At first I wasn't going to write this post since I believe that a film that appears to be (at least in part) based on thoroughly discredited, fear-mongering nonsense should get as little attention as possible.
Then after browsing several anti-vaccine and conspiracist websites I found as I suspected, that this has already exploded and whatever I write here won't make matters any worse.
The film 'Vaxxed' is directed by Mr Andrew Wakefield, a former physician who lost his medical license after research that he had authored, was found fraudulent (containing as I understand it, both methodological and ethical flaws).
Just watching the trailer for this film elevated my BP into dangerous territory. How is it that this man keeps promoting the same debunked data to this day? Hasn't it caused enough harm already?
It seems that anti-vaccine proponents span the entire spectrum from sadly misinformed to clearly unhinged. However, no matter what their individual motivation happens to be, they are in my opinion dangerous. We have fought a hard battle against diseases that today are vaccine-preventable. Millions of children have died in the past and some still do, to this day. We don't see much of it in first-world countries due to the success of vaccines. Anti-vaccine proponents seem to believe that the "olden days" were better. I think it's deeply worrisome.
In my escapades around the internet, I've found all sorts of scary blogs, clips and opinions relating to childhood vaccines.
This YouTube clip rather amusingly (in a sad way) has 90 likes and zero (!) dislikes (probably because no rational person would even click on it in the first place). (I'm not sure what this says about me)
Anyway this women thinks that nagalese (an enzyme) is added on purpose to vaccines in order to induce autism, cancer and type 2 diabetes in vaccine recipients. And the doctors who discovered this were subsequently murdered to cover this up. This vaccine tampering seems to be a part of some nefarious population control plot.
(It seems that alpha-N-acetylgalactoseaminidase (referred to as nagalese in the YouTube clip) can deglycosylate vitamin D binding protein (DBP) and DBP plays a role in the immune cascade response. So it seems that alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase can interfere with the immune response. While some cancer cells can release alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase, I've found no proof that injecting them into humans induces cancers, never mind autism and DMII. I will however admit that I didn't spend an inordinate amount of time researching her theory).
I admit that this last video is a bit extreme. But this woman and other "anti-vaxxers" have one thing on common. They are willing to accept something as true, even when there is no supporting evidence available.
Serious questions:
* Why are some people so vulnerable/susceptible to flawed logic and poor research?
* What can we as nurses/healthcare professionals do to ensure that our patients base their decisions on sound evidence-based facts or at least have the opportunity to do so? Or should we just reconcile ourselves with the fact that a portion of the population will base their decisions on questionable or outright false information, misconceptions and fear?
I don't believe it is going to be possible to see the movie VAXXED unless it gets a digital release. Unless, of course, you live in NY.
I still don't want to see it. Nothing here has made it sound even the least bit entertaining. Going by the credits, it obviously has no scientific value. I'd rather watch the X-Files. They are at least honest about their pseudoscience.
Then why is it NOT manslaughter (against the provider) when a child dies as an adverse reaction to a vaccine?
Just like the unvaccinated child, the death IS preventable if the choice not to vaccinate is made?
What if a vaccinated person contracts a preventable†(via vaccination) disease and spreads it? Is that person (parents) just as liable if that person had not been vaccinated?
This is a Bolshevik mentality. If it is manslaughter for one, it must be for all.
Here is something that I am sure that many people have not thought about:
Nobody will argue the fact that administrators are cutting costs (and corners) everywhere they can. Many have argued that this is beginning to become a safety issue which still does not get the administrators to change.
The influenza vaccine is mandated for all staff at healthcare facilities. They even have flu clinics†set up in the facilities where the staff can go (prior to flu season) to get vaccinated for free and meet their employment mandate.
So why would the administration use the more expensive single-dose when they can save money on the multi-dose? No problem, it is safe.
I am wondering if anyone thought about this before or how many have their own physician do their flu vaccines.
Again, this is not anti-vax, this is to stimulate critical thinking.
Scroll back in this thread. We've already gone through this scenario.
As far as the critical thinking, thanks. I don't know what I would have done without you, banterings.
Untrue, the underlined part. Every study has to look at both vaccinated and unvaccinated children in order to be a valid study. Not just vaccinated children, because that would be worthless information since the point of the numerous studies was to try to find a link, so unvaccinated children have been a crucial part of the studies. and all of them have found that vaccinated and unvaccinated children are affected by autism at about the same rate.
"Conclusions and Relevance In this large sample of privately insured children with older siblings, receipt of the MMR vaccine was not associated with increased risk of ASD, regardless of whether older siblings had ASD. These findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD."
"Conclusions and Relevance In this large sample of privately insured children with older siblings, receipt of the MMR vaccine was not associated with increased risk of ASD, regardless of whether older siblings had ASD. These findings indicate no harmful association between MMR vaccine receipt and ASD even among children already at higher risk for ASD."
But have you really analyzed the study, and thought critically about it ...
I love cats, so hope you can stop weeping, and start thinking, so you don't disturb your cat.
Take a look at Back to Eden, by Jethro Kloss, who used to use a sauna, etc., to kill tetorifice bacteria in his patients who had tetorifice, by the hyperthermia. Not safe for everyone, but apparently worked for his patients.
Sticking my head in to say... why in hades would anyone advocate for secondary prevention (damage control) of a truly horrific disease, when such a safe and effective primary prevention measure is available?? And one that has been safe and effective for decades, I might add.
For one who would actually encourage someone to skip that shot, and get a little toasty after they have been infected and symptomatic... again, we're talking about tetorifice... may God have mercy on his soul. [ATTACH=CONFIG]21612[/ATTACH]
Sticking my head in to say... why in hades would anyone advocate for secondary prevention (damage control) of a truly horrific disease, when such a safe and effective primary prevention measure is available?? And one that has been safe and effective for decades, I might add.
For one who would actually encourage someone to skip that shot, and get a little toasty after they have been infected and symptomatic... again, we're talking about tetorifice... may God have mercy on his soul.
My thoughts exactly. You'd have to be some kind of sick sadist (or masochist, if you yourself are not immunized) to eschew primary prevention and then try to treat the resulting infection. Or else you just have your head in the sand and think it can't happen to you. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
)
to cover this up. This vaccine tampering seems to be a part of some nefarious population control plot.
canigraduate
2,107 Posts
I don't believe it is going to be possible to see the movie VAXXED unless it gets a digital release. Unless, of course, you live in NY.
I still don't want to see it. Nothing here has made it sound even the least bit entertaining. Going by the credits, it obviously has no scientific value. I'd rather watch the X-Files. They are at least honest about their pseudoscience.