or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › I'm Not Vaccinating › Why so much mainstream hatred for non-vaxers?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why so much mainstream hatred for non-vaxers? - Page 2

post #21 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taximom5 View Post


My take on this will anger some people, and I apologize in advance for doing so, but this is what I really believe.

 

I believe that it is the same force that drove otherwise good, kind, otherwise-Christian Germans and Austrians to hate the Jews in the 1930's and 1940's , and the same force that drives bigotry of any kind.

 

That force is a combination of fear, herd mentality, and a kind of survival instinct, and it's part of human nature.  It drives one to ignore facts when one feels threatened.

 

It is compounded by the greed of a select few, who play upon these fears. 

 

In the 1930's, there was a massive propaganda campaign launched against the Jews; children's books and adult cartoons depicted Jews as money-grubbing leeches who supposedly harmed innocent children.  Newspapers talked about the horrible threat against the culture from these "outsiders."

I know what I'm talking about first-hand--my father was a Holocaust survivor, and we have a newspaper clipping from 1937, with a picture of him and a schoolfriend (both born in Austria, to Austrian parents)--two little boys with dark curly hair (obviously not Aryan) wearing lederhosen and carrying schoolbooks.  The caption was about how the "Outsiders" dared to wear the Austrian national costume (which ALL schoolboys wore) and were a sign of Jews taking over Austrian culture.  And how it must be stopped.

 

Fast-forward to today.  Children's books and TV cartoons are filled with propaganda of how getting vaccines helps.  Newspapers are literally full of lies--there is article after article about how the "science is in," how vaccines are "proven" to not be linked with autism (no such proof exists), how Wakefield lied in a study to link MMR with autism (it wasn't a study, it was a case series, and it said very clearly, "we have NOT proved a causal association with MMR and autism").  I've even seen SEVERAL newspaper articles saying that Wakefield's study linked thimerosal in the MMR with autism (MMR does not and never has contained thimerosal, and Wakefield's case series never mentioned thimerosal).  

 

The press reports every year that vaccines are safe, and that thimerosal has been "removed.".No mention is made of the 1297 cases of admitted and compensated vaccine-induced permanent brain damage.  No mention is made of the many studies linking vaccines with autoimmune disease, asthma, diabetes, lupus, MS, etc. No mention is made of the fact that 90% of the flu shots available are thimerosal-preserved.  No mention is made of the fact that the adult versions of the vaccines given in the US are still thimerosal-preserved, nor of the fact that the thimerosal-preserved pediatric vaccines are still being made in the US--and shipped to third-world countries, where autism and autoimmune disease rates are suddently on the rise.

 

Flu shots are urged in every news media, in every drug store, on every corner.  Businesses offer financial incentives to "get your flu shot."  No mention is made anywhere of the recent studies showing that the flu shot is as effective as...a placebo.  No mention is made of the possible risks of this vaccine.  None whatever. It even says in the package insert "safety and efficacy not determined in eldery and pediatric populations."  The answer to recent studies showing especial lack of efficacy in the elderly?  Give them a DOUBLE shot.  No mention is made of the increase in reports of severe adverse effects in those getting the double shot.

 

Those who refuse, delay, or even QUESTION vaccines are vilified.  Parents have had children taken by various government services for refusing vaccines. California just passed a bill allowing children as young as 12 years old to be given hepatitis B vaccine, Gardasil, and other "services" relating to sexual activity WITHOUT PARENTAL KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT.  The press blames each and every outbreak of a "vaccine-preventable disease" on the unvaccinated, in spite of the fact that the vast majority of those come down with these diseases are fully vaccinated.

 

Just like in the 1930's, it's all about fear-mongering, and finding a group to blame, a group whose removal from the situation will result in increased profits to others.

 

So, just like in the 1930's, we need to ask ourselves:  who is threatened by someone turning down a flu shot, Gardasil, Rotavirus vaccine, etc??  What is being threatened?  Not their health, that's for sure. 

 

As always, we need to follow the money trail, because THAT'S what is being threatened, and THAT is what is being used to force compliance.  Vaccines are a multi-billion dollar business.  Money is used as the motivating factor for vaccine compliance rates in medical practices, in businesses (health insurance companies offer discounts for companies with 100% vaccine compliance rates), and health insurance rates.

 

The financial conflict of interest is EVERYWHERE.  The former head of the CDC is now president of Merck's vaccine division.  The head of Reuter's is on the board of Merck.  The Murdochs are on the board of Glaxo, AND own and run their own vaccine testing facility.  The doctors who teach in medical schools are also paid consultants with pharmaceutical companies--usually with SEVERAL pharmaceutical companies.  The CME (Continuing Medical Education) courses required for doctors' board certification are directly run by pharmaceutical companies.

And all the studies that purport to show how "safe" vaccines are are in some way financially tied to the very industry that profits from their sale.  This is known as "tobacco science," for obvious reasons.

 

The really sad thing is, we haven't changed at all in the last 80 years.  Only the group being targeted has changed.  The motivations, the methods--all the same.

 



 

 



Wow. So, a public health campaign is equivalent to targeted genocide?
post #22 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by oaktreemama View Post


So to sum up-a bunch of privileged first world Moms fapping on the Internet about vaccines are drawing parallels between themselves and the slaughter of six million people?
GROSS.


It was one person who brought up Nazis - so saying a bunch is a little out of order.  

post #23 of 312
Thread Starter 

Can we please not get off focus... 

 

I know you had reasons taximom5, but I think mentioning those words just gives fodder to those who would like to hate and not discuss. 

 

I would like to know if people think the mainstream media is increasing attacks on non-vaxers in the last few years, as I have not followed the issue very long myself, and if so, why?

 

post #24 of 312
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post

I think that is because the cornerstone of Non-vaxxing is parental choice.  Hence we are tolerant of those who choose differently.  

 

The cornerstone of vaxxing is not parental choice (although many parents and certainly most if not all vaxxers on MDC do chose vaxxing as opposed to it being a default).  The cornerstone of vaxxing is public health and not  choice.  Indeed some vaxxers seem to think we should be forced to vax our kids, and many laws around schools and the like do make non-vaxxing difficult.

 

 


This was insightful to me, thank you. You are right, most non-vaxers have made a choice and support the ability to choose, same with sel/delayed. Some vaxers also make the choice and support ability to choose, but not all - vax is default. 

 

My DD has had some vaccines. I'm not sure how many more she will have in the future. I really don't care too much about anyone else's vaccine status, (other than the fact oral polio is standard in the country I'm living in - main reason my DD got IP).

 

post #25 of 312

Is slate part of the mainstream media now?

 

In my 14 years on parenting boards, the vaccine debate has raged along a small patch of well-trodden ground with few substantive changes in content.  If the volume appears to have gone up lately, I think it's mainly because larger groups of people have suddenly realized that the web is a thing where people talk about stuff.  Back in the day before the MDC crash of the early-oughts, when MDC was working hard to be as big as hipmama, traditional journalists had no reason to look in on our little conversations about babies.  Doctors were very worried about vaccine compliance, but they hadn't actually gone and read what people wrote on message boards about it.  And, to be fair to them, it would have been hard to do.  Back then, a thread started on MDC at midnight would have 10 posts by 1 am, and be languishing on the third page of recent posts by sunrise.  It's a lot easier to follow the conversation now that the pace has slowed somewhat.  No one's posted on the "New to Vax Research" forum for almost two whole days.  A single grad student could read the whole thing in an afternoon and have time left over to check the citations.  

post #26 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post



It was one person who brought up Nazis - so saying a bunch is a little out of order.  

 

 

It's one person with two "likes" and a reply that says "totally agree."  She's not alone.

post #27 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

 

I would like to know if people think the mainstream media is increasing attacks on non-vaxers in the last few years, as I have not followed the issue very long myself, and if so, why?

 



Quickly (as I do not have much time at this moment)  I think the internet plays a large part in this.  There were probably always people who thought non-vaxxers were Crazy with a capital "C" - but they did not have a public forum to get their message of non-tolerance out - or other people to band together with on their focus.  

 

I do suspect there is more venom at the moment (in addition to the above mentioned forum for their thought). I have some ideas and will write more tomorrow - but would love to read what other people have to say.  Good topic - and you are not the only one has noticed a fair bit of venom towards non-vaxxers.  

post #28 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

 

 

It's one person with two "likes" and a reply that says "totally agree."  She's not alone.



Not necessarily.  That post was large - there might be other stuff they like about it.  shrug.gif

post #29 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post



Quickly (as I do not have much time at this moment)  I think the internet plays a large part in this.  There were probably always people who thought non-vaxxers were Crazy with a capital "C" - but they did not have a public forum to get their message of non-tolerance out - or other people to band together with on their focus.  

 

I do suspect there is more venom at the moment (in addition to the above mentioned forum for their thought). I have some ideas and will write more tomorrow - but would love to read what other people have to say.  Good topic - and you are not the only one has noticed a fair bit of venom towards non-vaxxers.  



I've also noticed a fair bit of venom towards those who vaccinate lately.  I think there's just more venom being spewed.

post #30 of 312
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

Is slate part of the mainstream media now?

 

In my 14 years on parenting boards, the vaccine debate has raged along a small patch of well-trodden ground with few substantive changes in content.  If the volume appears to have gone up lately, I think it's mainly because larger groups of people have suddenly realized that the web is a thing where people talk about stuff.  Back in the day before the MDC crash of the early-oughts, when MDC was working hard to be as big as hipmama, traditional journalists had no reason to look in on our little conversations about babies.  Doctors were very worried about vaccine compliance, but they hadn't actually gone and read what people wrote on message boards about it.  And, to be fair to them, it would have been hard to do.  Back then, a thread started on MDC at midnight would have 10 posts by 1 am, and be languishing on the third page of recent posts by sunrise.  It's a lot easier to follow the conversation now that the pace has slowed somewhat.  No one's posted on the "New to Vax Research" forum for almost two whole days.  A single grad student could read the whole thing in an afternoon and have time left over to check the citations.  


I would consider Slate to be, yes, they used to have a permanent link from MSN's site, although that is no longer there, it was for years. I don't know their current relationship.

 

That's interesting these boards used to be more active. Several days ago I posted a whole index of product inserts in the New to Vax Research forum and no one has made any comment. I guess it's just more fun to jump on and make comments when someone says something controversial. 

 

 

 

post #31 of 312

People hate on and demonize non-vaxers because they are worried about their children. In my expereince, the rabid pro-vaxers genuinely believe most VPD's to be deadly to children, and if everyone vaccinates, the disease will be gone, and THEIR children will be safe. It's just as selfish* as those who choose not to vax. They aren't worried about those "immuno-compromised who can't be vaccinated", they are worried about their own child...they just try to pretend it's for everyone. (this is my opinion after years of reading vax threads on various message boards)

 

*I don't think making an informed medical decision for your own child is selfish...vaccinating or not, but a lot of people on the pro vax side claim it's selfish not to vaccinate

post #32 of 312

Yes, it is more fun to have conversations about controversy.  I don't have anything to say about package inserts.  Apparently, no one else does either.  That doesn't mean that it has no value, just that it doesn't inspire much in the way of commentary.  

 

 

post #33 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlec View Post

People hate on and demonize non-vaxers because they are worried about their children. In my expereince, the rabid pro-vaxers genuinely believe most VPD's to be deadly to children, and if everyone vaccinates, the disease will be gone, and THEIR children will be safe. It's just as selfish* as those who choose not to vax. They aren't worried about those "immuno-compromised who can't be vaccinated", they are worried about their own child...they just try to pretend it's for everyone. (this is my opinion after years of reading vax threads on various message boards)

 

*I don't think making an informed medical decision for your own child is selfish...vaccinating or not, but a lot of people on the pro vax side claim it's selfish not to vaccinate



I think concerns about public health are legitimate expressions of a desire to do good in the world.  Of course I want MY children to be safe from diseases like measles and diphtheria.  I'd like other children to be safe from those diseases too.  I'm not comfortable rounding people up and forcing them to get vaccines.  But I believe that public health would be well-served by higher vaccination rates, and I support advertising and information campaigns that promote that goal. 

 

My concern for the immuno-compromised who can't be vaccinated - people like my grandfather - is quite real.  His medical issues are a frequent reminder that we all rely on the support and protection of our families and communities.

post #34 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post



I've also noticed a fair bit of venom towards those who vaccinate lately.  I think there's just more venom being spewed.


Really?  I am not being argumentative, but I have not noticed it (particularly outside of MDC - we do get a little heated in here)  which means:

 

-there really isn't much  (certainly not anywhere near as much as is spewed at non-vaxxers)

 

or 

 

-there is some, I just have my non-vax filter on and don't notice it.

 

Any examples?

 

K.

 

post #35 of 312

Wow, comparing people who understand and can read scientific studies and vaccinate their children accordingly based on fact to Nazis sure is special!  

post #36 of 312
Thread Starter 

Quote:
Originally Posted by littlec View Post

People hate on and demonize non-vaxers because they are worried about their children. In my expereince, the rabid pro-vaxers genuinely believe most VPD's to be deadly to children, and if everyone vaccinates, the disease will be gone, and THEIR children will be safe. 

 

I guess you are right to a certain extent. Although I see some rabid pro-vax attitudes in people who do not even have children. Perhaps a lot of this attitude is based on the fact that a lot of people don't know much about vpd and the vax schedule (like the commentor on the article I mentioned thinking he can contract Hep B from street food).

 

I guess the internet just makes it easier for people to say whatever they want, in relative anonymity, and yeah it feels good when you find a group of people saying things you agree, or think you agree with, and disparaging another group with opposing view just makes you feel better about yourself and your choices. Sure, I realize that this happens on MDC all the time. And it is a cycle, a homebirther gets picked on in real life or another mommy board, and comes here to get some support and feel better and be judgey about whoever. Then that whoever takes offense. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

Yes, it is more fun to have conversations about controversy.  I don't have anything to say about package inserts.  Apparently, no one else does either.  That doesn't mean that it has no value, just that it doesn't inspire much in the way of commentary.  

 

 

Yeah for all the arguing going on in the Research Vaxing forum about unbiased sources and what not, I thought the information straight from horse's mouth would be helpful. I'll have to go back and bump it in the future when it gets bogged down by posts arguing about comparing non-vax hatred to xenophobia.


Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

I think concerns about public health are legitimate expressions of a desire to do good in the world.  Of course I want MY children to be safe from diseases like measles and diphtheria.  I'd like other children to be safe from those diseases too.  I'm not comfortable rounding people up and forcing them to get vaccines.  But I believe that public health would be well-served by higher vaccination rates, and I support advertising and information campaigns that promote that goal. 

 

My concern for the immuno-compromised who can't be vaccinated - people like my grandfather - is quite real.  His medical issues are a frequent reminder that we all rely on the support and protection of our families and communities.

 

Stik, do you think the language used in the Slate article is warranted (calling non-vaxers elite over-privileged moms with superiority complexes who have special snowflake children that deserve special treatment?) I think I have seen you say you sel/del vaxed, or am I remembering wrong?

 

In your opinion, do advertising and information campaigns actually give appropriate information (especially commercials for flu vaccine)? I don't see many mainstream "information campaigns" giving much information about reactions - other than that they are "extremely rare," or that long term safety and safety of receiving multiple vaccines is unknown. I think there are some ethical concerns in this effort to keep vax rates high. I think this type of thing, the Slate article, is a tactic to not really address any true vax issues and just encourage people to remain pro-vax because it is fun to hate on those crazy nutty non-vaxers who are a threat to society.
 

I also wonder if current political/economic climate does have general population feeling less secure at the moment, so it is easier to demonize some "threats" to society. From what I'm reading there seems to be an increase in pedis refusing alternatively or non vaxed kids, and there seem to be movements to try to remove more state exemptions, the thing in Cali with parental consent not needed, etc.

Maybe this is nothing new though? I haven't paid attention to this for so long. (Miriam are you around? I know you have paid attention to this issue for a long time)


Edited by slmommy - 2/17/12 at 2:58am
post #37 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post


Really?  I am not being argumentative, but I have not noticed it (particularly outside of MDC - we do get a little heated in here)  which means:

 

-there really isn't much  (certainly not anywhere near as much as is spewed at non-vaxxers)

 

or 

 

-there is some, I just have my non-vax filter on and don't notice it.

 

Any examples?

 

K.

 


I know you didn't ask me Kathy, but I just wanted to address this because I'm having a hard time after what I've experienced IRL and read online accepting your assertion that non-vaxers in general are all about tolerance like it's all peace, love and rainbows, and there isn't any judgment tossed at those "ignorant" "brainwashed" folks who vaccinate their children. I think there's plenty of self-righteousness and judgment to go around, and it's not limited to one side.  I think the pro-vaxers (or maybe I should say the anti non-vaxers) voice is just louder because pro-vax is the majority view, so there's going to be be more opinions from that side.  Being in the minority is often difficult in that way.  

 

 

post #38 of 312
Thread Starter 

Abby, I'll buy that. I'm sure there is plenty of hurtful judgements by non vaxers on vaxers, on these boards or depending on the group you hang with IRL.

 

I think it would be harder to find examples in mainstream media. I remember a commercial I saw a year or so ago in the US, implying that if you love your kids and family that you will get a flu shot, you do it because you love them and want to protect them - implying if you don't, you don't love your kids. I have yet to see a commercial implying if you love your kids you won't vaccinate them because of reaction risks - and that if you do, you don't love your kids.... Even the other thread I saw on here about a "non-vax" billboard - it's message was just no shots = no school, not true! that's pointing out a legal fact, not vilifying anyone. And the person who ordered that billboard was worried the billboard company would find it too controversial. 

 

And I don't think that the non-vaxer judgements on pro-vaxers can 100% explain the strength and spitefullness of the mainstream attack on non/del/sel vaxers. Whereas, probably a lot of the judgement coming out of non-vaxers is a reaction to the counter judgement and condescension by the majority.

post #39 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by slmommy View Post

Ugh, this article disgusts me so much, if you are worried about your blood pressure, maybe skip it!

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2012/02/13/anti_vaccination_attitudes_percolate_amongst_those_with_superiority_fetishes_.html

 

I think I need to stop reading slate. theyve had a bunch of offensive articles hating on non-vaxers, homeschoolers, etc. recently.

 

 

 

WHY is there soooo much hatred against non-vaxers/delayed/selective? Is it really the herd immunity belief? I don't even really buy that they are concerned about those who cannot be vaccinated, because they don't even seem to believe that ANYONE should not be vaccinated....I'm starting to think it's just hatred of anyone doing something different, not toeing the line. I think in someways, radical pro-vax, with extreme non-vax hatred, are trying to make themselves feel better about their own choices, or something? What are your thoughts? I guess it's easy to hate on a small group of people who are doing something different from what you do.

 

I hate to inform this author that vax reactions don't just happen to parents with superiority complexes or special snowflake children. vax reaction seems pretty democratic too - doesnt matter race, class, gender, etc.

 

ETA - another question, do you long time non-vaxers see any differences in media towards non-vax? I haven't paid attention to or researched the issue for that long, (last few years), but since I have I've noticed so much ferocity from the media, has it always been like this or getting worse?


As someone who has watched this debacle unfold for 20yrs now, the fearmongering and scare tactics and media hype about it are a million times more now than 20yrs ago....there was no internet for immediate access to studies,and bunk material.  chicken pox, is a great example of how the description of the disease has changed in 20yrs..before 1990, it was basically a benign disease that kids got, parents missed work for a week or two, and then things went back to normal...nowadays, we have parent who are SO fearful of chicken pox, they are hysterical even knowing there might be a case somewhere in town.  And that's the ones who's kids are vaxed for it, too....actually, i have witnessed MORE parents who's kids are vaxed freak out over every little sniffle their kid has, freak out because johnny's classmate is not vaxed,  but its ok if their kids picks at the dirt on the bottom of their shoes, and then puts their fingers in their mouth.....

 

post #40 of 312
Quote:
Originally Posted by emmy526 View Post


As someone who has watched this debacle unfold for 20yrs now, the fearmongering and scare tactics and media hype about it are a million times more now than 20yrs ago....there was no internet for immediate access to studies,and bunk material.  chicken pox, is a great example of how the description of the disease has changed in 20yrs..before 1990, it was basically a benign disease that kids got, parents missed work for a week or two, and then things went back to normal...nowadays, we have parent who are SO fearful of chicken pox, they are hysterical even knowing there might be a case somewhere in town.  And that's the ones who's kids are vaxed for it, too....actually, i have witnessed MORE parents who's kids are vaxed freak out over every little sniffle their kid has, freak out because johnny's classmate is not vaxed,  but its ok if their kids picks at the dirt on the bottom of their shoes, and then puts their fingers in their mouth.....

 


That is kind of nuts.  Why do they vax if they don't think the vaccine protects their kid?

 

I vax but i'm in the UK and we don't vax for Chickenpox.  My DD2 got it December 23rd (merry christmas!) and her sister got it 2 weeks later.  It wasn't brilliant fun, but it was no big deal.  I didn't even see a GP - the pharmacist confirmed my diagnosis and game me some meds to calm itching and lower fever should i need it over the Christmas period...  I would say the worst thing for me about Chickenpox is going nuts because you can't get out and about until the scabs have formed (2 days for BFed DD2, 6 days for poor DD1!) - worst for me, as OH took the ill ones out when i was in with the sick one!

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: I'm Not Vaccinating
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › I'm Not Vaccinating › Why so much mainstream hatred for non-vaxers?