4 ms·

> I used to work for Andy Wakefield Interesting, what was that like? Did he actually believe all the claims he was making?

rpmisms 7y ago
Absolute horndog, no scruples, and a complete narcissist. Basically worse than they make him out to be. Del Bigtree is very similar. The Tommey family (worked with Andy on Vaxxed) are some of the kindest people I've ever met, and I'd like to see them again. Suzanne Humphries is possibly one of the smartest people I know, and is incredibly well-read. She's a nephrologist who started charting patterns around people getting flu shots followed by sudden kidney failure, well before Andy did his "research". She brought this to the attention of a researcher, and was promptly dismissed. She's not anti-vaccine, but is pro-vaccine-safety, which I appreciate as an intellectually honest position. Out of the whole crowd, she's the person I would listen to. She's a bit like Andrew Yang; she doesn't hold opinions, the data is her opinion. I'm not sure why this is getting downvotes. I'm answering the question.
- emptybits 7y ago
  > She's not anti-vaccine, but is pro-vaccine-safety I've never heard of Humphries before your comment. I searched and found a long video of Humphries where she says, at the outset: >> "never has there been a safe vaccine, never will there be a safe vaccine, and it is not possible to have a safe vaccine." [1] IMO, a reasonable person would call that an anti-vaccine point of view, don't you think? Calling it pro-vaccine-safety seems disingenuous. Anyways, I agree with you that she seems well read and she articulates her position in a level-headed manner and I'm even open to her being correct. But her position seems to be very anti-vaccine because she tells us that vaccine safety is "not possible" and that there will never be a safe vaccine. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efto1LpWkKw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efto1LpWkKw
  - rpmisms 7y ago
    Well, if we want to go deep into her body of research we can. She's pro-immunization, but doesn't believe vaccines as we know them are an effective way to do so. The current structure involves harming the body in order to create immunity, and therefore, if no benefit is derived, violates the Hippocratic oath. I get frustrated with her sometimes, because her ideas are incredibly rational and coherent, but she doesn't understand presentation or how to sell an idea. I would recommend her book if you want to gain an understanding of the rationalist arguments against modern vaccination: https://www.amazon.com/Dissolving-Illusions-Disease-Vaccines-Forgotten/dp/1480216895 https://www.amazon.com/Dissolving-Illusions-Disease-Vaccines... It's controversial thought, but it is enlightening, especially if you want to understand why some "otherwise" smart people believe this nonsense
    - emptybits 7y ago
      I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted. Thank you. I appreciate the book reference.
      - rpmisms 7y ago
        Because I said a wrongspeak. No problem. Hope you enjoy if you decide to peruse.
    - duck2 7y ago
      Eh. She looks very much like she's just playing to people's fears. If this is the rationalist argument, I wonder what are the irrational arguments. My early childhood passed in a city where meat was sold on pushcarts and where drinking tap water was an easy way to have an infection. I guess having the unnatural disease matter filled with metals injected into my muscle might have saved me from becoming a statistic.

rpmisms 7y ago

Absolute horndog, no scruples, and a complete narcissist. Basically worse than they make him out to be. Del Bigtree is very similar. The Tommey family (worked with Andy on Vaxxed) are some of the kindest people I've ever met, and I'd like to see them again. Suzanne Humphries is possibly one of the smartest people I know, and is incredibly well-read. She's a nephrologist who started charting patterns around people getting flu shots followed by sudden kidney failure, well before Andy did his "research". She brought this to the attention of a researcher, and was promptly dismissed. She's not anti-vaccine, but is pro-vaccine-safety, which I appreciate as an intellectually honest position. Out of the whole crowd, she's the person I would listen to. She's a bit like Andrew Yang; she doesn't hold opinions, the data is her opinion. I'm not sure why this is getting downvotes. I'm answering the question.

emptybits 7y ago
> She's not anti-vaccine, but is pro-vaccine-safety I've never heard of Humphries before your comment. I searched and found a long video of Humphries where she says, at the outset: >> "never has there been a safe vaccine, never will there be a safe vaccine, and it is not possible to have a safe vaccine." [1] IMO, a reasonable person would call that an anti-vaccine point of view, don't you think? Calling it pro-vaccine-safety seems disingenuous. Anyways, I agree with you that she seems well read and she articulates her position in a level-headed manner and I'm even open to her being correct. But her position seems to be very anti-vaccine because she tells us that vaccine safety is "not possible" and that there will never be a safe vaccine. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efto1LpWkKw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efto1LpWkKw
- rpmisms 7y ago
  Well, if we want to go deep into her body of research we can. She's pro-immunization, but doesn't believe vaccines as we know them are an effective way to do so. The current structure involves harming the body in order to create immunity, and therefore, if no benefit is derived, violates the Hippocratic oath. I get frustrated with her sometimes, because her ideas are incredibly rational and coherent, but she doesn't understand presentation or how to sell an idea. I would recommend her book if you want to gain an understanding of the rationalist arguments against modern vaccination: https://www.amazon.com/Dissolving-Illusions-Disease-Vaccines-Forgotten/dp/1480216895 https://www.amazon.com/Dissolving-Illusions-Disease-Vaccines... It's controversial thought, but it is enlightening, especially if you want to understand why some "otherwise" smart people believe this nonsense
  - emptybits 7y ago
    I'm not sure why you're getting downvoted. Thank you. I appreciate the book reference.
    - rpmisms 7y ago
      Because I said a wrongspeak. No problem. Hope you enjoy if you decide to peruse.
  - duck2 7y ago
    Eh. She looks very much like she's just playing to people's fears. If this is the rationalist argument, I wonder what are the irrational arguments. My early childhood passed in a city where meat was sold on pushcarts and where drinking tap water was an easy way to have an infection. I guess having the unnatural disease matter filled with metals injected into my muscle might have saved me from becoming a statistic.