Andrew Wakefield: Fraud – The Facts

Over on the “Stop the Australian Vaccination Network” (AVN) Facebook page, this got thrown up; a 15-page comic looking at the epic fraud by Andrew Wakefield, the money he gained from it, the money he stood to gain, and the implicit media and politicians who had their heads so far up their arses they literally had shit for brains.

Darryl Cunningham has put together a brilliantly illustrated book with an interesting use of real media in the comic that brings the comic down to earth – perhaps long enough for you to realize the sobering fact that children have died because of the personal greed of Andrew Wakefield and Richard Barr.

Perhaps long enough to realize that it didn’t just affect the children of the parents who were too scared to vaccinate because they believed the misinformation from Andrew Wakefield, Richard Barr, Jim Carrey, and Jenny McCarthey; it affects EVERYONE.

So, check out “The Facts in the Case of Dr. Andrew Wakefield“:

Darryl Cunningham Investigates

The final page really makes the same point as I, and others have been wanting for a long time:

Informed Journalism.

TruthAboutGardasil.org: Willful Ignorance or Sick Scam?

The access to the internet has meant that any poorly, educated dropkick can write about whatever they like;  such as me for example. While it may seem like there is little harm in it, the fact is there is a LOT of harm the misinformation people post on the internet, can do.

The effects of the spread of information can be seen both locally and overseas, such as the measles outbreaks in the US.

Often, it makes me pause to think whether these people are they serious in their belief, or if are they are simply preying on people – unfortunately, it frequently is the former.

This post is going to focus on just one website, for no other reason than at at 2:30am this morning the anonymous @Gardasil_Truth insisted on being wilfully ignorant, which I’ll be honest – pissed me off.

@Gardasil_Truth pushes a website run by @mariangreene04 (@TrthabtGardasil) which is supported by Jeffery Norris. As it stands, WHOIS indicates the website is registered in his name.

Marian, Mistress of Misinformation

Marian is going to be particularly angry at me for posting this; but it’s a point that needs to be made. The people that hold these erroneous beliefs are everyday people – People who make the mistake of thinking someone has posted all their “personal info” for all to see, when what you see above is all that was available. They THINK their information is posted for all to see because they were logged in at the time – Marian will know what I’m talking about.

More often than not, the internets’ anti something-or-other are everyday citizens like Marian Greene. You would unlikely know it (aside from the great big URL on her Facebook profile), but it’s people who like this that think they know what they are talking about, when they so frequently don’t. They don’t know what they don’t know.

It’s the average person walking along in the street, driving in the car next to you, or riding the coin-operated horse, who places themselves at the pinnacle of knowledge and wisdom, proclaiming that they are the only ones that need be convinced, and through their incompetence, ignorance, and arrogance, fail to understand that it is we uneducated dropkicks who know fuck-all about clinical research, which is why it is so important to get over our personal experience and look at the body of evidence – not cherry-pick the bits we want because it confirms our preconceived ideas.

But – to an extent, it’s not their fault. Most hold these erroneous beliefs simply as a result of only being exposed to one side of an issue; where the only information they are aware of is that which is provided to them within their ideological bubble of sycophants – There comes a point however, after years of not just being told they are wrong, but of years of evidence being provided that directly contradict their claims, that we can no longer say, it’s not their fault.

After a point, it is willful ignorance.

It is a desire to cling to their convictions, to hold the fort no matter what – in the face of everything –  They will forsake EVERYTHING to hold on to their last bastion of bullshit belief.

Marian made it clear: she said she had “all the evidence” she needed, that she was convinced, and that’s all that matters.

.. Sorry, but no.

This is not about your belief or opinion, Marian. This is about your sensationalist spin of HPV Vaccines, the implicit suggestion that there is a cover up, and the impact your campaigning has on impeding the health of young women world wide.

This is about your concerted effort to have governments PULL a vaccine off the shelves that can prevent hundreds of thousands of women around the world from getting Cervical Cancer, a vaccine which has had over 35,000,000 dosages issue, and of which only 0.2% reported a reaction.

Any why? Why do you want it pulled? Not because of a high rate of death. Not because of possible contamination of the batches. NO – because of her personal experience.

It is evident, that to Marian, the personal experience of others doesn’t count when they have to endure Cervical Cancer because a HPV Vaccine was no longer available.

By the start of 2010 she had made up her mind to fight against Gardasil, regardless of the facts; or the statistics – which she makes up on a whim. She has no doubt since that moment been provided encouragement and attention from various anti-vaccination nutjobs and groups who have less of a clue than she does about clinical research. See previous post – The Dunning Kruger Effect.

A strong motivation to Help

When presented with the assertion that the stats she uses are incorrect, rather than asking why, or how, she dismisses it as an “opinion”. With a resounding “I know what I know, and you won’t change that” mentality, she is a crusader of the most dangerous type – one that has faith in what she knows because of “personal experience”, rather than because of any statistical information that demonstrates the facts. She is a danger because she doesn’t campaign on what she KNOWS, but what she BELIEVES.

In one of her conversations for instance, @mariangreene04 attempted to tell @ratbagsdotcom that because HPV is a Virus, it could not cause cervical cancer; and as such, Gardisal was not preventing cervical cancer. Perhaps Marian was being particularily lazy when she decided to ignore the fact that HPV 16 & HPV18 leads to 70% of cervical cancer cases.

It’s information this was easily obtainable through a search, which would have lead her to this page and statement:

Persistent HPV infections are now recognized as the cause of essentially all cervical cancers. It was estimated that, in 2010, about 12,000 women in the United States would be diagnosed with this type of cancer and more than 4,000 would die from it. Cervical cancer is diagnosed in nearly half a million women each year worldwide, claiming a quarter of a million lives annually.

Needless to say, the statistics are supported by various lines of evidence on the page.

Nirvana: Just a Band

One of arguments from @Gardisal_Truth was that “100 people have died”. Despite this being factually incorrect, it is of course a logical fallacy – an Appeal to the Perfect Solution. (A Nirvana Fallacy). The argument is one of black and white thinking and can come from an incompetence in understanding complex problems and the interplay between multiple individual elements of a problem.

That sounds resoundingly similar to this situation.

While it’s a virtue to believe that a single death is one too many, we live in reality – not utopia. While not using Gardasil would mean no would die from Gardasil, it would mean many, many more would die from cervical cancer.

By June 21, 2010 the total number of deaths reported to VEARS was 68. Of the 68, only 32 have been confirmed, and of those no unusual pattern or clustering of the deaths were reported that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine.

Additionally, Curtis L. Allen, a spokesman for the CDC, said such reports should not be taken as proof that the vaccine is responsible for an individual case.

“It’s not quite as cut and dried as many people would think it would be,” he said. “VAERS is an early warning system — what it does is, it points you towards dangerous signals. It doesn’t say, ‘OK, this is a cause.'”

When I first questioned @Gardasil_Truth on Twitter about the claims, it’s very likely that I received their PRATT (Points Raised a Thousand Times) treatment.

Like a checklist to be ticked off before ignoring the answer, @Gardasil_Truth listed “facts” about Gadasil, and about the website:

  • Their website is just about “getting the word out”, and
  • “asking that people research Gardasil” before making a decision.

This is interesting, given that their websites’ introduction contains no such statement, nor is there a disclaimer that Marian has no formal qualifications and that medical expertise should be consultated rather than accepting the enduring rants at face value.

A search for “PubMed” on their website revealed one hit. This one: Quantifying the possible cross-reactivity risk of an HPV16 Vaccine

The study looked to quantify the actual and theoretical risks involved. The results stated that side-effects were almost completely unavoidable and concluded that any such HPV16 vaccine be thoroughly tested. DUH.

But ONE? Just ONE?!

ONE PubMed results on a website whose advocates claim they are “getting the word out”, the same people that insinuate that side effects were a secret?!

Even a simple bloody Google search would have given them the data the CDC has on Gardasil; though, I suppose when you’re on a misinformed vendetta, it’s far better to simply espouse laden bullshit than engage in a in-depth attempt at research.

So no, while I don’t think “TruthAboutGardasil” is a scam, what it is, is the crafty work of a concerned mother who lacks a grounded and unbiased knowledge of vaccines, a basic understanding of know to review scientific literature, and who refuses to see the benefits that can come from the HPV Vaccine far out way the risks involved.

The Government is Lying about Vaccines again! .. or not.

A commenter on this mother-based website’s article noted that she didn’t care for information that comes from the Government, or from any of its arms.

It seems she won’t accept the data, not on the basis on the accuracy of the data – she doesn’t care if it’s right or wrong. Apparently, it’s automatically wrong BECAUSE it’s from the government:

Reduced symptoms & Increased Mortality Rate vs Reduced Mortality Rate: A hard choice, apparently

What I’d be interested in is just where she, and others like her are getting their “facts” from?

The concept is quite odd, given that Governments are generally the only one in a position to gather the rich data sets – and it’s often quite easy for someone to say “Government” and disassociate the idea of a collective from the vast number of people that work towards the running on a country – many of which would need to be implicated in such a conspiracy.

Most, if not all private institutions don’t have the capacity to gather statistical information as rich as the government can – so, on what reliable, statistically significant DATA is she acting upon? I suggest none.

It’s cynicism.

I suppose, like all conspiracy theorists – there are only two options available when they refuse to believe that others are correct. Either everyone is wrong, or everyone is lying. It’s often too far fetched for them to believe that they themselves could EVER be wrong – and it’s that kind of willful ignorance that gets people infected, and killed.

So, kudos to the parents who vaccinate! – It’s sensible, rational, and responsible.

Vaccinations, The Flu, and You.

Winter is on it’s way, and with it the encouragement for the public to get Flu Vaccinations. Many higher-risk public-sector workplaces are offering the service free to their staff, such as Public Transport Services and Hospitals.

Importantly, everyone should have a clear understanding of Herd Immunity. I found as video that demonstrated it well, although the introduction is a bit boring as it has more to do with the USA rather than Australia. The video can be found here at a previous post.

Sydney’s Northern Beaches recently experienced the effects of a reduction in Vaccination rates (The Manly Daily), which I wrote about at the time. It’s a topic that needs to be frequently covered, as anti-vaccination propaganda that gets passed around eventually finds someone who will take it as fact.

It’s worth nothing that some anti-vaccination websites promote “natural” immunisation methods .. such as simply allowing your children to get sick; sometimes herd immunity or germ theory was rejected all together, usually both, and more often than not they dismiss any documentation without reading it. Anti-science rhetoric is common.

Let’s look at some of the common themes of Anti-Vaccination Groups:

Ingredient Misinformation

Ingredients are generally the first “line of attack” for Anti-Vax proponents. The information they give ABOUT their claims is generally factually incorrect and is often recited verbatim without any fact-checking performed. It is because these concepts are so ingrained it is often difficult to demonstrate through evidence that their knowledge is incorrect.

Anti-Freeze – FALSE!

The “antifreeze” error comes from a misunderstanding of the ethylene chemical compounds – all that is ethylene is not antifreeze.

Formaldehyde – TRUE!

Vaccines utilize formaldehyde that is identical to the substance found naturally in our bodies as a metabolic byproduct of methanol. It is commonly excreted in our urine as waste or converted into formalin.

Formaldehyde in our bodies = H2CO (natural)
Formaldehyde in vaccines = H2CO (synthetic)

Formaldehyde has other uses and is changed to be used in conjunction with other synthetic chemical compounds. These compounds, solutions, gasses, or resins can be, and often are, toxic.

Formaldehyde in embalming fluid = H2CO+CH3OH+CH3CH2OH+solvents
Formaldehyde in plywood = H2CO+NH2CONH2+CH3OH+HCOOH+H2O

Thimerosal – Depends! (On which Vaccine)

Thimerosal is a preservative that is used in the manufacturing process of some vaccines and other medicines to prevent the growth of bacteria and fungi, which could otherwise cause illness or injury.

Most anti-vaxers will claim that the amount of mercury that used to be in vaccine exceeded EPA exposure guidelines. However, Thimerosal metabolises into ethylmercury, not methylmercury. The guidelines are specifically for methylmercury, as ethylmercury has a half-life of only a few days to about a week, thus is not considered dangerous enough to regulate. You will literally get more exposure to mercury from a 6oz tin of Tuna.

In addition, Thimerosal has not be used in the MMR vaccine since 2002 and was removed due to political pressure as part of a recommendation, not a regulation. Despite the removal of thimerosal from vaccines, resulting in exposure levels lower than anytime in the past, autism rates have not declined, suggesting that there is no connection between thimerosal and autism.

Baby Foetuses – False!

This was simply scare-campaigning and not true in the slightest.

Aluminium – True!

Vaccines contain aluminum in a salt form. Anti-vaxers claim this is toxic, and some will cite that 4ppm will cause blood to coagulate. However, individuals are not exposed to such amounts of aluminum in a single vaccination visit. Below are the vaccines containing aluminum, with the corresponding parts per million (ppm) for an infant (~251 mL of blood in the body) and an 80lb. child (~4000 mL of blood); note the two numbers for DTaP represent extreme ranges of aluminum content.:

ppm (w/v) = (weight in grams of sample/volume of sample in mL) * 106
Vaccine ppm in infant ppm in child age received (in months)
DTaP (170mcg) .677 .043 2, 4, 6, w/ final ~4-6 yrs
DTaP(625mcg) 2.490 .156
Hep A .996 .063 12 w/ final ~6 mo. later
Hep B .996 .063 birth, 1 or 2, final at 6+
HiB .896 .056 2, 4
HPV .896 .056 11 or 12 yrs., then 2, 6 mo.
Pediatrix 3.386 .213 2, 4, 6 (in lieu of DTaP, IPV and Hep B)
Pentacel 1.315 .083 2, 4, 6, 15-18 (in lieu of DTaP, IPV and HiB)
Pneumococcus .498 .031 2, 4, 6, 12-15

Safety and Effectiveness

Measles, United States 1950-2001

After false claims about ingredients, the argument often falls towards Safety and Effectiveness. Essentially stemming from a lack of knowledge in statistics – specifically, gathering, analysis, and interpretation.

Statistically, the information from numerous data-sets demonstrates that vaccines are, in fact, effective in reducing the incidence rate of infection.

Improved socioeconomic conditions have undoubtedly had an indirect impact on disease. Better nutrition, the development of antibiotics and other treatments have increased survival rates among the sick; less crowded living conditions have reduced disease transmission; and lower birth rates have decreased the number of susceptible household contacts — all factors accounted for.

The only suspected issues Vaccines occur if a child has a rare, hereditary, mitochondrial disorder that pre-disposes them to a reaction – and even for this, the supporting information is not currently conclusive, nor strong. There is a test available that checks for this disorder.

Autism Spectrum Disorder

Interestingly, the published speculation about a link between Vaccines and Autism was made specifically about the MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella) vaccine; this information was lated investigated and found to have been manufactured by Dr. Andrew Wakefield and his colleagues.

The Paper was initially published in the respected medical journal The Lancet but later retracted after an investigation found Dr. Wakefield had several ethics breaches, including failure to disclose financial compensation from a lawyer representing families claiming MMR cause their children’s autism, failure to disclose financial interests in patents for MMR alternatives, failure to include data which contradicted his conclusions, use of contaminated samples to support his conclusions.

On May 24, 2010, the General Medical Council issued a determination that Wakefield was found guilty of professional misconduct and should be erased from the Medical Register in the U.K. (meaning that his license to practice medicine in the U.K. has been revoked).

And again, to date, no rigorous, controlled study has shown a causal link between vaccines and autism.

Vaccines are injected into the bloodstream  – False!

This claim stems from a lack of knowledge about anatomy, specifically – the lymphatic system. Vaccines are either injected subcutaneously, injected intramuscularly, given by mouth, or squirted up the nose.

Since subcutaneous and intramuscular vaccines are injected directly into the body, and antigens and other components are taken into the bloodstream via the lymphatic system (in order to spur antibody production through hyperstimulation of the Th2/humoral response) without passing through our ordinary immune defences.

At this point, no vaccines are recommended for injection into your bloodstream via the intravenous method. The CDC Pinkbook includes a Vaccine Administration section (Appendix D Page 5), which demonstrates the correct route of administration for each vaccine.

Conspiracy Theories

By the time Anti-Vax proponents get to this stage they have already exhausted their Ingredient & Efficacy arguments; arguments that are subsequently used  time and time again, despite being proven to be false. Usually, it is clear by this point that they have these beliefs because they have been personally affected by some infection, serious disease, or death and are looking for Agency. (Something/someone to blame).

Generally, it starts with the allegation that “Big Pharma” is poisoning your children, or you. The “evidence” cited is often not evidence at all, rather it is rife with innuendo and references to “consumerism”, or “corporate america”.  The claim involves everyone from manufacturers, governments, regulators, and health professionals.

Most challenges are met with ad hominem attacks of “You’re a Big Pharma Shill”, or claims you’re part cover-up of the information.

Ironic, given the names of some of these “informed choice” advocates. One, calling themselves the “Australian Vaccination Network” or AVN was ordered by the New South Wales Health Care Complaints Commission to clearly identify themselves as Anti-Vaccination based on the information that the AVN was:

  • provides information that is solely anti-vaccination
  • contains information that is incorrect and misleading
  • quotes selectively from research to suggest that vaccination may be dangerous.

I am willing to make it clear that there are justified concerns with Big Pharma. However, the allegation of a deliberate attack on the public isn’t supported by anything; most importantly, the statistics. It is purely a tactic – a Red Herring – something to take the argument towards how “terrible and greedy” pharmaceutical companies are, as if that was enough to proven that vaccines were dangerous.

Regardless of the conspiracies, the statistics demonstrate vaccinations work.

Additionally, Anna Kata in the Department of Anthropology of McMaster University in Hamilton Ontario released a paper, A postmodern Pandora’s box: Anti-vaccination misinformation on the Internet set out to examine and analyze antivaccination websites. In which she analysed information contained in Eight-Antivaccination sites, selected through Google searches that were used to identify the highest-ranked anti-vaccine sites using typical search strategies.

Her paper can be found here: http://resources.cpha.ca/CCIAP/data/1700e.pdf

 

More Links:

Wakefield Supports Vaccines

“My opinion, again, is that the monovalent, the single vaccines, measles, mumps and rubella, are likely in this context to be safer than the polyvalent vaccine.”

– Andrew Wakefield, Twenty Twenty Television

I found the quote to be quite a far way away from what is preached by the no-vaccination lobby group like the Australian Vaccination Network (Anti-Vaccination Network), who still refuses to place this health warning issued by the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC):

More on the Australian Vaccination Network Warning:

http://www.hccc.nsw.gov.au/Publications/Media-Releases/PUBLIC-WARNING-/default.aspx

PUBLIC WARNING ABOUT THE AUSTRALIAN VACCINATION NETWORK (AVN)

26 July 2010

by the Health Care Complaints Commission under section 94A of the Health Care Complaints Act 1993 

The Health Care Complaints Commission has investigated two complaints about the Australian Vaccination Network (AVN), a non-profit organisation registered in New South Wales that provides information about vaccination. The complaints alleged that the AVN provides incorrect and misleading information about vaccination.

The Commission’s investigation of the complaints focussed on the material presented by the AVN on its website http://www.avn.org.au.

The Commission’s investigation established that the AVN website:

 

  • provides information that is solely anti-vaccination
  • contains information that is incorrect and misleading
  • quotes selectively from research to suggest that vaccination may be dangerous.

On this basis, the Commission recommended to the AVN that it should include a statement in a prominent position on its website to the following effect:

 

  • The AVN’s purpose is to provide information against vaccination, in order to balance what it believes is the substantial amount of pro-vaccination information available elsewhere.
  • The information provided by the AVN should not be read as medical advice.
  • The decision about whether or not to vaccinate should be made in consultation with a health care provider.

The Commission recognises that it is important for there to be debate on the issue of vaccination. However, the AVN provides information that is inaccurate and misleading.

The AVN’s failure to include a notice on its website of the nature recommended by the Commission may result in members of the public making improperly informed decisions about whether or not to vaccinate, and therefore poses a risk to public health and safety.

Further Information

For further information, contact Mr Kim Swan, the Executive Officer of the Health Care Complaints Commission, on 9219 7483 or send an email to media@hccc.nsw.gov.au.

Yes, Northern Beaches – we have our misinformed too.

It’s of no surprise to see the comments that have been posted over on The Manly Daily’s article on an outbreak of Pertussis on the Northern Beaches. (http://manly-daily.whereilive.com.au/news/comments/parents-lashed-over-whooping-cough-outbreak/)

Unfortunately for this anonymous person with an “open mind”, the statistics they quoted are incorrect. Firstly, the correct % for Australian Children is around 90% overall – not 97%, as reported by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare in their publication “A Picture of Australian Children”. While a minimum of around 88% should be reached, the recommended rate of vaccination by the NHMRC is greater than 90%.

“When a person is vaccinated, their body produces an immune response in the same way their body would after exposure to a disease, but without the person suffering symptoms of the disease. When a person comes in contact with that disease in the future, their immune system will respond fast enough to prevent the person developing the disease.”  – http://www.immunise.health.gov.au/internet/immunise/publishing.nsf/Content/faq

Furthermore, Some parents often wonder why their children are contracting pertussis (Whooping Cough / WC) even when they’re immunized / vaccinated. This is, unfortunately, due to a misunderstanding of the way vaccination, and the subsequent immunisation of people occurs.

What is important here is the term “Herd Immunity”. Herd Immunity is a mathematical phenomena that exists because of immunisation rates. I found a wonderfully satirical video about it, and explains the mathematics that explain it’s effect, and demonstrates the effects visually. The video’s start is quite slow and goes on a bit about US politics and Lobby Groups, however Herd Immunity is VERY well explained and demonstrated later in the piece.

httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-cKzzPkz2o

Back to the comments at The Manly Daily: The problem with guessing is that it’s not supported by evidence. Even off the bat however, the child in question contracted his Whooping Cough from a child who WAS NOT VACCINATED. — So much for guessing.

"KNOWING", in the Maternal Instinct sense is NOT evidence.

Annette’s maternal “knowing” is not supported by evidence; there are hereditary mitochondrial defects that may be affected by a vaccine SCHEDULE (an overwhelming on an already diminished system) because of a pre-existing immunodeficiency. These are rare cases, and since their understanding is only relatively recent, people who are unaware of their own mitochondrial status would not be inclined to test their children before vaccination.

I point out schedule because the schedule is based on an average, healthy, immune system. The schedule can be changed to suit those who have mitochondrial defects so they CAN be effectively vaccinated, and subsequently immunised against disease like all others.

I actually laughed when I decided to check in to Dr Scheibner’s credentials. Viera doesn’t disclose what field she is a Doctor in; rather she leaves it up to the reader to take it that she is “in the know” through suggestion.

As it turns out, she is a Geologist.

Now, I’m NOT saying she is wrong BECAUSE she is Geologist, I am pointing out the red flag. This is an Appeal to Dubious Authority – her own! She’s so renowned she has her own Wikipedia page! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viera_Scheibner)

“Since retiring from the Department of Mineral Resources, Scheibner has been active as an anti-vaccination campaigner, making numerous statements linking vaccinations to various conditions, injuries and deaths. Her claims have been widely criticised and refuted by medical professionals.”

Viera lays claims that Polio, Measles, Whooping Cough and Rubella are beneficial to children; injuries and death attributed to Shaken Baby Syndrome, including retinal bleeding, broken bones, fractured skulls and detached retinas are actually caused by vaccination, and she believes there is a deliberate cover-up by the medical professional (Nurses, Medical Doctors, Immunologist, Infectious Disease Researchers, Medical researchers, etc, etc) to protect the Vaccination Program.

I was unable to find the evidence she cited.

Bronwyn Hancock, Vaccination Information Service -- Another AntiVaccination Group.

Bronwyn Hancock’s statements are not statistically supported by an official data, nor demonstrated through any rigorous trials. It should be noted that the Vaccination Information Service is NOT a government group, rather it is well-known to be anti-vaccination; Brownyn Hancock, along with others who run the organisation, purport to be “pro-informed choice”, unfortunately, the information presented on their website is fear-driven, and lacking in credible supporting documentation, and uses very little in the way of facts.

It’s been a while since then, and Paolo Just thought to reply to a previous post in the comments thread regarding the aforementioned video, and to others, laying claim that the documentation used is wrong BECAUSE it was (in his mind) financed by “Big Pharma” as it were.

I found It interesting he would quote Frank Lloyd Wrights’ “never let the facts get in the way of the truth”, after he continually denied evidence through cynicism. There was never any substantiated rebuttal of any of the evidence provided other than slander.

I too can quote!

“In my experience, the most staunchly held views are based on ignorance or accepted dogma, not carefully considered accumulations of facts. The more you expose the intricacies and realities of the situation, the less clear-cut things become.”
— Mary Roach

I made it clear it was my opinion that he was the epitome of some who could not be reasoned with; not because of his beliefs, but rather because he lacked the intellectual ability to understand how his logic was fallacious.

If Paolo were serious and genuine about making a point, he really should grow up and put forward arguments that are logical and without fallacy, and make claims that are supported by the body of evidence. At the end of the day, when someone is vehemently defending claims and denying empirical evidence, there really is only two options for them to believe.

For conspiracy theorists, they think they’re right and everyone is wrong. The alternative is there is a massive worldwide cover-up that everyone is in on.

However, for reasonable and the science literate, and those willing to investigate the facts and accept they may not already know the answer, they know better; it’s neither  –  The evidence shows vaccinations work.