turning everything into a conspiracy theory is itself a conspiracy theory.... - Mothering Forums

 80Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 43 Old 06-24-2016, 08:35 PM - Thread Starter
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,119
Mentioned: 237 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2321 Post(s)
turning everything into a conspiracy theory is itself a conspiracy theory....

I can think of 3 people who have outright said or implied vaccine critics on MDC are conspiracy theorists in the past week. Given the complete lack of conspiracy related talk (this is no Ebola week), this is an accomplishment (sarcasm)

May I just say that seeing conspiracy theorists everywhere is in itself sort of a conspiracy theory? How on earth is dismissing everything (or most things) your opponent says as conspiracy theory any better than someone claiming something is a conspiracy without proof? It isn't.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.
 
Book and herb loving mama to 2 teens and one young adult.

Last edited by kathymuggle; 06-26-2016 at 10:46 AM.
kathymuggle is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 43 Old 06-24-2016, 08:41 PM - Thread Starter
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,119
Mentioned: 237 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2321 Post(s)
As a fun aside, I though most of these definitions from urban dictionary on conspiracy theories were dead on :

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...acy%20Theorist

"A contemptuous term used primarily by the main stream media to slander anyone who questions their monopoly on truth.
Even though he has done his own research and has concluded that the official account of events is either lacking or inaccurate, he is still a conspiracy theorist because he does not believe what the main stream media proclaims to be the truth."

"A person who questions known liars"

"A word used by shills when they are losing an argument. The shill calls their opponent a "conspiracy theorist" in an attempt to discredit them by implying that they are paranoid and delusional. In point of fact, it is the shill using the term "conspiracy theorist that is engaging in an ad hominem attack that can be considered delusional, brainwashed and willfully ignorant of the FACTS."

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.
 
Book and herb loving mama to 2 teens and one young adult.
kathymuggle is offline  
#3 of 43 Old 06-24-2016, 08:57 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
There is a difference between conspiracy "theory" and conspiracy REALITY!!!

There never really were WMD's in Iraq.

Sub-prime loans actually WILL tank the economy.

No conspiracy "theory" here; just reality.
Anne Jividen is offline  
 
#4 of 43 Old 06-25-2016, 06:17 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
And, of course, there really are lots of conspiracies which rip people off, or injure people or kill people. Happens all the time. With a bit of help I've put together an entire thread of such conspiracies. Corrupt system not just around vaccines
Turquesa and Anne Jividen like this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by Deborah; 06-25-2016 at 06:31 AM. Reason: to add link to thread I mentioned
Deborah is online now  
#5 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 07:00 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
Figured out something pretty funny. At least I think it is funny.

Simple reality. The number of people who believe in one or another or even several conspiracy theories far exceeds the number of people who are total non-vaxers. This number also is considerably bigger than any possible number of selective and delayed vaxers. It is, finally, bigger than those sad people who don't keep up with the vaccine schedule because they are poor or disorganized or whatever.

In other words, there have to be quite a number of people who vaccinate on schedule who believe in at least one, perhaps even two or three conspiracy theories.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/...0-minutes-poll

Quote:
Around a quarter of Americans subscribe to some sort of conspiracy theory surrounding the death of Princess Diana, the death of Jesus, and the attacks on 9/11. (Sadly, no data is available on how many of us suspect curious links among the three.) Even more of us—7 in 10, in fact—are skeptical of the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald was alone responsible for the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ory-heres-why/

Quote:
We find that in any given year, about half the public generally endorses at least one conspiracy theory. Some of the most popular include the “birther” conspiracy about Obama (endorsed by about 25 percent), the “truther” conspiracy about 9/11 (endorsed by about 19 percent), the theory that the FDA is deliberately withholding natural cures for cancer (endorsed by 40 percent), and the theory that the Fed intentionally orchestrated the 2008 recession (endorsed by 19 percent).
This one even includes vaccines/autism as one of the conspiracy theories. http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/m...-results-.html

Quote:
37% of voters believe global warming is a hoax, 51% do not. Republicans say global warming is a hoax by a 58-25 margin, Democrats disagree 11-77, and Independents are more split at 41-51. 61% of Romney voters believe global warming is a hoax
So why the confusion on this board? Where some members are convinced that people who question vaccines are demonstrably sloppy thinkers who believe in dozens of debunked conspiracy theories, including that vaccines cause autism. Part of it is simply that the corollary isn't usually brought up: that most people at some time or other believe in one or more conspiracy theories. Most people includes people who vaccinate on schedule. It includes people who delay or select vaccines. It includes people who reject all vaccines.

The second factor, and this is the one that I find problematic, is that there is a sector of people who support vaccines who somehow believe that supporting vaccines demonstrates some sort of moral or intellectual superiority. There is also a sector of people who criticize vaccines who somehow believe that criticizing vaccines demonstrates some sort of moral or intellectual superiority.

All of this is a form of magical thinking. There are both brilliant people and idiots and a full range of in-between people on every possible side of this controversy.

I know this is all quite painful...

Let us move on with the understanding that we all care about the well-being of children and, despite our disagreements can still respect each other and treat one another with courtesy.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#6 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 07:03 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
All that said, the next person who uses the conspiracy theory club will be getting a link to the post above as a response.
Anne Jividen likes this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#7 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 10:16 AM
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 852
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 843 Post(s)
I think your post, Deborah, is very interesting, and makes a good point. Not every person who believes in one or two conspiracy theories necessarily believes in every conspiracy theory. And, yes, some people who have no issue with vaccination are truthers, or birthers, or whatever. And furthermore I assume that not everyone who is vax-skeptical feels that way because they think there is a conspiracy of any kind. BUT all of that being said, some people who are vax-skeptical do indeed think that there are conspiracies behind it that involve Big Pharma, the CDC, etc. Plus I have seen many many times sources that are linked from vax-skeptical people (no one necessarily reading this post) that mention, you know, the Jewish cabal, the Rothschilds, the Illuminati. And there are people who don't go quite that far who will say "follow the money trail." All of this is indicative of a belief in conspiracies. And when people who are here talk about organizations hiding data, I take that as a sign of conspiracy-minded thinking. Certainly anyone talking about the way tobacco companies hid data to manipulate the public would consider that a conspiracy to sell cigarettes, and I don't think there is much difference.
teacozy likes this.
Dear_Rosemary is offline  
#8 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 10:23 AM
 
Turquesa's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,657
Mentioned: 150 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1742 Post(s)
Skepticism about pretty much anything can be spun into a "conspiracy theory."

But has our culture really reached this low level of dichotomous thinking? Or has this just become a clever manipulation tactic to gaslight people who question any proclamation or dogma?

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines.” - Marcia Angell, M.D., former NEJM Editor
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Proud member of #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Turquesa is offline  
#9 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 10:26 AM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dear_Rosemary View Post
I think your post, Deborah, is very interesting, and makes a good point. Not every person who believes in one or two conspiracy theories necessarily believes in every conspiracy theory. And, yes, some people who have no issue with vaccination are truthers, or birthers, or whatever. And furthermore I assume that not everyone who is vax-skeptical feels that way because they think there is a conspiracy of any kind. BUT all of that being said, some people who are vax-skeptical do indeed think that there are conspiracies behind it that involve Big Pharma, the CDC, etc. Plus I have seen many many times sources that are linked from vax-skeptical people (no one necessarily reading this post) that mention, you know, the Jewish cabal, the Rothschilds, the Illuminati. And there are people who don't go quite that far who will say "follow the money trail." All of this is indicative of a belief in conspiracies. And when people who are here talk about organizations hiding data, I take that as a sign of conspiracy-minded thinking. Certainly anyone talking about the way tobacco companies hid data to manipulate the public would consider that a conspiracy to sell cigarettes, and I don't think there is much difference.
Well, you can make conspiracy theory very broad when convenient (Drug company does 15 studies and then publishes the 5 with good results...conspiracy!) and very narrow when convenient (you know, politicians lie all the time, doesn't mean there is a conspiracy) and then it is pretty easy to get people into the right boxes.

I'm not denying that some people who criticize vaccines are very extreme in their views.

I'm just pointing out that trusting vaccines doesn't guarantee that people always color within the lines.

Without a lot of very thorough polling and research, we have no idea who is the craziest in this discussion. The data hasn't been collected.

But unscientific assumptions gathered from reading comments on newspapers and facebook pages don't prove much, do they?

Nor do arguments based on turning all questions about vaccines, regulatory agencies and scientific publications into conspiracy theories. Just another way of trying to stop people from asking questions by mocking them. To be blunt.


vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#10 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 10:54 AM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 4,857
Mentioned: 525 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3490 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
Well, you can make conspiracy theory very broad when convenient (Drug company does 15 studies and then publishes the 5 with good results...conspiracy!) and very narrow when convenient (you know, politicians lie all the time, doesn't mean there is a conspiracy) and then it is pretty easy to get people into the right boxes.

I'm not denying that some people who criticize vaccines are very extreme in their views.

I'm just pointing out that trusting vaccines doesn't guarantee that people always color within the lines.

Without a lot of very thorough polling and research, we have no idea who is the craziest in this discussion. The data hasn't been collected.

But unscientific assumptions gathered from reading comments on newspapers and facebook pages don't prove much, do they?

Nor do arguments based on turning all questions about vaccines, regulatory agencies and scientific publications into conspiracy theories. Just another way of trying to stop people from asking questions by mocking them. To be blunt.

I agree that not all non-vaxers are conspiracy theorists, but a good chunk are. There is some data that looks at this issue. We've discussed this study here before (a long time ago) and think it's relevant to points brought up in this thread.

http://www.motherjones.com/environme...s-gmos-climate

Quote:
If You Distrust Vaccines, You're More Likely to Think NASA Faked the Moon Landings

The new study, by University of Bristol psychologist Stephan Lewandowsky and his colleagues in the journal PLOS ONE, finds links between conspiratorial thinking and all three of these science-skeptic stances. Notably, the relationship was by far the strongest on the vaccine issue. For geeks: the correlation was .52, an impressive relationship for social science. Another way of translating the finding? "People who tend toward conspiratorial thinking are three times more likely to reject vaccinations," says Lewandowsky. (By contrast, for climate change denial and GMO resistance, the correlation with conspiratorial beliefs was real but much smaller, .09 and .13, respectively.)
Also, are we really using urban dictionary as a source now? Because this is their definition of anti-vaxer:

Quote:
anti-vaxer

1. A person who apposes vaccinations despite scientific evidence. Often associated with a fear that they cause autism.

2. Slang for someone who refuses to acknowledge obvious facts because they're contrary to their preconceptions.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...erm=anti-vaxer

The earth is not flat | Vaccines work | Chemtrails aren't a thing | Climate change is real #standupforscience
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by teacozy; 06-26-2016 at 10:58 AM.
teacozy is offline  
#11 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 11:24 AM - Thread Starter
 
kathymuggle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 8,119
Mentioned: 237 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2321 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
I agree that not all non-vaxers are conspiracy theorists, but a good chunk are. There is some data that looks at this issue. We've discussed this study here before (a long time ago) and think it's relevant to points brought up in this thread.

http://www.motherjones.com/environme...s-gmos-climate

[/url]
The conclusion of that "study" come from an online survey of 1001 Americans. I doubt they can suss out whether someone is a conspiracy theorist or not from such a survey (unless the person is a raging conspiracy theorist) and certainly not the way it is applied by pro-vaxxers on mdc - where choosing to criticize vaccine is very likely to lead to allegations of being a conspiracy theorist. For example: many pro-vaxxers here think I am a conspiracy theorist. I disagree....and I suspect many non-vaxxers would agree I am not a conspiracy theorist. If people who have argued/discussed this for hours cannot come to a conclusions on who is and who isn't a conspiracy theorist, then how could a survey?

Here is the wording from the motherjones article:

"ewandowsky's team conducted the research through an online survey of 1,001 Americans, which asked them a variety of questions about conspiracy theories, and also separate batteries of questions on vaccines, climate change, and genetically modified foods. On vaccines, for instance, survey respondents were asked how much they agree with statements like "The risk of vaccinations to maim and kill children outweighs their health benefits" and "I believe vaccines are a safe and reliable way to help avert the spread of preventable diseases."

Note the hyperbolic words used with vaccines "maim and kill". This might deliberately exclude many non vaxxers and almost all selective/delayers. The more moderate non-vaxxers might be excluded from their survey through the use of hyperbolic words.

There is a battle of two wolves inside us.  One is good and the other is evil.  The wolf that wins is the one you feed.
 
Book and herb loving mama to 2 teens and one young adult.

Last edited by kathymuggle; 06-26-2016 at 02:58 PM.
kathymuggle is offline  
#12 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 11:38 AM
 
Tweety_Bird's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,011
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 328 Post(s)
Of course, we are to believe that that urban dictionary definition is not biased.

Doesn't it work both ways, i.e what slang should apply to pro-vaxxers:
Quote:
Slang for someone who refuses to acknowledge obvious facts because they're contrary to their preconceptions.

Last edited by Tweety_Bird; 06-26-2016 at 11:45 AM.
Tweety_Bird is offline  
#13 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 02:22 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
I agree that not all non-vaxers are conspiracy theorists, but a good chunk are. There is some data that looks at this issue. We've discussed this study here before (a long time ago) and think it's relevant to points brought up in this thread.

http://www.motherjones.com/environme...s-gmos-climate

Also, are we really using urban dictionary as a source now? Because this is their definition of anti-vaxer:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...erm=anti-vaxer
The problem with all of this is that so many people who DO VACCINATE have to also spend time believing in conspiracies that it just doesn't work as a dividing line. Because way too many Americans go for conspiracy theories. Many, many, many, many more than decline vaccines.

However, it is clear that it is an essential pillar of your thinking, so who am I to undermine your world view?
samaxtics and Anne Jividen like this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#14 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 02:47 PM
 
samaxtics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,083
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1416 Post(s)
Was Vioxx a conspiracy?
Was Thalidomide a conspiracy?
Was the Tuskegee experiment a conspiracy?
Anne Jividen likes this.
samaxtics is offline  
#15 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 02:57 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by samaxtics View Post
Was Vioxx a conspiracy?
Was Thalidomide a conspiracy?
Was the Tuskegee experiment a conspiracy?
I'm not sure any of them qualify.

I think with Vioxx, Merck sort of knew there was something wrong, but they were hoping it wasn't as wrong as it looked and in the meantime maybe they could sell a LOT of product. So I call that one a mix of wishful thinking, greed, dishonesty.

Thalidomide was a reasonable sort of mistake that turned into a horrible disaster. The conspiracy part comes later when the manufacturer manages to deny responsibility more or less forever.

Tuskegee? Fits right in with the laws in the US that allowed sterilization of the "unfit" who often just happened to be outsiders like blacks or native americans or poor people. I'm rather doubtful that the people who started the experiment had any idea they were behaving unethically. Which is pretty sickening, but given american history, not surprising.

The largest conspiracy I've come across lately is the one involving genetically modified food. That one is truly massive, although I think a large number of the players aren't really aware of what was done, how it was done, or why it was done. In other words, they are true believers and just as deceived as the rest of the mob. The group of people who consciously made the active decisions was tiny.
applejuice and Anne Jividen like this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#16 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 04:41 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 4,857
Mentioned: 525 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3490 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post
The conclusion of that "study" come from an online survey of 1001 Americans. I doubt they can suss out whether someone is a conspiracy theorist or not from such a survey (unless the person is a raging conspiracy theorist) and certainly not the way it is applied by pro-vaxxers on mdc - where choosing to criticize vaccine is very likely to lead to allegations of being a conspiracy theorist. For example: many pro-vaxxers here think I am a conspiracy theorist. I disagree....and I suspect many non-vaxxers would agree I am not a conspiracy theorist. If people who have argued/discussed this for hours cannot come to a conclusions on who is and who isn't a conspiracy theorist, then how could a survey?

Here is the wording from the motherjones article:

"ewandowsky's team conducted the research through an online survey of 1,001 Americans, which asked them a variety of questions about conspiracy theories, and also separate batteries of questions on vaccines, climate change, and genetically modified foods. On vaccines, for instance, survey respondents were asked how much they agree with statements like "The risk of vaccinations to maim and kill children outweighs their health benefits" and "I believe vaccines are a safe and reliable way to help avert the spread of preventable diseases."

Note the hyperbolic words used with vaccines "maim and kill". This might deliberately exclude many non vaxxers and almost all selective/delayers. The more moderate non-vaxxers might be excluded from their survey through the use of hyperbolic words.
That was just one of the questions. There were two which would have given a "reverse score" in the vaccination questionnaire, the other one was mild and would have included the less extreme non-vaxers.

Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2016-06-26 at 6.31.57 PM.png
Views:	100
Size:	236.8 KB
ID:	45897

The earth is not flat | Vaccines work | Chemtrails aren't a thing | Climate change is real #standupforscience
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
teacozy is offline  
#17 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 04:44 PM
 
teacozy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Hogwarts
Posts: 4,857
Mentioned: 525 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3490 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
The problem with all of this is that so many people who DO VACCINATE have to also spend time believing in conspiracies that it just doesn't work as a dividing line. Because way too many Americans go for conspiracy theories. Many, many, many, many more than decline vaccines.

However, it is clear that it is an essential pillar of your thinking, so who am I to undermine your world view?
Well, yeah. Most people in general vaccinate, so it follows that there are going to be overall more "conspiracy theorists" who are pro-vaccine. The question is what percentage of those who vaccinate believe in conspiracy theories vs what percentage of those who don't vaccinate believe in conspiracy theories?

The earth is not flat | Vaccines work | Chemtrails aren't a thing | Climate change is real #standupforscience
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
teacozy is offline  
#18 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 06:20 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Again, the distinction between reality and theory is never pronounced.

What is the reality we see happening before our eyes? On in forty-five!

Evidence based science! We can see the weather is more extreme then it was when i was a kid.

I can see there are more neurologically damaged kids in my kid's class then there were in mine.

Evidense-based science! What is the reality, what is the theory?!
Anne Jividen is offline  
#19 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 06:26 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by teacozy View Post
Well, yeah. Most people in general vaccinate, so it follows that there are going to be overall more "conspiracy theorists" who are pro-vaccine. The question is what percentage of those who vaccinate believe in conspiracy theories vs what percentage of those who don't vaccinate believe in conspiracy theories?
Only if you think that one group is saner and smarter than the other group. Otherwise a few percentage points in one direction or the other won't matter at all.

I'll give you a flipped example.

Some vaccine critics believe that the vaccine compliant are followers, prone to going along with the crowd, disinclined to think independently or make up their own minds about important questions. Some of the bits that substantiate this point of view:

1) parents who don't even know what vaccines their baby got at the last well visit

2) parents who believe that getting the vaccines guarantees that their baby won't get sick and feel free to haul the poor tot around through malls and into crowded restaurants

3) the awesome similarity of many pro-vaccine comments on some facebook pages, newspaper and magazine articles, etc.

I'm sure we can all come up with more of this sort of observations. Is it science? Is it a conclusive judgement on the character of the vaccine compliant parent? Does it matter what percentage of the vaccine compliant actually know what vaccines their child got at the last "well" baby visit?

I think my evidence that most people who vaccinate are compliant without any real thought is pretty convincing. Just as convincing as the claims that most people who question vaccines fall into the extreme end of conspiratorial beliefs in fact.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Last edited by Deborah; 06-28-2016 at 04:21 PM.
Deborah is online now  
#20 of 43 Old 06-26-2016, 06:42 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
There is a difference between theory and reality.

Putting the word "conspiracy" before the former, does not disprove the latter.
Anne Jividen is offline  
#21 of 43 Old 06-28-2016, 04:22 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
bumping this up in the hope that someone will respond to my evidence about the lack of active thought among the vaccine compliant in post #19 .
Anne Jividen likes this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#22 of 43 Old 06-28-2016, 06:45 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
bumping this up in the hope that someone will respond to my evidence about the lack of active thought among the vaccine compliant in post #19 .
for my own, i would like to request "active thought" be defined as reality........


I will of course defer to the OP's meaning......

As someone who is trying to "actively think" the existing reality is pushing me away from the practice of vaccination.
applejuice likes this.
Anne Jividen is offline  
#23 of 43 Old 06-28-2016, 06:49 PM
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,389
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 438 Post(s)
OK, also wanted to get some opinions about Polly Tommey's camera phone being "deactivated".

What do y'all think? Just a glitch, or nefarious powers shutting down the conversation......

https://www.periscope.tv/AutismMedia/1lPKqzZQaVmGb
https://www.periscope.tv/AutismMedia/1jMKgnogzzOxL
applejuice likes this.
Anne Jividen is offline  
#24 of 43 Old 06-29-2016, 06:15 AM
 
SchoolmarmDE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 877
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 424 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
I'm not sure any of them qualify.

I think with Vioxx, Merck sort of knew there was something wrong, but they were hoping it wasn't as wrong as it looked and in the meantime maybe they could sell a LOT of product. So I call that one a mix of wishful thinking, greed, dishonesty.

Thalidomide was a reasonable sort of mistake that turned into a horrible disaster. The conspiracy part comes later when the manufacturer manages to deny responsibility more or less forever.

Tuskegee? Fits right in with the laws in the US that allowed sterilization of the "unfit" who often just happened to be outsiders like blacks or native americans or poor people. I'm rather doubtful that the people who started the experiment had any idea they were behaving unethically. Which is pretty sickening, but given american history, not surprising.

The largest conspiracy I've come across lately is the one involving genetically modified food. That one is truly massive, although I think a large number of the players aren't really aware of what was done, how it was done, or why it was done. In other words, they are true believers and just as deceived as the rest of the mob. The group of people who consciously made the active decisions was tiny.
I would disagree with you at least on Tuskeegee.

Perhaps it's from living in a place with a proud history of dissent, but I think the experimenters knew they were behaving unethically, even if lawfully, and they certainly agreed not to disclose their behavior to any of the people affected, for years.

Similarly, medical experimentation by the Third Reich, which might get a similar pass, doesn't, because the behavior of the experimenters afterwards, in destroying incriminating documents, shows pretty conclusively that they knew they were wrong. People know they are wrong, even when they have the power to be.

But we don't have to go boutique in finding conspiracies. The presentation of "Weapons of mass destruction" as an excuse for regime change in Iraq is clearly a conspiracy. Whether regime change was necessary or not is a different debate, but various players decided to subvert the ability of Congress to advise and consent.

Or guns for hostages, that was a good one.
applejuice and Deborah like this.
SchoolmarmDE is offline  
#25 of 43 Old 06-29-2016, 07:07 AM
 
samaxtics's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,083
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1416 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deborah View Post
I'm not sure any of them qualify.

I think with Vioxx, Merck sort of knew there was something wrong, but they were hoping it wasn't as wrong as it looked and in the meantime maybe they could sell a LOT of product. So I call that one a mix of wishful thinking, greed, dishonesty.

Thalidomide was a reasonable sort of mistake that turned into a horrible disaster. The conspiracy part comes later when the manufacturer manages to deny responsibility more or less forever.

Tuskegee? Fits right in with the laws in the US that allowed sterilization of the "unfit" who often just happened to be outsiders like blacks or native americans or poor people. I'm rather doubtful that the people who started the experiment had any idea they were behaving unethically. Which is pretty sickening, but given american history, not surprising.

The largest conspiracy I've come across lately is the one involving genetically modified food. That one is truly massive, although I think a large number of the players aren't really aware of what was done, how it was done, or why it was done. In other words, they are true believers and just as deceived as the rest of the mob. The group of people who consciously made the active decisions was tiny.
For the most part I agree.

I see similarities between vaccines and the other issues I listed. Did people accuse the critics of Tuskegee, Vioxx and Thalidomide of being conspiracy theorists? I'm not aware of any such labels. So why the label for vaccine critics?
applejuice and Deborah like this.
samaxtics is offline  
#26 of 43 Old 06-29-2016, 06:05 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by samaxtics View Post
For the most part I agree.

I see similarities between vaccines and the other issues I listed. Did people accuse the critics of Tuskegee, Vioxx and Thalidomide of being conspiracy theorists? I'm not aware of any such labels. So why the label for vaccine critics?
They woulda if they coulda!
applejuice likes this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#27 of 43 Old 06-29-2016, 06:13 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by SchoolmarmDE View Post
I would disagree with you at least on Tuskeegee.

Perhaps it's from living in a place with a proud history of dissent, but I think the experimenters knew they were behaving unethically, even if lawfully, and they certainly agreed not to disclose their behavior to any of the people affected, for years.

Similarly, medical experimentation by the Third Reich, which might get a similar pass, doesn't, because the behavior of the experimenters afterwards, in destroying incriminating documents, shows pretty conclusively that they knew they were wrong. People know they are wrong, even when they have the power to be.

But we don't have to go boutique in finding conspiracies. The presentation of "Weapons of mass destruction" as an excuse for regime change in Iraq is clearly a conspiracy. Whether regime change was necessary or not is a different debate, but various players decided to subvert the ability of Congress to advise and consent.

Or guns for hostages, that was a good one.
I've got to concede on Tuskegee. What messed me up is that I'm reading a new biography of Lincoln by Blumenthal and the description of the utter self-righteousness of the slaveowners confronted with the beginnings of the abolition movement and the cooperation of many affluent and powerful northerners with the slaveowners rubbed my nose in how deep, powerful and ruthless the race based politics in the US really are.
applejuice likes this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#28 of 43 Old 10-03-2016, 07:11 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
Here is an interesting example of some doctors who believe there is a conspiracy against the diagnosis of Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma http://www.healio.com/pediatrics/pra...iatrics%20news

Quote:
“The truth is that this is a manufactured controversy — invented by a few authors, primarily so they can be used as expert witnesses,” Daniel Lindberg, MD, associated professor of emergency medicine and pediatrics at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, said in a press release.
They did an e-mail survey of doctors who work with babies who show up with the symptoms that are used to diagnose SBS or ABT and these doctors still have faith that the diagnosis is solid. Oddly, there is no mention of the overturned legal cases other than the mention of expert witnesses.

Nowadays, something like this is considered science? An e-mail survey?
samaxtics likes this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#29 of 43 Old 10-03-2016, 07:28 PM
 
Deborah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: the Seacoast of Bohemia
Posts: 15,469
Mentioned: 333 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2775 Post(s)
The point of the survey is to show that this diagnosis is still commonly accepted, therefore it must be true in all cases, therefore anyone who criticizes it must be wrong. It is to help build a legal defense.

On the other hand, there is a substantial body of evidence that other things can cause the same symptoms (not mentioned at all in this article) and any sort of "science" that a priori refuses to look at other possible causes, especially in a legal case that could result in years in prison for an innocent person, is bad science.

This article reviews some situations that can "mimic" the essential symptoms currently labeled as AHT. http://www.insidejusticeuk.com/artic...ead-trauma/137

Quote:
What emerges from the above discussions is that this is a field in crisis. Medical, legal, academic and other scholars have voiced concern about the use of the SBS/AHT triad of symptoms as a tool for diagnosis and prosecution, as significant medical and scientific evidence discredits its very existence. Each of the symptoms contained in the triad have several natural and accidental causes in addition to abuse, so it is therefore difficult to see how the triad could be considered reliable in a medical or scientific sense. Maintaining that the triad is reliable in a legal sense is simply absurd.

Furthermore, it needs to be questioned how objective the science around the triad and identification of SBS/AHT really is. Although the identification of symptoms might be objective (i.e. symptoms are present and correctly identified), concluding that these symptoms are indeed evidence consistent with non-accidental injuries appears to be a completely subjective exercise.
Which is why the e-mail survey in my first link is not actually evidence for AHT.

Discussion of some of the legal problems. http://www.stevensoncriminaldefense....--part-2.shtml

Quote:
In order to cope with the increasing challenges, the supporters of SBS made a change in terminology away from SBS to AHT (abusive head trauma). This change in nomenclature resulted in three important advantages to the supporters of SBS/AHT. First, unlike SBS, AHT allows for an endless variety of possible causes for the presence of the triad. Second, the diagnosis of AHT relieves the proponent from the arduous task of actually having to provide a cause. The cause of abusive head trauma is abuse to the head to the extent that trauma is caused. Third, the use of AHT distances the supporter from the questionable history of SBS. However, once one understands the history of SBS, one can better see that all that has really changed is the name. Like SBS, AHT is a self-fulfilling prophecy, one in which its mere diagnosis implies the cause.
Curiously, the critics of SBS/AHT are not accusing the proponents of conspiring, just of being mentally stuck in defending a paradigm. On the other hand, the proponents of SBS/AHT do seem to think that their critics are part of a conspiracy...to do what...get violent child abusers out of jail by deceiving the courts?
samaxtics likes this.

vaccine injury is preventable
prevent it
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
(if the government still allows you to say no...) #teamvaxchoice
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Deborah is online now  
#30 of 43 Old 10-04-2016, 05:32 AM
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 504
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
In reply

to the comment that people who vaccinate act on mindless impulses to conform: why can't some (many) be acting to promote health? Just as some anti-vacciners may conversely be acting on uncertain fears? I think people are complex, and it's hard to make blanket statements. Thalidomide, as I understand it, was rushed into production without an appropriate testing period. I think this is not too uncommon, as medical models often don't (or haven't) included unique female health issues. A conspiracy? Misogyny maybe, arrogance and greed. Whatever our personal experiences, our history, will form our world view. Two people can be looking at the same scene and see very different things, how to verify either one is correct? One, both, neither?
mumto1 is offline  
Reply


User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Online Users: 14,859

29 members and 14,830 guests
anthropology , BirthFree , broodymama , ChasingLittleFeesers , christine.l2017 , Deborah , Dovenoir , emmy526 , esg , Fluffer , friendly_mum , gizzypeach , greenemami , hillymum , jamesmorrow , Katherine73 , lhargrave89 , lisak1234 , Mirzam , moominmamma , NaturallyKait , rocatalicia , RollerCoasterMama , rubelin , Shelsi , Springshowers , sren , zebra15
Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 12:21 PM.