Slashdot Mirror


Low Vaccination Rates At Silicon Valley Daycare Facilities

Vaccination rates across the U.S. don't neatly correlate with religiosity or wealth; Wired reports that one conspicuous pocket of low vaccination rates, according to California's state database of daycare records, is a place where you might not expect it: Silicon Valley — specifically, the daycare centers at some large tech companies. A WIRED investigation shows that some children attending day care facilities affiliated with prominent Silicon Valley companies have not been completely vaccinated against preventable infectious diseases. At least, that’s according to a giant database from the California Department of Public Health, which tracks the vaccination rates at day care facilities and preschools in the state. We selected more than 20 large technology and health companies in the Bay Area and researched their day care offerings. Of 12 day care facilities affiliated with tech companies, six—that’s half—have below-average vaccination rates, according to the state’s data. ... And those six have a level of measles vaccination that does not provide the “herd immunity” critical to the spread of the disease. Now, this data has limitations—most critically, it might not be current. But it also suggests an incursion of anti-science, anti-vaccine thinking in one of the smartest regions on Earth.

47 of 580 comments (clear)

  1. Not anti-science, anti-authority by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not surprised by this. There's a particularly rabid strain of libertarianism that seems to hold anything related to authority in contempt, even when it's bound on sound science.

    Since "the man" wants them to be vaccinated, libertarians automatically distrust vaccines.

    1. Re:Not anti-science, anti-authority by sg_oneill · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm actually astounded by how often computer guys can be so bad at the science they claim to be upholders of. In no other industry have I come across so many guys with actual degrees who are convinced climate change is some sort of vast left wing conspiracy, that vaccines are some sort of evil big-pharma plot, and so on.

      I mean fine, believe what you want, but don't call yourself an engineer when you hold so much science in contempt guys.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
  2. Its politics/emotions not intelligence level ... by drnb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Science denial is probably more strongly correlated with politics/emotions not intelligence level. The left and the right merely have different things they are in denial about, different things that touch on their politics and their emotions. And emotions lead people to stand by their beliefs regardless of rational thought and evidence, both on the left and the right.

  3. You don't say! by AdamThor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Of 12 day care facilities affiliated with tech companies, six—that’s half—have below-average vaccination rates, according to the state’s data."

    So half of the sample is below average? Hmmm!

    --
    -- "Oh. This guy again."
    1. Re:You don't say! by quenda · · Score: 3, Funny

      These are the same companies where as much as 40% of sick leave is taken on a Monday or Friday.

    2. Re:You don't say! by Arkh89 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Do not confuse average and median .

    3. Re:You don't say! by medv4380 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's just a bad summery of the data. It's that half fall below the 92% rate for herd immunity. Not that half are below average, and even then you'd be making the mistake of assuming that the Average is Normally distributed because that's the only time the Average is supposed to equal the Median other than by pure chance.

  4. All it will take is by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 4, Insightful

    for a bunch of these kids to get chickenpox or pertussis and everyones tune will change on vaccinations.

    I grew up with a grandmother who was a nurse during the 20's - 60's. She told me horror stories of what medicine was like before things like penicillin and vaccinations. People died from the simplest things, as they do still, but back then it was more dangerous. We take for granted that we live in a time with less disease than ever in human history.

    People need to wake up.

    --
    We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
  5. "In a place you might not expect it" -- srsly? by bfwebster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The anti-vaxx movement has been almost entirely among liberals and environmentalist, who view Big Pharma and anything "unnatural" with deep suspicion. I've been highly amused at recent efforts to cast it as a conservative cause; there are some anti-vaxxers among the hard right, but the vast majority are on the left.

    --
    Bruce F. Webster (brucefwebster.com)
    1. Re:"In a place you might not expect it" -- srsly? by Galaga88 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Silicon Valley is unexpectedly bad for vaccines - it's the perfect mix of anti-science liberals and anti-government libertarians. One group thinks vaccines are poison, the other thinks they're a conspiracy.

    2. Re:"In a place you might not expect it" -- srsly? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's a neat narrative but doesn't actually fit the data very well.

      Look at a map of vaccination rates. Georgia, Montana, and California have a similar rate of non-medical exemptions. Montana has a pretty high rate, too.

      I have a different theory. Tree huggers and libertarians are both deeply suspicious of vaccines, for myriad reasons. But those people can't account for the degree of the problem.

      I think the source of the problem has more to do with wealth. It's like breast feeding vs bottle feeding. When bottle feeding first came out, wealthy mothers jumped at the prospect of breastfeeding. Poorer mothers couldn't because it was too expensive. Fast forward several generations and the situation is reversed--many poorer mothers must bottle-feed in order to maintain employment, while wealthy mothers are likely to be able to afford the time to breastfeed. Of course, when you look at the hard scientific data, almost all the benefit from breastfeeding can be attributed to disparity in wealth and social status (including parenting culture). In fact, bootle-fed babies have _lower_ rates of food allergies, although that's probably also related to wealth and living environments (germ theory of immune system development and all that).

      If you stand back, wealthy people are always trying to distinguish themselves from the poor. I think that's what's happening with vaccinations. Rich families have taken up the cause of anti-vaxxers because _they_ can. They feel more divorced from the threat of old-school diseases than poor families simply because of their social station. And feeling that way affirms their view about how they're better (healthier, smarter, etc) than the rabble. All the half-hearted mumbo-jumbo you hear from most parents (who aren't that extreme in terms of their beliefs) is just a rationalization of behavior that their social culture engenders.

      Look at Whole Foods. _Most_ people who shop their aren't hard core environmentalists. They're rich people who _happen_ to passively support environmentalists causes simply because, in American culture, environmentalism is seen as anathema to the interests of the working poor. The rich tend to support environmentalist causes because it's a social signifier that says, "I'm not poor, and neither are all my friends who also support environmentalist causes".

      Of course, it's all much more subtle than the above. But I think that's it in a nut shell.

    3. Re:"In a place you might not expect it" -- srsly? by Rakarra · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A local Italian court rules? We're supposed to take that seriously?

      Tell me if any of these facts about the Italian case throw up red flags:
      *) The court listed the thoroughly discredited 1998 study from Andrew Wakefield as proof that there is a connection. Everyone around here knows how much bullshit went into that.
      *) The physician hired by the plaintiffs testified that there was a connection between Autism and MMR. That physician also sells an "autism cure," making money with snake oil.
      *) Andrew Wakefield tried to open a business on the back of the vaccine scare he instigated selling tests for "autistic enterocolitis" from a company that would specialize in "litigation-based health testing."

      So all the anti-vaxxers love to say that pharmaceutical companies have conflicts of interest, that it's in their interest for people to get sick so they can charge them for a cure. Why can't those conflict of interest charges ever apply to Wakefield (the only scientist who ever reported that there was a link between vaccines and autism) and the Italian doctor who also sought to profit from this?

  6. More liberal than libertarian by drnb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not surprised by this. There's a particularly rabid strain of libertarianism that seems to hold anything related to authority in contempt, even when it's bound on sound science. Since "the man" wants them to be vaccinated, libertarians automatically distrust vaccines.

    If you look at some of these enclaves of anti-vaxxers you will find that they are generally liberal enclaves, not libertarian enclaves.

    1. Re:More liberal than libertarian by Galaga88 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think it's more common among liberals (which makes me ashamed to call myself a liberal at times) but libertarians have a big problem with vaccines too for different reasons - and Silicon Valley is the kind of place to which libertarians are naturally drawn.

      Since it's California and it's filled with both populations, you just have a double-whammy. :\

    2. Re:More liberal than libertarian by the+gnat · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Most libertarians I know are reasonable libertarians. They want some service and regulations, they just want such to be minimal and to be served by the lowest and most local level of government. Just enough for basic safety, a level playing field, equal opportunity and most importantly accountability to locals.

      I'd argue that in California, the biggest contingent is what are sometimes called "liberaltarians" (I include myself in this group): secular, very libertarian on social issues, skeptical of interventionist foreign policy, broadly pro-capitalism, generally just want to mind their own business and make money and be left alone, but don't usually freak out over income taxes and mildly redistributionist policies and universal healthcare, and probably more environmentally conscious than average. Personally, I despise laws banning smoking in private business (e.g. bars), or requiring seat belt or bike helmet use, but on the other hand, I think California's law declaring the coastline public property was one of the wisest things the state ever did.

      Most of us are willing to put up with the large number of crazies in the Bay Area because overall, they're not nearly as powerful as you might expect (outside of Berkeley, at least), and they also like weed, gay marriage, and Mexican food, so at least we have that much in common.

    3. Re:More liberal than libertarian by david_thornley · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You do realize that "level playing field" and "equal opportunity" conflict with "minimal" government and "most local level", right? A lot of government programs are trying to help people in bad situations and give them opportunities, and very frequently local governments serve local prejudices.

      Nobody that I know wants more government than is necessary for government to carry out its proper functions. However, the people I know have very different ideas of proper government functions, and where the balance should be.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    4. Re:More liberal than libertarian by drnb · · Score: 4, Informative

      You do realize that "level playing field" and "equal opportunity" conflict with "minimal" government and "most local level", right?

      No, there is no such conflict. Minimal is in the sense to achieve these goals. What reasonable libertarians and liberals disagree on is what constitutes a level playing field. A libertarian may lean more towards equal opportunity, a liberal more to equal outcomes. The later requires far more gov't involvement. A libertarian would also be less nanny-state'ish. Vax for measles, compulsory, Vax an infant for a STD, optional.

      A lot of government programs are trying to help people in bad situations and give them opportunities, and very frequently local governments serve local prejudices.

      Not really. The far more common situations is that Washington DC applies a one size fits all solution to problems that contain a high degree of local circumstances. Besides dollars sent to DC to address the situation coming back missing a large chunk of change, the DC money is also ineffectively used since it doesn't consider the local circumstances. Local dollars under local control could be far more effective at addressing the problem.

    5. Re:More liberal than libertarian by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      libertarians have a big problem with vaccines

      Watch it with the broad brush there, sparky. In the words of Frederic Bastiat:

      "every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”

      I have no issue with vaccines. I have an issue with government usurping the power to decide what medical treatment I will undergo.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    6. Re:More liberal than libertarian by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So if there is an outbreak of measles, you think the state should be rendered impotent, that the lives of others who, for a number of reasons, do not have the luxury of choice over vaccinations (the very young and immuno-compromised people) should be sacrificed on your altar of absolute liberties?

      This is the problem. There is a certain level of libertarianism that is rationale, even positive and beneficial. And then there are is a kind of libertarianism that views society as a sort of dangerous fiction whose only purpose is to steal the absolute and unconstrained liberties that this kind of libertarian believes exists.

      The worst part is that if your type of Libertarian causes the death of a person who cannot be vaccinated for a number of medically legitimate reasons, it could never be reasonably proven in court, so that the basic judicial action that your kind of Libertarian always proclaims as the legitimate way for citizens who have been harmed could not be used.

      Or, to put things more simply, you should be allowed to be a carrier of harmful diseases, and anyone that objects can go get fucked, and if any of them are harmed via your decision, well, too fucking bad.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    7. Re:More liberal than libertarian by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not even sure if it needs to be about liberties. Just common sense. I can't *force* someone to get vaccinated, but I sure as hell can mock them as harmful teeth grinding retards and lobby my childrens school to exclude their virii infested spawn until their parents wake the fuck up.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    8. Re:More liberal than libertarian by monkeyzoo · · Score: 4, Funny

      You'd think Berkeley would have the best recycling in the world...

      They do, for needles. ;-)

      But regarding the OP, these "smartest regions on earth" are full of people who think they're smarter than everyone else and therefore that they know better. As John Stewart put, "This is Marin County! They're not rednecks. They're not ignorant. They practice a mindful stupidity."

      http://thedailyshow.cc.com/vid...

    9. Re:More liberal than libertarian by spooje · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So if there is an outbreak of measles, you think the state should be rendered impotent, that the lives of others who, for a number of reasons, do not have the luxury of choice over vaccinations (the very young and immuno-compromised people) should be sacrificed on your altar of absolute liberties?

      Nope. As a libertarian and a physician I have absolutely no problems with government quarantining people who are infected or may be infected. I have no problem with the government offering free vaccines for epidemic diseases (not STDs) for people who can't afford it, and it's one of the few areas I don't mind the government spending taxes to help foreign nations.

      I do have a problem with the government telling me what kind of medicine I have to take and by extension what kinds I have to give my kids. I get a vaccine for pretty much everything I can just because I can, but I will be the one to decide what I do and don't put into my body. From a moral and ethical stand point I have no problems with people opting out.

      In addition anything the government mandates runs the risk of abuse. Who chooses what immunizations make the cut? MMR? Smallpox? Chicken Pox? What about HPV? How much rigging the system will the pharmaceutical companies do to get the new canker sore vaccine included or include something that's not nearly as effective as they claim?

      Or, to put things more simply, you should be allowed to be a carrier of harmful diseases, and anyone that objects can go get fucked, and if any of them are harmed via your decision, well, too fucking bad.

      If by your actions you knowingly put others at risk you should be criminally and civilly liable. It's the same a people who know they have AIDS then go have bare back sex with others without telling them. Those people go to jail for attempted murder. You take your kid who you know has to Disney? I have no problem with arresting them for that. I also don't have a problem with them facing other consequences like if you don't vaccinate your kid he/she can't go to a public school.

      Your characterizations of Libertarians is way off base. You might want to try to speak with a few before you claim us all as heretics.

      --
      Tea and kung-fu. Life is good. Rising Phoenix
    10. Re:More liberal than libertarian by tehcyder · · Score: 3, Informative
      That's utter bollocks. Ignoring the dynamism and wonderfulness, you will never have an egalitarian society without government there to curb the excesses of powerful corporate interests. And unfettered laissez faire capitalism will result in even more powerful corporations than we have now.

      It is more honest for libertarians to admit they are only really interested in liberty, and don't actually care about equality or fraternity at all.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  7. how is this possibly news? by Gorshkov · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Of 12 day care facilities affiliated with tech companies, six—that’s half—have below-average vaccination rates, according to the state’s data.

    In other words, half the day care facilities were below average, and half were above. Isn't that kinda/sort the DEFINITION of average?

  8. Re:Ha! by grimmjeeper · · Score: 3, Funny

    I prefer to keep the gluttons away from my lunches as well. It's hard to deal with gluten intolerance when they're eating all of my food.

  9. Smart and stupid by X10 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apparently, a person can be very smart and very stupid at the same time.

    --
    no, I don't have a sig
  10. Re:anti-science??? by grimmjeeper · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Exactly. Anti-science brought on by a superiority complex, thinking that they are smarter than the scientists who have done huge amounts of research. I can see exactly why this type of thinking is predominate in an area like Silicon Valley. "Don't bother me with the research. I'm smart enough to know everything I need to know already."

  11. The reason is obvious by pem · · Score: 4, Funny

    The only women that will marry the loser geeks are batshit insane, and the geeks have made the perfectly valid mental calculation that they are more apt to pass on their genes if they have kids and don't vaccinate them than if they fail to have kids altogether.

  12. Or not - the data is not up-to-date by Namarrgon · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the Wired article:

    But Google has a simple explanation—a representative chalked it up to old data. “In 2013-2014, these two childcare facilities had immunization rates of 98 percent and 81 percent,” says a Google spokesperson, emphasizing that immunization is important to the company. “The reported numbers for the current year are lower simply because many parents have not yet provided updated immunization records. We’ve asked them all to do this, so we can update the figures.”

    So it looks low right now only because the parents who have not yet updated their records are being counted as "unvaccinated".

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  13. Re:Italian Court Rules MMR Vaccine Caused Autism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Italian Court Rules MMR Vaccine Caused Autism ...

    Was that the same court that convicted scientists for not predicting an earthquake? My great-grandfather left that place for a reason. Well, two, corruption and stupidity.

  14. Re:anti-science??? by the+gnat · · Score: 4, Informative

    you think it's _good_ to carry out mass-vaccination of a species

    Smallpox killed more people in the 20th century than every war combined, and is now completely eradicated because of mass vaccination (sometimes coerced). Remember: vaccines are unnatural, but so is a life expectancy of 80 years.

  15. Thimerosal != toxic mercury by Namarrgon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Thimerosal (thiomersal) is metabolised into ethylmercury, which is far less toxic than the methylmercury commonly found in e.g. tuna, and breaks down into safe inorganic mercury a lot quicker. This has been a source of confusion to laymen (and the Italian court), who have incorrectly compared the levels of ethylmercury from a vaccine dose against WHO health guidelines on methylmercury.

    Many studies have been done on the actual toxicity of thimerosal, and the results still come up as "safe for use" at the doses involved. No link with autism has been found, despite many years of looking.

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  16. Dogs but not people by geekd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The doggy day care I bring my mutt to won't take her unless she is up to date on all her shots.

    But a people day care does not have this same rule?

    That's just crazy.

  17. Re:Its politics/emotions not intelligence level .. by grimmjeeper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Science denial is probably more strongly correlated with politics/emotions not intelligence level. The left and the right merely have different things they are in denial about, different things that touch on their politics and their emotions. And emotions lead people to stand by their beliefs regardless of rational thought and evidence, both on the left and the right.

    I disagree. Having spent a lifetime around pig headed engineers (including myself), this is my reasoning:

    I think it has everything to do with intelligence, or, at least self perceived intelligence. The smarter someone thinks they are, the less likely they are to listen to others who they think are somehow less intelligent. They consider it a personal affront that someone else would tell them they're wrong about vaccines. They consider only the superiority of their own intellect when deciding that they will either accept or reject the established science. That kind of hubris is concentrated in certain professions, many of which are concentrated in Silicon Valley. Politics doesn't enter into it at all. This kind of self righteous thinking permeates the self declared intellectual elite in every party, including the independents who tend to be the most effete among them ("anyone who is dumb enough to let a party tell them how to think is inferior"). They have considered whatever they consider to be important in their own mind and have come to a conclusion that you dare not question.

  18. Re:Its politics/emotions not intelligence level .. by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Go into any whole-foods in Silicon Valley, and you'll see plenty of herbal medicines that do nothing but empty people's wallets. Silicon Valley isn't some kind of pro-science paradise.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  19. Even with the new outbreaks by asasdlfgnjl · · Score: 3, Informative

    Children have a greater chance of getting stuck by lightning than catching measles.

    Kinda makes sense that people who commonly do risk assessment would choose not to vaccinate.

    Especially when the majority of polio cases in the united states are caused by vaccinations than any other sources combined.

    PS:Iâ(TM)ve had both vaccinations.

  20. Spectre of Autism... by DigitalAce9 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It seems that people have forgotten the autism/thiomersal hysteria of a few years back -- just in time to deliver a generation of unvaccinated kiddos into our schools. Unfortunately, the "thiomersal-autism-link" was promoted loudly by people like the well-meaning, but misinformed Jenny McCarthy as panicked parents sought answers for the "autism outbreak". Autsim is heavily over-represented in families that have engineers as family members. See this article from Scientific American (paywall, sorry): http://www.scientificamerican.... The referenced UK survey showed that families with engineers in them can have between 2.5 to 8.6 *times* the statistical occurrence of autism in their children. Even though the whole thiomersal-autism link has been debunked, in the intervening time a lot of people have sadly opted out of vaccinating their kids -- better "safe-than-sorry" seemed the prevailing wisdom -- until science can make a ruling on it, right? After all, when was the last time a kid came down with measles? ...This against the backdrop of seeing kids with a life-long devastating condition like autism -- nearly every family I know in Silicon Valley knows one or more families that are stricken with it. I personally know over half a dozen, including my own son. Unfortunately, the success of vaccinations seems to have been blunted everyone's memory of why we did it in the first place. As parents, all of us try to make the best decisions based on the most current studies/data available, but the tragedy is that current prevailing wisdom failed us on this one. --Ace

    1. Re:Spectre of Autism... by Yaztromo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The referenced UK survey showed that families with engineers in them can have between 2.5 to 8.6 *times* the statistical occurrence of autism in their children.

      Just in case anyone reading your message jumps to the wrong conclusion, I'll remind everyone that correlation != causation, even in this case.

      There is, however, growing evidence that microexons -- tiny gene fragments that aren't well understood -- that are linked to altered brain development in individuals with autism (paper).

      And (IIRC) there is a certain amount of correlation between problems with microexons and older fathers. Due to the cost and length of their education, engineers may not be having children until they are older (and perhaps more established in their careers), increasing the risk factor (it has been well established that older fathers are more likely to sire autistic children).

      I'm not accusing you of having much such an assumption. The correlation is interesting and needs further investigation, however it may just stems from age of fathers, rather than any special mental makeup of engineers.

      Yaz

  21. Re:Italian Court Rules MMR Vaccine Caused Autism by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Informative

    You are aware, I trust that the MMR-autism link was a fabrication of a con artist named Andrew Wakefield, who had his on MMR formulation that he wanted to put on the market, and so managed to get a fake research on the current MMR formulation put into the British Medical Journal. His fraud was completely exposed, his research demonstrated to be fake, and he was utterly discredited.

    Science isn't determined in courts, no matter what a bunch of evil lawyers says.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  22. Re:Its politics/emotions not intelligence level .. by dnavid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Science denial is probably more strongly correlated with politics/emotions not intelligence level. The left and the right merely have different things they are in denial about, different things that touch on their politics and their emotions. And emotions lead people to stand by their beliefs regardless of rational thought and evidence, both on the left and the right.

    In my experience, there's science denial, and then there's the more likely phenomenon occurring here which is the belief that one's personal interpretation of the evidence is vastly superior to anyone else's. If an anti-vax article sounds reasonable to them, its far more likely to their thinking that everyone else who considers it rubbish is wrong, because their own understanding is far superior.

    That's not exactly science denial, that's narcissism masquerading as science denial. And this general belief is, in my experience, extremely prevalent in the various technology industries, particularly IT.

  23. Re:Its politics/emotions not intelligence level .. by plover · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Being a self-perceived-intelligent pig-headed engineer myself, I think you're missing a critical component in that description. I'm right, until proven otherwise. Show me a trustworthy test, show me trustworthy data, show me trustworthy studies, show me proof from a respectable authority that I'm wrong and I will happily change my mind and apologize to you for wasting your time in having to convince me.

    One thing I've noticed about software engineers is that too many of them are lacking the critical statistics skills they need to function effectively. Perhaps it's because we tend to think in Boolean terms of true and false. Thus, "I have a 1:450,000,000 chance of winning the lottery" turns into "I have a chance of winning the lottery", which is a different wording that is remarkably easy to misinterpret as a "50:50" chance, even though both outcomes are statistically equal to false. They apply that same lack of understanding to any risk, including vaccination (a 1:3,000,000 chance of a serious adverse reaction becomes "a chance of a serious adverse reaction".)

    In the case of vaccines, I was initially a bit skeptical when it came to vaccinating my son. But it was extraordinarily easy to convince myself that they're safe and effective, and that the one study showing a purported link to autism was completely fraudulent. It took about an hour of research that anyone with a browser and half a wit could do. And because it was so easy to learn the truth, I now hold all anti-vaxxers in that extra-special contempt I reserve for the willfully ignorant. In this case I consider them parties to attempted murder. They threaten society as a whole, either because they're too stupid to do the research or too dull to change their minds.

    --
    John
  24. And SV is even less surprising by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As many people on Slashdot have probably noticed, there are more than a few geeks who are infected with Smartest Motherfucker in the Universe syndrome. Since they've gone through their lives generally being a good deal more intelligent than their peers, but with poor social skills, it can lead to an arrogance that they are smarter than basically anyone else, and that their knowledge is supreme not just in their field, but in all fields.

    Well that then is ripe for anti-scientific shit like anti-vaxxer crap. They believe they are in on a secret that normal people are just too stupid to see, that they are smarter and better than those sheep doctors and so on and so forth. It feeds their ego on their intellect to believe they know better than the medical establishment.

    So this surprises me not at all. SV has all the right elements to be a hotbed of this kind of shit.

  25. I call it by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Smartest Motherfucker in the Universe Syndrome. You see it all the time. One great famous geek example was Hans Reiser. He was so sure he was just smarter than everyone that he could get away with murder. No way those dumb cops could know more about criminal justice than him...

    Geeks seem to have it the most, probably a combination of above average intelligence, below average social skills, and a culture that makes intelligence the be-all, end-all of being "better". However you see it in other areas too. My sister is really bad. Don't you dare to tell her about something she thinks she knows about, she'll jump all over your shit for that. As such, she's a fairly regular fountain of bad ideas. Mom calls me at least once every couple months to ask about some harebrained shit my sister is up on that is bad for her/necessary for her.

  26. Have them talk to a polio survivor by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You want someone who will rake people over the coals about vaccination, get someone who had to see the horrible epidemic that was polio prior vaccination.

  27. That data only supports vaccination. by denzacar · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the links provided above:

    The risk of VAPP is not equal for all OPV doses in the vaccination series. The risk of VAPP is 7 to 21 times higher for the first dose than for any other dose in the OPV series. From 1980 through 1994, 303 million doses of OPV were distributed and 125 cases of VAPP were reported, for an overall risk of VAPP of one case per 2.4 million doses. Forty-nine paralytic cases were reported among immunocompetent recipients of OPV during this period. The overall risk to these recipients was one VAPP case per 6.2 million OPV doses. However, 40 (82%) of these 49 cases occurred following receipt of the first dose, making the risk of VAPP one case per 1.4 million first doses. The risk for all other doses was one per 27.2 million doses.
    ...
    The last case of VAPP acquired in the United States was reported in 1999.

    New cases per 100,000 population in 2011
    Rubeola (measles) 0.06

    That's 1 in 1.66 million for measles.
    1 in 2.4 million for Vaccine-Associated Paralytic Polio - overall risk.
    1 in 1.4 million for Vaccine-Associated Paralytic Polio - for first doses.
    1 in 27.2 million for Vaccine-Associated Paralytic Polio - for all other doses.

    Only thing is, that 1 in 1.66 million number for measles is for a single year, 2011.
    Even the "worst" numbers for polio vaccine are from data FOR 14 YEARS. 1980 - 1994.
    What are the numbers for that period for measles?

    New cases per 100,000 population in 1980
    Rubeola (measles) 5.96

    New cases per 100,000 population in 1990
    Rubeola (measles) 11.17

    That's somewhere between 1 in 16778.52 and 1 in 8952.55 during a similar time period, vs. 1 in 1400000 to 1 in 27200000.
    You can't really compare them for "new outbreaks" - AS THERE WERE NONE FOR POLIO SINCE 1999.

    As for lightning strikes data...
    That may be more relevant in the lottery discussion from the other day.
    As those are both cases closer to pure mathematical chance, while measles and vaccines are preventable risks.
    Though in reality those lightning strikes probably fail to match their average US numbers when comparing millions of people riding on subways and people climbing mountains.

    I.e. You can significantly increase your chances to get hit by lightning, but not really for catching polio from a vaccine or for winning a jackpot.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  28. Your rights versus my rights by DutchSter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So why is it that I can't send my child to preschool with a peanut butter sandwich, but yet I am expected to respect your decision to send your unvaccinated child to be with mine?

  29. Re:Italian Court Rules MMR Vaccine Caused Autism by clovis · · Score: 4, Informative

    US Media Blackout Of Italian Vaccine Ruling

    Poor dumbed down Americans will never know the truth.

    Rimini: 2012 – Italian Court Rules MMR Vaccine Caused Autism [zengardner.com]

    On September 23, 2014, an Italian court in Milan award compensation to a boy for vaccine-induced autism. (See the Italian document here.) A childhood vaccine against six childhood diseases caused the boy’s permanent autism and brain damage.

    While the Italian press has devoted considerable attention to this decision and its public health implications, the U.S. press has been silent.
    Italy’s National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program

    Well. yes we've already heard of this in the USA. It's old news.
    You may be surprised to learn that the media in the USA is not compelled to print every piece of bullshit that comes up. If you had been awake during the last few decades you would have known that news commentators that get caught telling stories that are later proven to be false are fired without a second chance.

    From 2013, here's an article from Forbes:
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/em...
    And another from 2013:
    http://www.skepticalraptor.com...

    It appears that the courts depended upon the testimony of a single doctor who has never published in a journal, but yet who claims to have a cure for autism.