't care about proportionality, about making sure vulnerable populations are protected. They don't care about the 540 dead kids since April. They don't care about the 3900 DEAD people from this virus. Nope. They care about a young woman with a psychogenic condition. Not flu vaccine reaction. 10 days after. For frak's sake. 10 days. We've covered that, as well. Adverse effects occur much faster, within hours. But she's pretty and they can get traction; they can use this woman. How does it help them get to their truth about autism wherever it leads? It doesn't. Nothing they write about is about getting at the truth. Whale.to.
Am I being crystal clear here?
Age of Autism wants people to stop getting vaccinated. I don't know why. Maybe for the same reason they can deny the holocaust and make up other facts when reality doesn't suit them.
Good people of good conscience cannot wade through the moral wasteland of Age of Autism and its sister-arm whale.to and not walk away morally outraged. They cannot. They cannot stand with Age of Autism and support what they are doing. They cannot high-five those individuals. They cannot. They cannot stand in the midst of that and pretend that there are any good intentions there. There are not.
Perhaps these people are lovely in the real world. If they are, then it is their internet selves that are their true reflection. Perhaps they are Dorian Grays; I'll concede that. It makes the nastiness all the worse. It makes their sincere, intense desire to see vaccination stopped and people sick, and some of them die, all the more reprehensible.
You cannot read their site, cannot read whale.to, which they particpate in, and walk away thinking these people are in possession of any truth.
Make no mistake, Age of Autism is a moral wasteland. The people behind it, the majority of its regular commenters, are not about vaccine efficacy, about making things better for families impacted by autism. It is an ugly sharkfest there and I will not mince words about this. If you stand in the midst of that, if you participate in the dismantling of one of the most important preventatives we have against disease all in the misguided and very inaccurate belief that autism is caused by vaccines, if you reward, support, high-five, engage in the nastiness and the lies they spew forth, then you will have the deaths on your conscience.
There is a time to stand and say this is wrong. There is a time to look around at the company you keep, the beliefs you have, and critically examine both. Failure to stand against so much falsehood, so much hate, so much capacity to do harm is not acceptible. To participate in it, to be in the midst of that, is to be a part of that moral wasteland. To fail to stand against it is to take your place in the moral wasteland. It is a decision to choose anger over accuracy, to choose hate over hope, to choose ugliness over compassion.
Craig writes at AoA (http://www.ageofautism.com/2009/11/are-we-becoming-a-majority.html#comments):
"Some deadly and communicable disease will happen. The vaccine defenders will blame people who are questioning vaccines. They won't wonder why the disease is affecting those that are vaccinated too."
This assertion that vaccine defenders (nice one, misses the point somewhat but makes your assertions calmer in comparison) won't wonder why diseases affect the vaccinated shows an incredibly poor understanding of herd immunity. You've got to get off of the woo and outright inaccurate information. Of course, when AoAers won't read mainstream scientific explanations for how vaccines work, how can they understand that getting vaccinated is not a guarantee that one will have full immunity. This is something that has been explained ad nauseum to the "concerned parents" over at Huff to no avail. Science-Based Medicine has an article on herd immunity: http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=516. When you use AoA's inaccurate talking points, it hurts your arguments. Badly.
And we've been over informed consent here. Sigh. Call me a vaccine defender if you like, but you miss the point. If we were talking about parents like Craig who had children who had near immediate adverse reactions resulting in hospital stays and more than reasonable likelihood that there was in fact an adverse reaction, more attention might be paid, more credence given. However, these thousands of parents that AoA and the like are so certain got autism from vaccines didn't have adverse reactions. They are simply connecting dots based on the things they've heard. And the science that can find fifteen (corrected number) cases of intussusception in infants receiving the original rotavirus vaccine and result in the vaccine being pulled from the market could surely find the 300,000 juveniles with autism if it were the vaccines.
So very disappointing.