AoA: Not Anti-Vaccine? Bunk.

Yesterday, I wrote on Obradovic's latest mess of a piece over saving the vaccine program. There were very few comments at the time, but there are plenty of them now, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that most who bother to comment are vehemently and proudly anti-vaccine. The comments also prove that they may believe they have "educated" themselves on the situation while going on to spout garbage about not injecting vaccines directly into the bloodstream.

There are some things I didn't focus on yesterday that still stick sufficiently in my craw. Number inflation is one of them. One of their commentors noticed it as well. Obradovic says 40% of Americans aren't vaccinating. The commentor asks: "The e-mail said 4 percent of parents are selectively vaccinating or not vaccinating at all. Yet, the article says 40 percent. Is it 4 or 40%?" And overall, this commentor agrees with AoA.

CNN's Medical Managing Editor, Miriam Falco writes in March about a survey looking at parents and vaccinations. She notes: "11.5 percent refused at least one of the vaccines recommended for their child.  Those who refused at least one vaccine for child appeared more concerned about newer vaccines, particularly vaccines that prevent HPV (the FDA approved Gardasil in 2006 and Cervarix in 2009)." That doesn't sound like 40%.  In fact,  Falco writes, "Even though more than 90 percent of parents believe that vaccinations are a good way to protect their children from disease, more than half of the parents also believe vaccines cause serious side effects, a new survey has found." See, really doesn't sound like 40%. If you have to manufacture and manipulate your numbers, as Obradovic and Katie Wright, heck all of the AoAers, for that matter, then your argument isn't sound, is it?

Obradovic writes: "Further, 1 in 20 families now has an affected child, with neighbors, grandparents, relatives and friends being eye witnesses to the regression and recovery of these children."

How the heck does 1 in 110 kids equate to 1 in 20 families? Really? Was there some newfangled math going on that lets Obradovic invent stuff wholesale?

They've got commentors over there writing things like "it is not logical to imagine that vaccines will ever be discontinued until the time when the King of Kings and Lord of Lords establishes his kingdom rulership over mankind" so the government should "in the meantime, removing the heavy metals and many other toxic ingredients, eliminating multiple doses, spreading out the vaccines, and reducing the schedule" for those who will disobey the "correctness of God's Laws."

And others who write "I don't think it's possible to green a vaccine. They are filthy and toxic" and follow it with "Also, the theory of herd immunity is just that...a theory. Have we ever seen studies that prove this theory?"

You have to appreciate those who are willing to speak their truth unequivocally so that you know they are unreachable: "I am ANTI-vaccine. I wear my "label" proudly. I make no apologies for my stance either." In an earlier comment, this commentor wrote: "I know damn well what happened to my child and NO ONE and I mean NO ONE, will ever tell me I'm wrong. I am a witness and my son is a silent witness."

When you know what you know and believe you have all the facts and that no one can convince you otherwise, there is no reasoning with you. There is only a line drawn in the sand.


kathleen said...

I think that the saddest thing about those comments is that these people are raising children. Imagine being told over and over-"you would have been "normal" if you hadn't been damaged by vaccines" How destructive. Thankfully, AoA is now truthful in their stance. They are not about autism...not about working towards getting services or supports...they are about blaming vaccines and rage.C'mon, the woman who wrote this post considers her child as "less than"...what was it she said(in bump in the road).."That child is dead" because of autism. They don't care about getting their facts straight-hell, look at some of their most vocal supporters-they've changed their stories over and over-just so they can be right.Just so that they can have an excuse to be disappointed in their kids.
Rage is like fire-it is all consuming. In time they will burn themselves out.

Kristen said...

"She notes: "11.5 percent refused at least one of the vaccines recommended for their child."

I don't think it is right to assume that every parent who has refused a certain vaccine should be counted in AoA's numbers. There are reasons to refuse a certain vaccine, even for unequivocally pro-vax parent like myself.

I didn't get Gabriel the hepA vaccine because his doctor said it wasn't imperative right away, and he would have to have a separate appointment. We worried about how traumatic vaccines are for Gabe. But the Dr. did say we would need to get it for him when he is a little older.

So that probably includes me in their statistic (which bothers me).

KWombles said...


Don't worry, I'm not lumping people who choose to delay or not partake of a particular vaccine with the AoAers. There are legitimate reasons to pick and choose vaccinations and to opt to delay. Informed decisions are not the issue here. I have friends who have not vaccinated for legitimate reasons.

I think you're right, though, and AoA would assume that anyone who delays a vaccine is coming from their position that vaccines are filled with toxins.

Now, it does look like that if we only look at the HPV vaccine that a larger percentage of parents are opting out of the vaccine for their teenage daughters.

If AoA would do better at sourcing, that would help, but the media is just as bad with the "a recent study" without ever giving you enough information to track it down.

And if you do track it down, you find out the media got it wrong, like with the recent mirror neuron study that concluded it had refuted the mirror neuron theory of autism-- except that it doesn't--the study itself had a sample size of 10, all autistic males ranging from 19 to 40--agggh--it's frustrating when you have to meticulously wade through research to glean out, is this legit, are the conclusions warranted, is the sample size sufficient, is the sample representative-- we shouldn't be surprised that most people (who don't have graduate classes in statistics and research design) would have a hard time determining sound science. (had to digress here with the mirror neurons)

Kathryn said...

I tried to comment on that post, actually--the comments must be reviewed by the author or something before they're put up. I think mine said something like, "It makes me sad that you are stupid," which made me feel better but will probably never appear on the site.

Love your blog, by the way. I've been reading AoA's just to make sure I know what they're up to. They're hilarious/sad enough on your own but I also enjoy reading the commentary here.

KWombles said...


The comments are heavily moderated over there; occasionally they'll let one contrary to their views on so they can attack the poster, but then they never let the poster back on to rebut. Nice, huh?

Thanks, I appreciate knowing that. :-) Yeah, every now and then I laugh out loud over there; it's equal part groans, sadness, frustration, and sheer disbelief.

Sirenity said...

Wonderfully written, Kim! I agree that once someone has chosen to hold fast to a belief there is nothing you can do.
I find it interesting that anyone who dares to disagree has to provide hardcore scientific data and 100% accurate statistics or they are jumped on, yet AoA'ers can make it up as they go and when asked to explain their info they scream "I JUST KNOW!! I WAS THERE!!!'
You have to admit though, the AoA website is good for entertainment value-just too bad that some people will stumble in there unaware that they have entered Wackaloonyland.

Hugs and laughter

Kristen said...

I didn't mean to imply that you would put me in that group, just that AoA would be more than happy to count me.

Thank you for the reply.