Antivax: Behind the Stupid (and Other Notes)

Tiassa

Tiassa

Let us not launch the boat ...
Valued Senior Member
With Friends Like These ....

​

Oh, goshy gee, imagine that:

Kristen O'Meara had researched the potential harms of vaccines and decided not to vaccinate her three daughters, one 5-year-old and 3-year-old twins. Then her entire family got rotavirus, including O'Meara and her husband. The illness can cause severe diarrhea and lead to dehydration, and O'Meara said they were sick for weeks.

She admitted that she put her children's health at risk. "It was awful and it didn't have to happen because I could have had them vaccinated. I felt guilty, I felt really guilty," she told Good Morning America.

Her daughters are now fully vaccinated after an "aggressive" schedule to bring them up to date―a decision she said cost her some friendships. A recent study found that 87 percent of pediatricians have encountered parents who refuse vaccines.

(Rinkunas↱)​

And, you know, don't cry for them or whatever; that is to say, have your schadenfreude, I shan't refuse you the pleasure. But at the same time, don't overlook the real kicker, because, you know, sure, we all moan in disgust that people finally get around to it when it's their own, but still: "Her daughters are now fully vaccinated ... a decision she said cost her some friendships."

Who are these people, and what is the logic there?

The thing is, I don't actually doubt it. Still, I don't quite understand. If I say, "How dare you subject your children to this miniscule risk just because you're scared by the larger risk that just ravaged you and your family!" am I treating their opinions poorly? Am I projecting too foolish and belligerent an identity politic?

I'm just going to leave the O'Mearas to count their lessons learned and blessings enjoyed. But, you know, seriously, I'm prepared to challenge the fitness of those friends lost to actually be parents. And, you know, maybe that's just it: If they're childless political friends, maybe they just don't recognize that the heart of parental duty is protecting the next generation.

And to that end, rotavirus, compared to having "researched the potential harms of vaccines", makes the point. Risk analysis results in high risk event; risk analysis is revised. Isn't this pretty straightforward? Naturally, someone, somewhere, is going to be pissed off that you figured it out.

Priority: Do not risk child's death in order to protect child from harm. This ought to be self-evident, sure, but spare a moment amid cursing parents who require such demonstrations in order to figure it out for remembering that watching this happen to someone they purportedly care about is apparently insufficient to make the point clearly enough for some others.

How many of those people are parents?

This is a worrisome question, but there is no point in losing sleep over it. A favorite gesture of futility and something muttered about "people" should serve well enough.
____________________

Notes:

Rinkunas, Susan. "All It Took for Anti-Vaxxer to Admit She Was Wrong Was Her Entire Family Getting Sick". Science of Us. 26 September 2016. NYMag.com. 27 September 2016. http://sciof.us/2czxV1J
 
Tiassa said:
Who are these people, and what is the logic there?
Click to expand...
The anti-vaccination movement is quite, ermm, vocal and protective of each other. When someone breaks ranks, they do break off the friendship and turn on people they previously supported.

You should see how they attack parents who come out and are justifiably angry when their children fall terribly ill due to lack of vaccination in the community..

We lost friends over the vaccination issue when we had our first child. A couple, friends of ours, were upset and angry that we were going to vaccinate our son. They chose not to. We a third of three sets of couples, friends, who had children within months of each other. We had been friends for many years. Two of us vaccinated, one did not. The one who did not was quite insulting about it, called us bad parents for endangering our sons. It got heated. We decided to avoid contact, for obvious reasons, since we did not want our newborn son to contract anything as at the time, he was too young to be vaccinated. When time came, we vaccinated, obviously. The anti-vaxxer couple pitched a fit about it, called us unfit. Condescendingly joked about our genuine fear of our eldest contracting something from their unvaccinated son. We stopped call contact from that point on.

Sadly, and sure enough, 13 months later, he contracted whooping cough (they presume from a play date he had with other unvaccinated kids in their anti-vaxxer mother's group) and passed it around at day-care, where many 6 week old babies were also in care as parents went back to work. Thankfully the smaller babies did not fall ill. But several of his classmates did. When they realised who had passed it, parents were understandingly livid. They were advised that he would not be allowed back unless he was vaccinated. They still refused to vaccinate. Despite everything.

The children are still unvaccinated and she boasted to a mutual friend that they had contracted chicken-pox and had passed it on, giving children "natural immunity". That these poor kids would not have contracted the disease if they had vaccinated their children apparently escapes them. One child at the school was in remission for leukemia and had to be kept from school during the outbreak. And this couple still failed to understand or care that their lack of vaccination are endangering the lives of other children. The mutual friend was so disgusted, he too has now broken off all contact, because really, they are beyond redemption. We had hoped they would have come around, but anti-vaxxers dig in deep. Some see the light of day, like the O'Meara's and the Hills in Canada (whose story is quite out there, and they decided to vaccinate when the mother realised how close they had come to infecting her sister's child who was in the NICU and how dangerous and deadly her stance had become). But when they do finally see the light, they do face backlash from their communities.

It needs to be said that they are, to put it bluntly, batshit crazy.
 
Daecon said:
You don't think the anti-vaccination movement is recklessly stupid?
Click to expand...

I don't think it's bat shit crazy or laden with murderous motives. At worst it is simply misinformed, much as cult followers are. I think this tendency of some to demonize them and attribute death and disease to them is feeding something dark in those people. A need to scapegoat and hate a certain minority for their beliefs. If you don't like the antivax movement, educate them, don't villify them as the "other".
 
Magical Realist said:
I don't think it's bat shit crazy or laden with murderous motives. At worst it is simply misinformed, much as cult followers are. I think this tendency of some to demonize them and attribute death and disease to them is feeding something dark in those people. A need to scapegoat and hate a certain minority for their beliefs. If you don't like the antivax movement, educate them, don't villify them as the "other".
Click to expand...
They should be vilified for spreading disease and killing people.
 
spidergoat said:
They should be vilified for spreading disease and killing people.
Click to expand...

They're not killing people. Do you have any evidence for that? Did you know that people who go into work when they're sick are spreading disease too. And way more often than antivaxxers. Why don't you villify them?
 
Magical Realist said:
Really?

Curb your hysteria. They're not causing the downfall of human civilization.
Click to expand...

So ... that's the best you could come up with?

Really?

Seriously, though:

• If I say, "How dare you subject your children to this miniscule risk just because you're scared by the larger risk that just ravaged you and your family!" am I treating their opinions poorly? Am I projecting too foolish and belligerent an identity politic?​

It would seem, for instance, you might answer in the affirmative. It is, of course, better to let you speak for yourself, but that's part of my point.

Perhaps you might offer two cents on something having to do with the subject at hand instead of looking around for a straw man↱.

That epidemic can damage the human endeavor is what it is; that the world isn't going to end just because some foolish identity politic sickened or even killed someone's kid is, in its own right, what it is.

I just find it extraordinary that one can watch a "friend" go through an experience and then resent that the "friend" should respond affirmatively to that experience. Perhaps, then, we might also consider: If we strip out this manner of insistent idealism, what of the antivax argument remains?

And, you know, while our society still grapples with issues of conscience for refusing medical care, it's a lot different than it was when I was nine or ten and the question registered in my perception because some parents somewhere were going to court in order to allow their ten year-old to refuse cancer treatment.

There are some people we now prosecute, and let's face it, the end of the world has nothing to do with letting a child die for the sake of a parent wanting to go to Heaven. Neither has it anything at all to do with resenting one's "friends" for deciding their children's health and wellbeing should rate a higher priority than identity politics. As I said, the heart of parental duty is protecting the next generation.
 
Magical Realist said:
I don't think it's bat shit crazy or laden with murderous motives. At worst it is simply misinformed, much as cult followers are. I think this tendency of some to demonize them and attribute death and disease to them is feeding something dark in those people. A need to scapegoat and hate a certain minority for their beliefs. If you don't like the antivax movement, educate them, don't villify them as the "other".
Click to expand...
It's impossible to educate anyone who adamantly refuses to learn no matter how many times you try. You of all people should know that.
 
Daecon said:
It's impossible to educate anyone who adamantly refuses to learn no matter how many times you try. You of all people should know that.
Click to expand...

Then don't worry about it. Since the Enlightenment we have stopped imprisoning and burning at the stake people for their wrong beliefs. So we discuss and educate and try to understand each other. That's what civilized people do at least.
 
I don't know if I'm up on all my vaccinations. Nobody really knows how long many vaccines last. Back in July I came down with shingles. Is there a vaccine I could've gotten? Sure. But I didn't. Oh well..

I imagine there's way more of these kinds of people than there are antivaxxers. Then there's just the very poor who can't afford proper health care for themselves or their kids. Are these people all spreading disease too? Probably. Should they be villifed and thrown into prison? No..
 
Last edited:
You do understand the distinction between ignorance and wilful ignorance, don't you?
 
spidergoat said:
I do.

http://jennymccarthybodycount.com/
Click to expand...

"Is the United States Anti-Vaccination Movement directly responsible for every vaccine preventable illness and every vaccine preventable death listed here? No. However, the United States Anti-Vaccination Movement may be indirectly responsible for at least some of these illnesses and deaths and even one vaccine preventable illness or vaccine preventable death is too many."

Indirectly? May be? Some? Seems very tentative to me. But hey, when villifying minorities its always better to err on the side of murder eh?
 
Daecon said:
See post #11.
Click to expand...

You have no idea what will change a person's mind at a given time. Maybe you're coming across the wrong way. Maybe the right facts haven't sunk in yet. There's no way you can say someone won't change no matter how many times you try. And like the woman in the OP, maybe it even takes getting sick to do that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top