11/16/2009

Scientifically Incorrect: Maher Explains His Woo Stance

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/vaccination-a-conversatio_b_358578.html


Bill Maher wasn't deep enough in the hole he has dug himself, so he decided to go deeper.

Insecticide in vaccines? Check.

Formaldehyde in vaccines? Check.

Vaccines: "Injecting something into my bloodstream?" Check.

Thinking "vaccines containing many different dicey substances shot directly into the bloodstream"  is accurate? Double check.

Bringing in antibiotics in his defense of bullshit on vaccines? Check.

Bringing in the whale.to loonies? Blaylock (127 hits/posts on whale.to), Fisher (219 on whale.to), Dr. Jay Gordon (27 on whale.to). Triple frakking check.

Bill Maher's own naturopath? Check.

How much more woo and anti-science can you get?

Oh, well, hell, let's just quote his ending!

"Ms. Fisher said "If we want to create a society that is dependent on shots for immunity -- the same way we are getting dependent on prescription drugs, antibiotics, and surgery -- this is the path we should keep going down."
          I don't think its "anti-science" to pause and consider that point of view."


So damn dumb. See my recent blog on Fisher for more on why she has zero credibility.

Update:
And for proof that there are folks out there with similar thinking: http://goodgrieflinus.blogspot.com/2009/11/maher-snubs-stermer.html. :-) I found this while looking for exactly where Fisher said the asinine quote above about shots for immunity. Seriously? Dependent on vaccines for immunity instead of suffering through and possibly suffering complications or dying from the disease. It should be a complete frakking no-brainer. Should be. Really, really should be. If you're not a complete dumbass.

So, I don't know where she said this, other than directly to Maher, because a google search of the quote only brings up Maher's piece both at Huff and his myspace page, the above blog, a forum of folks talking about it, a page in arab, and Countering.

So, I can't proove Fisher actually said something that stupid. I'll take Maher's word for it. And since he's in agreement with that bit of asinine fluff, well, much as I've had an appreciation for Maher in the past, while often thinking him a condescending pompous ass, he's been a funny condescending pompous ass. Too bad he wasn't trying for that here.

"If we want to create a society that is dependent on shots for immunity" -- touched on this above: avoid illness, complications and death? Hmmm.

"-- the same way we are getting dependent on prescription drugs, antibiotics, and surgery -- this is the path we should keep going down."  --Antibiotics to cure bacterial infections, prevent death. Hmm.

Prescription medications to make managable the illnesses and diseases that otherwise would kill us. Hmmm.

Surgery? Being dependent on it is a bad thing? So, my brother with the ruptured colon should have avoided surgery? When my fibula was sticking out through my skin, I, too, should have avoided surgery. The gall bladder removal? The hysterectomy? The colonoscopy that found and removed a precancerous polyp? The hysterectomy? All to be avoided because dependence on it is bad? And my brother with the brain tumor should also avoid surgery? Don't want to be dependent on life-saving and life-improving surgeries. **hysterectomy was totally worth two mentions!**

This one sentence is so beyond the pale with the frakking stupid, it is blinding.

4 comments:

goodgrieflinus said...

Thanks for pointing out the typo, KWombles. Corrected now.

It is good to know that there are some around who reject the anti-science when we see it - good blog.

AutismNewsBeat said...

Maher is "teaching the controversy", a tactic taken straight from the creationists' playbook.

Liz Ditz said...

Roundup of bloggers critical of Maher's article, including this post.

AutismNewsBeat -- good point on "teaching the controversy".

Barbara Loe Fisher makes me incoherent. Thanks for stepping up.

Corina Becker said...

I'm trying to figure out HOW the anti-vaccinists haven't figured out that vaccines AREN'T injected into the bloodstream.

I suppose part of it is that they haven't had a vaccine in so long that they've forgotten the pain that's in the MUSCLE from the injection, or the fact that the nurses/doctors who's giving the vaccine isn't looking for a vein to inject the vaccine.

Like, I've had my blood tested. I get it tested regularly to check my iron levels. The nurses to the whole tie the rubber band around the arm, tells me to make a fist and pokes around the small of my elbow for a vein.

That doesn't happen when you get a vaccine. They clean the arm of the arm and stick the needle in. As far as I can tell, they must think since you bleed, it must have been injected into the bloodstream.

Dunno, my musing on that, anyways.