5 ms·

To be fair, anti-vaxxers do have legitimate examples of vaccines being harmful [0]. Calling them all out as crazies just reduces the communication between sides

To be fair, anti-vaxxers do have legitimate examples of vaccines being harmful [0]. Calling them all out as crazies just reduces the communication between sides and doesn't help further vaccination promotion. [0] https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/07/why-pandemic-flu-shot-caused-narcolepsy https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/07/why-pandemic-flu-sho...

fao_ 9y ago
I don't know why you're being downvoted. The article you cite is a legitimate example of a case where vaccines have caused harm, you're not directly advocating that people stop having vaccinations.
- s73v3r_ 9y ago
  Because nobody who is anti-anti-vaxxer is claiming that vaccines have never caused harm.
jstarfish 9y ago
There is such a thing as overstating one's case though, especially when it comes to advocacy. To a rational mind, 200 years of practical evidence and the elimination of several deadly pathogens should outweigh a handful of legitimate but isolated counterexamples, but they argue against it anyway to the extent that they would risk their children contracting measles, tetanus, diptheria, mumps or rubella over an anecdotal correlation of autism...which even if causal, is difficult, time-consuming and expensive to treat, but not deadly. Yes, sometimes vaccine supplies get contaminated or have adverse effects, but so do batches of milk, spinach, peanut butter, and Chipotle burritos. It hardly justifies a concerted argument against any of these things. It is craziness, and no amount of logic, evidence, patience or negotiation ever convinces these people otherwise. We may as well dismiss them and move on.
- KhanMahGretsch 9y ago
  https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm >During years when the flu vaccine is not well matched to circulating influenza viruses, it is possible that no benefit from flu vaccination may be observed. I'm crazy for not allowing myself to be injected with several strains of influenza virus when the most-optimistic estimates of efficacy are around ~40%. Calling it a flu "vaccine" seems like a misnomer to me, given the rapidly-mutating nature of the virus. >We may as well dismiss them and move on. This is HN.
  - nkozyra 9y ago
    The influenza shots are really not the subject of antivax sentiment, nor are they pushed the way tdap etc are. And this latter group has much more efficacy, not even including herd immunity effects.
    - KhanMahGretsch 9y ago
      Indeed, I was referring to the flippant dismissal of the above poster’s comment, and I addressed the flu-shot’s status as an exception. Of course that won’t save you from the “I f’ing love science”-brigade down voting without rebuttal.
EpicEng 9y ago
To be fair, you can find an issue with all sorts of medicine in the past. That doesn't mean we stop taking medicine. Do we also stop using software because some app had a bug? Of course not. So no, I don't think defending anti-vaxxers with that example is being "fair". I realize you're not really defending their overall position, but even the line of thinking you proposed is deeply flawed.

fao_ 9y ago

I don't know why you're being downvoted. The article you cite is a legitimate example of a case where vaccines have caused harm, you're not directly advocating that people stop having vaccinations.

s73v3r_ 9y ago
Because nobody who is anti-anti-vaxxer is claiming that vaccines have never caused harm.

jstarfish 9y ago

There is such a thing as overstating one's case though, especially when it comes to advocacy. To a rational mind, 200 years of practical evidence and the elimination of several deadly pathogens should outweigh a handful of legitimate but isolated counterexamples, but they argue against it anyway to the extent that they would risk their children contracting measles, tetanus, diptheria, mumps or rubella over an anecdotal correlation of autism...which even if causal, is difficult, time-consuming and expensive to treat, but not deadly. Yes, sometimes vaccine supplies get contaminated or have adverse effects, but so do batches of milk, spinach, peanut butter, and Chipotle burritos. It hardly justifies a concerted argument against any of these things. It is craziness, and no amount of logic, evidence, patience or negotiation ever convinces these people otherwise. We may as well dismiss them and move on.

KhanMahGretsch 9y ago
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/qa/vaccineeffect.htm >During years when the flu vaccine is not well matched to circulating influenza viruses, it is possible that no benefit from flu vaccination may be observed. I'm crazy for not allowing myself to be injected with several strains of influenza virus when the most-optimistic estimates of efficacy are around ~40%. Calling it a flu "vaccine" seems like a misnomer to me, given the rapidly-mutating nature of the virus. >We may as well dismiss them and move on. This is HN.
- nkozyra 9y ago
  The influenza shots are really not the subject of antivax sentiment, nor are they pushed the way tdap etc are. And this latter group has much more efficacy, not even including herd immunity effects.
  - KhanMahGretsch 9y ago
    Indeed, I was referring to the flippant dismissal of the above poster’s comment, and I addressed the flu-shot’s status as an exception. Of course that won’t save you from the “I f’ing love science”-brigade down voting without rebuttal.

EpicEng 9y ago

To be fair, you can find an issue with all sorts of medicine in the past. That doesn't mean we stop taking medicine. Do we also stop using software because some app had a bug? Of course not. So no, I don't think defending anti-vaxxers with that example is being "fair". I realize you're not really defending their overall position, but even the line of thinking you proposed is deeply flawed.