Slashdot Mirror
Bill Gates Says Anti-Vaccine Effort Kills Children
Hugh Pickens writes writes "CNN has an interesting interview with Bill Gates who says that unbelievable progress is being made in both inventing new vaccines and making sure they get out to all the children who need them. The improvements could cut the number of children who die every year from about 9 million to half that. But Gates has harsh words for those who engage in anti-vaccine efforts, especially Dr. Andrew Wakefield, who falsified data to 'prove' a fraudulent link between vaccines and autism. 'It's an absolute lie that has killed thousands of kids,' says Gates. 'Because the mothers who heard that lie, many of them didn't have their kids take either pertussis or measles vaccine, and their children are dead today.'"
Someone mod Bill +1 hero so he gets out of the troll area
These damaged children should be able to hold their parents criminally liable.
Countries with high child mortality rates have a greater problem with overpopulation. That is, if you know half your kids will die of pertussis, you will have more kids. It is paradoxical, but preventing child mortality actually decreases overpopulation.
Hey, go with what you know. Getting to use it to save lives, all the better.
So, how in the hell could better vaccines and better health care help lower the world population? They can't.
Yes they can, and they do. As parents become more confident that their children will survive, they have fewer of them, and invest more resources in each child. Vaccines, good healthcare, good nutrition, and good education, all reduce population growth.
It's one thing for people to choose not to have vaccines, that is a right and it would be an assault on their person to force it upon them. It's another thing entirely for groups with an agenda to promote misinformation and falsified, unethically conducted research in order to try to influence people into refusing vaccines. The lives of the children that die from diseases that can be prevented by vaccination should be on their consciences.
Sorry to interrupt your "Evil Bill's got a needle" rant but better health means people don't have ten kids in the hope that two will survive past the age of five. A "vaccine" substitute for the pill means you only need one shot a year rather than paying for pills once a month (assuming you can find a reliable source for the pills).
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
This is an historic day. It is the first time I ever agreed with Bill Gates about anything.
Anti-vacc parents will have anti-vacc children
Anti-vacc parents are more likely than me to have dead children. Who will sue them now?
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
... when slashdot used to be news for nerds and not just yet another flamewar breeding news website
I think a lot of people would be surprised to know that he's been on something of an anti-vaccination crusade, especially when it comes to flu shots. He basically is of the position that the whole campaign to inoculate people against H1N1 is in and of itself a conspiracy. He's adamant that you don't need vaccines if you eat right.
I believe you are overstating his position. If your immune system is weakened, get a flu shot. If you're a hypochondriac munchausens case, we'll, if it will shut you up, go ahead, get a shot. But I believe his point (speculating) is the vast majority of the healthy population doesn't need a flu vaccine. He certainly isn't boasting he's found the cause of autism.
snipped:
And it's precisely because I am a Darwinist that I fear the overuse of antibiotics, since that is what has allowed nasty killer bugs like MRSA to adapt so effectively that they are often resistant to any antibiotic we can throw at it. There are consequences to vaccines and antibiotics. Some people want to study that, and some, it seems, want to call off the debate.
I wouldn't stick Bill in with the pseudoscientists... he's a comedian and a talk show host... he wants a debate, not a paradigm shift.
The Admin and the Engineer
it should be simple to see if those kids ALSO have the 1% autism rate of the larger population. If they do, vaccines don't cause autism.
He was a liar and a scam artist. He fabricated a scientific study. Does it matter who pursued him?
I don't understand you people who want to beatify the guy. What the fuck is wrong with you?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
If your immune system is weakened, get a flu shot. If you're a hypochondriac munchausens case, we'll, if it will shut you up, go ahead, get a shot. But I believe his point (speculating) is the vast majority of the healthy population doesn't need a flu vaccine. He certainly isn't boasting he's found the cause of autism
Not a smart point. If you are healthy, you should get a vaccine, because you could carry it to your old granny or your 3-week-old infant niece, and kill them. The vast majority DOES need a vaccine, that's how we get "herd immunity."
Although the moon is smaller than the earth, it is farther away.
My god, what an appalling piece of writing. If one wanted to claim to state a position and then not make it, I don't know if they could waste so many words as Mr. Maher. Any little information on what he believes or not is made moot by his apparent lack of understanding of the differences between vaccines and antibiotics. There are clear reasons why we should lessen the use of antibiotics, but whether that is so or not, is completely irrelevant to the use of vaccines. So, I for one will put him down as a dangerous fruitcase. One who doesn't understand the limitations of his own knowledge.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
A serious question for you: from what you have written it appears that you have set a threshold for chance of injury for your child to be 1:10,000. If this is the case, then do you allow your children to be in cars? What about other risky behavior where the chance of injury is high (contact sports for example)? With respect to Guillain-Barre, this can also be caused by food poisoning from campylobacter jejuni. C. jejuni poisoning most commonly occurs with chicken (which carry the bug). Do you forbid your children from eating chicken?
It would seem that to be logically consistent you would need to curtail these activities. However, in the talk about risk to children from vaccination, there are other much more prevalent (and immediately deadly) risks to which parents seem to have no problem exposing their children. As someone who apparently has made the choice about acceptable risk for your children, how do you logically reconcile foregoing one (extremely debatable) "risk" versus allowing many other well documented and serious challenges to your children's life and limb?
Again, I am not attacking your beliefs (although I do not agree with them). I am wondering at the thought process behind your beliefs in the context of other risks that you willingly put your children through.
-- The Genesis project? What's that?
You've picked the weak one out of the mix instead of tuberculosis, polio, tetanus, rubella or even measles - why is that? Even if you rig the game that way chicken pox is worse than you think and the chance of catching it is obviously reduced as less people around you are susceptable (which renders your 20x risk statement above a bad guess or deliberately misleading).
Is it just the first example you can think of or have you been conned into rigging the game as well?
I'll take your word for it that the linked above example is over the top emotional bullshit because advertisers and PR people are paid to do such manipulative shit. You and I are not paid to do so and have no such excuse. We should not assume that all vaccination has problems because of an anecdote about advertising hype.