Trevor Butterworth
The good thing about the blog Respectful Insolence is that its surgeon scientist author, Orac (a nom-de plume) is relentless in his pursuit of quackery in the mainstream media; the bad thing is that it’s like reading Medieval Times.
Actress Jenny McCarthy is the latest media-blessed avatar of a pre-scientific mindset by virtue of writing a book about how she dealt with her son’s autism. As Orac writes:
“While contemplating the burning stupidity that is Jenny McCarthy over the weekend as she mindlessly parroted some of the worst misinformation of the antivaccine movement and assured an interviewer that she would , all the while solemnly proclaiming that, were she to have another child she “”wouldn’t vaccinate at all, never, ever,” all the while objecting to her being portrayed as “antivaccine,” I couldn’t help but notice perhaps an uptick in the use of a favorite antivax question in reference to vaccines:
“Why are we injecting TOXINS into our babies?“
Jenny McCarthy repeated that question (or variants thereof) multiple times in her interview, while piously proclaiming herself “antitoxin” not “antivaccine” and demanding that the CDC “get all the toxins” out of the vaccines. Her protestations otherwise, McCarthy had latched on to a favorite antivaccination trope that is trotted out with some regularity to try to scare parents…”
In a nutshell, anti-vaccination activists comb through the ingredients in vaccines, seek out the studies which found the adverse effect level, and then cite these studies as proof that the ingredient is a toxin, and, well, babies shouldn’t be injected with toxins. As Orac notes, this kind of scaremongering is both “deceptive” and “as dumb as it gets.”
Why? Because the dosage makes the poison. (Orac helpfully goes through the relevant ingredients to show how deceptive and dumb the claims made about their toxicity are).
The surge of interest in these ingredients comes as the anti-vaccination activists find themselves on the end of a losing battle with “their previous favorite bogeyman vaccine ingredient” thimerosol, which voluminous research has failed to connect to autism.
“Consequently, they’re branching out to other scary-sounding ingredients in vaccines and invoking vague (and, conveniently enough, almost impossible to demonstrate) “environmental toxins.” Heck, Jenny McCarthy is even ignorant enough to go on and on in interviews about how there are–gasp!–viruses in vaccines. My first thought was: How else would Dr. McCarthy suggest that we provoke the desired immunity?”
Somehow it has escaped Jenny McCarthy’s attention that the vaccination is responsible for eradicating such devastating diseases as smallpox – and for a massive reduction in cases and deaths in the U.S. from diphtheria; pertussis (whooping cough); tetanus; polio; measles; mumps; rubella (German measles); invasive Haemophilus influenza type b (Hib); acute hepatitis B; hepatitis A; varicella (chickenpox); Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumococcal); and smallpox.
As a recent study by the Centers for Disease Control noted,
“…for immunizations developed prior to 1980, there was a 92 percent reduction in vaccine-preventable illnesses and a 99 percent or greater decline in deaths due to vaccine-preventable diseases.”
And what is the basic building block of a vaccine? A weakened version of the virus or bacteria responsible for the infection which triggers an immune response without inducing the actual infection.
November 27, 2007 at 2:51 pm |
I think her point is valid-the polio vaccine was contaminated with sv40 virus, which is used to cause cancer in lab animals because it is the most cancer causing virus known-98 million people were infected and this virus is being found in rare cancers-I feel we have traded immunity of mild diseases and left ourselves open to deadly diseases-there is alot of data showing that immunity is a double-edged sword-this is a billion dollar business-why is autism non-existent among the Amish? Why are bees on organic farms not dying of viruses? It’s time to come clean about the chemical factors that allow human immunity to be weakened-why do women who receive flu shots for ten years have much higher rates of breast cancer? we have every right to question medical experimentation on ourselves and our children.
November 27, 2007 at 6:05 pm |
I applaud Jenny McCarthy for speaking out. She is doing so because she cares enough to want to help and protect other children who are going through what her child has suffered—or who might! Once upon a time I “believed” in vaccinations too….However, I’ve read far too much on the subject by now to maintain those beliefs.
Of the two children I have, the first was indeed vaccinated. The second, not. Oh—by the way–guess who gets sick more often?
November 28, 2007 at 2:43 pm |
By all means, Jeanruss, question medical experimentation – but try to do so from a perspective of understanding what the scientific research actually says – and that requires an understanding of statistics and basic biology. to cite the most obvious factual errors in your post, autism is very much existent within the Amish, vaccination is not a billion dollar industry (the problem is the opposite – it’s not economical to create vaccines, something that was all over the news during the first wave of scare stories about Avian flu). As for the breast cancer flu shot link, I just don’t know where you found that – I gave up after several google searches, so I couldn’t even find the source of your misinformation. Come back to me with solid, statistically rigorous research, and we’ll talk further.
Trevor Butterworth
November 28, 2007 at 3:15 pm |
Ms. Dickerson,
I hate to point out that if Ms. McCarthy is successful in persuading parents to forgo vaccination of their children, as you seem to hope she will be, the only thing she will ensure happening is that children will suffer devastating illness.
How can I say that so blithely? Because we have proof from when certain newspapers in Britain started hyping fears over the MMR vaccine, vaccination rates plummeted, and kids started to experience the effects of measles. Do you even know what they are? Well because some mom failed to vaccinate her kid, at least one child died.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/5081286.stm
So the question is what do you really mean when you say you’ve read a lot of stuff on the dangers of vaccination? Did you read it from a deep understanding of science, medicine and statistics or did you just accept a whole bunch of stuff as true without exercising a modicum of skepticism because it conveniently explained what was happening in your own family?
Trevor Butterworth
December 2, 2007 at 3:06 am |
Who’s fear mongoring now Trevor?
“I hate to point out that if Ms. McCarthy is successful in persuading parents to forgo vaccination of their children, as you seem to hope she will be, the only thing she will ensure happening is that children will suffer devastating illness”
Please review the CDC incident reports of Polio, and all other comunicable diseases from 1900 to present. What you will find is a direct coorelation between the reduction of these diseases and the introduction of indoor plumbing. ALL of these diseases experienced extreme reduction BEFORE the associated vaccines were introduced.
All diseases associated with childhood vaccines are not particularly virilant to an otherwise healthy child over the age of 6 months. Of course the vaccines are not introduced until the danger period has already passed.
As a highly informed physician I am raising three non-vaccinated children, none of which have ever experienced anything more than a stuffy nose. To me, the risk of bypassing the design of the immune system by injecting antigens ussually contacted in the upper respiratory tract or surface of the skin, into the blood stream is far greater than a couple itchy days off school as my children gain permanant immunity by dealing with the actual disease.
Also, I’m sure you know the immune system like the brain and musculoskeletal system needs to be exercised to remain healthy. There has been suposition in the literature that avoiding the acute immune responses to infectious organisms sets up a situation of chronic immune difieciencies leading to diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, and cancers.
DrD
December 2, 2007 at 5:20 am |
Ms/Mr jeanruss,
First off, we did not trade “immunity to mild diseases” for something else. The diseases the childhood vaccines protect against were not mild. Polio, pertussis, smallpox – these were diseases that killed and permanently handicapped thousands of children. Secondly, to your comment that autism is “non-existent” among the Amish: there is a lot of evidence supporting genetic contributions to autism. The Amish population has little genetic diversity, which has been documented because there are other genetic disorders which are much more common in the Amish than in the general population. The Amish population may not have those genetic variations which predispose persons to Autism. You should also consider that there are many substances other vaccines to which the Amish are not exposed or are exposed at lower levels. Processed food ingredients are only one example; any of a large number of substances could be a culprit. A final thing to consider is that a lower rate of Autism diagnosis may not reflect a lower rate of Autism, particularly in a community such as the Amish where children are not regularly seen by a physician and do not receive traditional education. Any of these could account for a lower rate of autism in the Amish, if such a lower rate does in fact exist.
December 2, 2007 at 5:05 pm |
Two months ago I thought nothing about getting a flu shot.
Now, having missed work for more than half the month of November and been charged thousands of dollars without finding out what’s wrong for something that started the day after a flu shot….I guess I wouldn’t be so quick to call Jenny McCarthy a flake.
December 3, 2007 at 10:40 am |
Perhaps commenter jeanruss and certainly Ms. McCarthy are not old enough to remember polio. I am. And to read commentary that would bring that back simply appalls me. I’m not old enough to remember smallpox, but simply reading “All the King’s Men” should be sufficient to instill dread of that deadly, disfiguring disease.
Early in my career, I spent some time as a clinical psychologist and worked with a few autistic children as part of a larger project with the local school district. I can’t claim expertise on the syndrome, but I do know one thing… the increase in diagnosed autism may well be due to nothing more sinister than evolving diagnostic criteria. From the pioneering work of Leo Kanner (1894 – 1981) to the authoritative historical work of Bernard Rimland (see “Infantile Autism”, 1964) to the present day, the diagnostic criteria that define autism have been evolving in such a way that with each new generation of clinical authority comes expanding diagnostic criteria. If present trends continue, I calculate that we’ll all be autistic by 2178.
As for the Amish, my reading of Amish doctrine suggests that medical treatment, including vaccines, is not prohibited. But in any case, in 2005 the AP reported at least 5 cases of polio in a Clarissa, Minnesota Amish community. Naturally, these tragic cases were entirely preventable.
However, it is my understanding that autism (and polio) can be prevented by burning 5 bat’s eyelashes in oil of hensbane at midnight on the winter solstice. I think I read the study that established that procedure as effective on the Puffington Host. If memory serves, it was authored by the eminent epidemiologist, climate authority, and medical researcher Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
December 3, 2007 at 1:20 pm |
The dosage makes the poison? Where are the studies showing the safe dose of thimerosal, aluminum, formaldehyde? Shouldn’t the dosage be studied for cumulative effects prior to the introduction of every new vaccine? Other countries don’t use this insane argument which really only benefits the makers of vaccines.
But Jenny McCarthy is the nut case? Where is any common sense?
December 3, 2007 at 1:36 pm |
Felicia,
“The dosage makes the poison” is the fundamental basis of toxicology. Do you eat carrots, or spinach, or lettuce? Do you realize you are ingesting naturally occurring chemicals which can cause cancer, but don’t because the dosage is so small? You can go to your sink right now and drink enough water to poison your liver and die – does that mean water is toxic?
[b]In order for a chemical to produce an effect, toxic or otherwise, it needs to interact with receptors or enzymes in a cell molecule. If the amount of the chemical is insufficient to bind itself to most or all of the receptors in a cell there is no effect.[/b]
Sometimes common sense is neither sensible nor common. It depends on what kind of knowledge base you reason from. STATS has a good primer on toxicology and risk.
http://www.stats.org/in_depth/evaluate_healthrisks/health_risks_page3.htm
And I hate to break it to you, but these principles govern how medicine and chemicals are regulated throughout the world.
May 15, 2008 at 5:09 pm |
“Please review the CDC incident reports of Polio, and all other comunicable diseases from 1900 to present. What you will find is a direct coorelation between the reduction of these diseases and the introduction of indoor plumbing. ALL of these diseases experienced extreme reduction BEFORE the associated vaccines were introduced.”
Er, I think we had plumbing in the fifties, Ed Norton.
“All diseases associated with childhood vaccines are not particularly virilant to an otherwise healthy child over the age of 6 months. Of course the vaccines are not introduced until the danger period has already passed.”
Setting aside the grotesque misinformation of this passage for a moment (and how many thousands of unnessary deaths and incapacitations does it take before you decide what sufficient virulence levels is required before they qualify as a health risk?), I would ask the author what he/she proposes to do when those children who harbor these diseases because they not immune to them then transmit them to the elderly and immuno-compromised, who are overly susceptible? Or when these children become adults and prematurely die because we decided to follow the advice of an uneducated crackpot who’s only discernable peersonal attribute of note is an attractive pair of surgically-enhanced mammary glands?
May 15, 2008 at 5:17 pm |
To Felicia:
“Where are the studies showing the safe dose of thimerosal, aluminum, formaldehyde?”
Every time a vaccine is tested for licensure. Multiple safety tests are performed on every one of them.
“Shouldn’t the dosage be studied for cumulative effects prior to the introduction of every new vaccine?”
Previous vaccinees are not excluded from clinical trials, and so are enrolled during the testing of a new one. So, to answer your question, studies ARE done to to study these effects.
“Other countries don’t use this insane argument which really only benefits the makers of vaccines.”
Other countries DO essentially use the same methodologies and testing the US does. In fact, the US generally has the best record for new drug and therapeutic in the world.
“But Jenny McCarthy is the nut case?”
Yes, she is.
“Where is any common sense?”
Not anywhere near where she’s sitting.
May 29, 2008 at 9:36 am |
I’m with you, she’s nuts,
June 26, 2008 at 4:12 am |
“Perhaps commenter jeanruss and certainly Ms. McCarthy are not old enough to remember polio. I am. And to read commentary that would bring that back simply appalls me. I’m not old enough to remember smallpox, but simply reading “All the King’s Men” should be sufficient to instill dread of that deadly, disfiguring disease.”
I should ask all the anti-vaccine people one question:
Which of the two fates I propose is the worst for a child? Being diagnosed with autism? Or being crippled or killed by a disease we know we can prevent?
Are they really that willing to gamble the health and life of their child in the face of imagined boogey men [how pray tell do they explain all the vaccinated children that were NOT diagnosed as "autistic"?]?
I’d also like to point out that my father was born deaf thanks to prenatal rubella. Please tell me that his mother not getting a vaccine [he was born in 1950] made his life better somehow ["Hey at least he's not autistic!"].
August 21, 2008 at 10:36 pm |
Jenny Mcarthy is not the spokes person for all parents of children with Autism…she thinks she is but she is not. I have 2 children on the spectrum and I do NOT believe it was caused by vaccines. I am a part of the “epidemic” yet I see hundreds of kids at my children’s schools and they are not autistic so why are the vaccines so selective?
October 7, 2008 at 8:30 pm |
The incidence among boys show that the disease is x-linked, and therefore genetic. Jenny needs to stop thinking that God has sent her on a mission.
October 7, 2008 at 8:36 pm |
The incidence of polio increased when we got indoor plumbing. Better sanitation is not the reason that diseases (especially airborne diseases) became scarce in countries where vaccines are used. Increased sanitation caused children to contract the disease after they were weaned and no longer getting antibodies directly from their mothers to help soften the blow of the disease while they developed an immunity to the invading virus. Weaned children had to fight it all on their own. Vaccines gave them the fighting chance that antibodies from their mothers used to give them while nursing.
October 20, 2008 at 10:48 pm |
This country is sadley overcome with Greed.It’s all about money. The ones that will suffer is our future children. I think we should vaccinate our children,BUT Why So Much! The amount of prescriptions and vaccines that are put out there has tripled over the last ten years. The chemicals in our food is outrageous also. It is very sad, that this once great country is plummeting all in the name of money. Money is the root of all evil. Good for Jenny for standing up for mother’s and children who don’t get a voice.
January 12, 2009 at 7:05 pm |
[...] public statements by Jenny McCarthy suggest that she doesn’t understand basic textbook science, and that Robert Kennedy Jr.’s investigation into the suppression of [...]
March 15, 2009 at 8:02 am |
I don’t care if Jenny is right or wrong, but it is incredible how scientists are dumb and arogant. They rely on statistics and methods which can’t find causes for countless diseases. History also shows that science was more times wrong than right. Computer programs are still so primitive that they can’t see patterns that even an ant can. This is the science that makes policies for our and our childrens health. Pathetic! So yes, I will rather trust Jenny and common sense than your stupid studies.