Vaccine Refusal at AoA and effed up comments

Some of the commentators over at Age of Asinine are cracking me up. What follows is my opinion and mouthy way of sharing it. 

The post (about the watchdog article) is discussing how less persons with their shots will equal more persons with the vaccine preventable diseases.
(Gasp, such simple logic has them foaming at the mouth over there!)


Bob Moffit goes on a rant about how he wants a funded study of vaccinated versus unvaccinated oh and by the way he wants a statistic about children's health improvement. 
Newsflash Bob, before vaccines most families lost AT LEAST ONE CHILD to diseases we can now prevent. And I agree with jen, who points out that we just might have that study if the vaccination rates continue to fall in California.

then patrons99 goes on a rant about the lack of scientific evidence in vaccines and herd immunity. (The irony here is killing me) Later he/she follows up with "why dont we use a naturpath?  HAHAHA, because,um... doesnt work?

Then of course you get this commenter going on a discouraged tirade.  Why?  Because the article does not address every little paranoid concern she has.  She figures every article about vaccination should be written by Kim Stagliano I guess...

"What about the fact that an immunized person can still carry and spread pertussis"? Asks another. My answer? "We will get you better Science Classes next time, little grasshopper." Heck even wiki knows that vaccinated persons do not just carry around the disease and spread it.

Mary adds her two cents worth demanding citations for all information in the article. (Here is a hint, Mary.  This is a news article not a study.  But let me answer your questions for ya.  1. Doctors trained in diagnosing disease diagnosed these children with whooping cough.  According to Age of Idiots all doctors have financial ties to the CDC-except for their pets.  2. Various labs tested the samples collected.  According to Age of Ridiculous all labs and lab techs are paid by the CDC and vaccine manufacturors, except for their pets. 3. Duh, if they had been immunized successfully they would not have caught it.  As a 'student of statistics' you should be telling us the answer and providing the formula and information that you use to determine the answer. So, let's say for every 100 people vaccinated 85% are now protected from that disease. If 100 people in one location end up with the disease, the odds are very high that NONE of those persons were immunized (or were immunized AFTER they came incontact iwth the disease.) It is possible that one of those hundred were immunized unsuccessfully. 4. They do not cite the studies because they did not write for a scientific journal.  Besides, Mary, you guys only want studies by Wakefield. Anyone else does a study you AoA'ers all scream foul. 5. Mary, bad news.  You fund the writer.  You buy the paper, or patronize businesses that advertise in that paper.  Thsoe funds are used to pay the reporters.

Tracey has another rant but this gem- "bullying the "educated parent" into compliance!" is my favorite.  I love the quotes around educated parent.  EXACTLY Tracey.  Parents like yourself who have researched on whaleto and AoA etc THINK you are educated.  What you are though is mistaken.  Vaccines do not cause autism.  Vaccines do prevent disease and the spread of said disease.  Herd immunity used to work until you educated yourself. :)

Just because I think it fun, I will finish with Berndetta.  Hunny, have you thought about this? Don't you think that if there were aborted fetuses in the vaccine that it would be difficult to inject it? I'm not funny??? But in all seriousness, there is no gawddammed fetus in teh vaccine.  ohtay??

Child Murder-There is no justification

Ever since Wakefield was trounced by the GMC, Age of Autism has been posting more articles about vaccines than they have about autism.  

Today I stumbled across THIS POST that kind of made me wish they would have stuck to vaccines.
Adriana Gamondes tells us of how in reading all the details of this crime she began to think of poetry-murder ballads.
(And later in the article tells us that parents of autistic children do not have genetic mental health issues-feel the irony there).


After a bit of a lecture on murder ballads she jumps to AoA rhetoric-vaccine injured kids (which are not vaccine injured-they are autistic) are such a dramatic pain in the tushie that the 'vaccine injury community' feels sympathy for the parents that murder their children then kill themselves.


Because, you see, it is just so hard to have an autistic child.


I have an autistic child.  I have two other high maintenance children.  I recently took on an emotionally damaged child who is 16 months old.  Get over it.  Children are hard work.  They cost money.  They bring stress into your world.  They are also incredibly rewarding-if you bother to open your heart to them.


I cannot fathom this parent, this Adriana Gamondes that wrote this up. Don't get me wrong-at times she seems quite lucid.  She is correct, people need to be aware that many prescription drugs can trigger thoughts of suicide, depression, anxiety and so forth. 


The implication throughout Adriana Gamondes' post that parents of autistic children have not only some justification for murdering their children, but that they are fighting off the need to do so at any given moment-well it horrifies me.


Somehow she and her pack of rabid followers are all sure it is the child's fault, big pharma's fault-anyone but the mother's fault.  I find it terrifying that the word autism is a mitigating factor when discussing murder.  


I do not care if your child is loud, obnoxious, ugly, hyper, a fecal artist, severely handicapped or just plain difficult-it is our job as parents to do EVERYTHING in our power to ensure that child feels loved, safe and accepted while still working on developing skills and growth.


Nowhere, noway, nohow is it a parent's job to judiciously decide that a child needs to die.  
Period.