3 ms·

Opposition to compulsory vaccination is just one manifestation of mistrusting the US government. Some say that the Soviets/Russians have engaged in propaganda a

Opposition to compulsory vaccination is just one manifestation of mistrusting the US government. Some say that the Soviets/Russians have engaged in propaganda and social engineering. There's some evidence for that, but it's hard to say how much it contributed. But there's also the record of government deception. Lying about the health impacts of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing. And the nuclear power industry. The suspicious death of Karen Silkwood. Colluding with industry to cover up health impacts of air and groundwater pollution. Suppression of the EPA dioxin report during the Reagan era. Lying about health effects of Agent Orange on US troops and innocent Vietnamese civilians. And so on. So is it really surprising that many people don't trust the government? Edit: It's unlikely that thiomersal (organic mercury compound) caused autism. And it's worth noting that thiomersal levels in vaccines have generally been reduced in the last decade or two.

petermcneeley 8y ago
Let me add to that. 2008 crash and bailout. WMDs in iraq. Revelations of NSA. Opioid crisis. I even heard somewhere that streetlights have cameras and microphones?
threatofrain 8y ago
I’d argue it has more to do with science-focused education. It’s healthy to distrust power, and for all you know HN people are much more distrusting of the government than most, not merely in words but also in action. Science based education also improves attitudes and usage of condoms and contraceptives, and I’d argue the primary mechanism is countering bad ideas and the promotion of good ones.
fzeroracer 8y ago
The issue was never about trusting the government though, that's the problem. People who believe in anti-vaxx theories for example I bet would be more than happy to trust any number of government agencies that align with their beliefs. It's not that they don't trust the government, it's that they have an irrational breakdown of logical examination. For example, it's not a conspiracy at all to say that the government tracks people. It would be a conspiracy to say that you, yourself are being gang stalked without a rational basis for why the government would take immense interest in someone that's done absolutely nothing to potentially earn their ire. In that sense, the anti-vaxx movement is rooted in a belief mindset much like gang stalking rather than any sort of rational empirical observations. The government had zero interest in using vaccines as a way of ensuring conformity, much less using it to target or poison individuals. It's the same cognitive dissonance that occurs when say, the NRA says that guns are for the sake of stopping tyranny while also supporting the police which function as the long arm of the government.
- mirimir 8y ago
  The government does have an interest in promoting widespread vaccination, to reduce the risk of epidemics. They also have an interest in protecting vaccine manufacturers from lawsuits. That's why we have the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. So given all that, it's not entirely unreasonable to worry that the government is lying. That it's publishing deceptive studies. Because they have before, about other issues.
  - fzeroracer 8y ago
    I think it's unreasonable to assume the government is lying about vaccines because you would have to establish a rational reason for the government to do so. Now the anti-vaxxer might say 'they are lying about vaccines not causing Autism' in which case that would be an irrational reason for lying. It would have to imply that governments around the world are solidly collaborating on the dangers of vaccines. This would not hold up to any scrutiny and is why anti-vaxx beliefs would be solidly irrational.
    - linuxftw 8y ago
      > I think it's unreasonable to assume the government is lying about vaccines because you would have to establish a rational reason for the government to do so. Same reason as any: money. Pays well to ensure vaccines of dubious quality are fast-tracked [1]. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-gerberding/former-cdc-head-lands-vaccine-job-at-merck-idUSTRE5BK2K520091221 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-gerberding/former-c...
    - mirimir 8y ago
      I thought that I was being clear enough. But ... Why did the government lie about the health impacts of fallout from above-ground nuclear weapons testing? It's because they felt that above-ground tests were necessary for weapons' development. Also because they cost less. Why would the government lie about the risk of vaccine injury? Because they want people to vaccinate themselves and their children. To protect the public health. As a wild-ass guess, the public-health benefits of universal vaccination are likely great enough that appreciable injury risk is acceptable. But individuals don't really see evidence for public-health benefits. All they ever see are their kids being injured. So it's in the government's interest to reassure people. But what dominates social media are reports of injuries.

petermcneeley 8y ago

Let me add to that. 2008 crash and bailout. WMDs in iraq. Revelations of NSA. Opioid crisis. I even heard somewhere that streetlights have cameras and microphones?

threatofrain 8y ago

I’d argue it has more to do with science-focused education. It’s healthy to distrust power, and for all you know HN people are much more distrusting of the government than most, not merely in words but also in action. Science based education also improves attitudes and usage of condoms and contraceptives, and I’d argue the primary mechanism is countering bad ideas and the promotion of good ones.

fzeroracer 8y ago

The issue was never about trusting the government though, that's the problem. People who believe in anti-vaxx theories for example I bet would be more than happy to trust any number of government agencies that align with their beliefs. It's not that they don't trust the government, it's that they have an irrational breakdown of logical examination. For example, it's not a conspiracy at all to say that the government tracks people. It would be a conspiracy to say that you, yourself are being gang stalked without a rational basis for why the government would take immense interest in someone that's done absolutely nothing to potentially earn their ire. In that sense, the anti-vaxx movement is rooted in a belief mindset much like gang stalking rather than any sort of rational empirical observations. The government had zero interest in using vaccines as a way of ensuring conformity, much less using it to target or poison individuals. It's the same cognitive dissonance that occurs when say, the NRA says that guns are for the sake of stopping tyranny while also supporting the police which function as the long arm of the government.

mirimir 8y ago
The government does have an interest in promoting widespread vaccination, to reduce the risk of epidemics. They also have an interest in protecting vaccine manufacturers from lawsuits. That's why we have the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. So given all that, it's not entirely unreasonable to worry that the government is lying. That it's publishing deceptive studies. Because they have before, about other issues.
- fzeroracer 8y ago
  I think it's unreasonable to assume the government is lying about vaccines because you would have to establish a rational reason for the government to do so. Now the anti-vaxxer might say 'they are lying about vaccines not causing Autism' in which case that would be an irrational reason for lying. It would have to imply that governments around the world are solidly collaborating on the dangers of vaccines. This would not hold up to any scrutiny and is why anti-vaxx beliefs would be solidly irrational.
  - linuxftw 8y ago
    > I think it's unreasonable to assume the government is lying about vaccines because you would have to establish a rational reason for the government to do so. Same reason as any: money. Pays well to ensure vaccines of dubious quality are fast-tracked [1]. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-gerberding/former-cdc-head-lands-vaccine-job-at-merck-idUSTRE5BK2K520091221 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-gerberding/former-c...
  - mirimir 8y ago
    I thought that I was being clear enough. But ... Why did the government lie about the health impacts of fallout from above-ground nuclear weapons testing? It's because they felt that above-ground tests were necessary for weapons' development. Also because they cost less. Why would the government lie about the risk of vaccine injury? Because they want people to vaccinate themselves and their children. To protect the public health. As a wild-ass guess, the public-health benefits of universal vaccination are likely great enough that appreciable injury risk is acceptable. But individuals don't really see evidence for public-health benefits. All they ever see are their kids being injured. So it's in the government's interest to reassure people. But what dominates social media are reports of injuries.