Hacker News Reader

Comment by pavanred | Hacker News Reader

Can any one explain how this anti-vaccination thing started in the US, and how is it continuing?

I do not know much but I know that anti-vaccination and climate change are heavily politicized in US, if I am not wrong. How did this don't trust the experts in the field, I know better thing start?

No matter which side you lean politically, I would like to believe most people would want the best for the kids, and essentially if its health related most people would take their doctor/pediatrician's advice. So, why are there so many people not vaccinating their kids? Is there a portion of doctors who believe in this and advice against vaccinations to the parents? Or are the parents just ignoring doctors advice and choosing to not vaccinate by themselves? Or anything else?

View on HN

http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/01/05/autism.vaccines/

It was a paper written written that tried to claim that vaccines were behind the rise in Autism.

The paper was later redacted and the author admitted it was completely fake.

But the seed of fear was planted, and no amount of discussion, truth, or facts can change what many Americans "feel" is the truth.

There's also an ever growing "anti-science" and "anti-intellectual" wave in this country that this paper did not help with.

> There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that “my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”

Isaac Asimov, 1980.

http://aphelis.net/cult-ignorance-isaac-asimov-1980/

To be fair, Europeans display as much ignorance when it comes to GMO foods.

I think this is part of it, though I feel there's a healthy dose of egoism in there. Americans don't really live in communities like Europeans tend to, and when they do, it tends to be within an socioeconomic bubble. So I think we tend to easily dismiss the worth or even existence of others, the recognition of whom I think would put a damper on anti-intellectualism.

I just wanted to throw a bit of an extension so this, and keep in mind this is completely of my opinion/observation.

A big drive to what I think is fueling the anti-intellectual movement is a misunderstanding of the scientific research and purpose. Many of the "anti-intellectual" types I've interacted with often cite the same rational for their opinions and it usually falls into a few broad categories:

1) The Egg is Healthy Debate - "First they're healthy, then they're not, then they're healthy again! How can we trust them with this if we can't trust them with eggs!" - It shows lack of understanding that we can change opinion based on new information. Often they want to believe there's this black & white distinction to every issue and can't see the nuances of why something can be both good and bad for you but in different ways.

Somewhat of an additional point to this is people are taking it to mean scientists are often wrong, so maybe they're wrong this time too.

2) Bought & Paid Research - Sugar is the most recent one where lots of people are believing the war on fats was a driven narrative by interested groups. Maybe the food pyramid is a good example; something that was taught extensively but was heavily influenced by Agricultural groups. As an extension to this lots of people think they can ignore science at their leisure because they think everything is a bias from some group sponsoring the research that benefits them.

If Dr. Andrew Wakefield 'admitted it was completely fake' why would he produce a movie in 2016 with Dr. William Thompson of the CDC saying precisely the opposite?

He and others have provided enough information to the BMA to be struck off, and enough to the Lancet for the research to be withdrawn.

He still makes movies because that's how he makes his money these days - scamming rubes.

if a cdc whistleblower doesn't phase you nothing will

You mean unsubstantiated bluster, as compared to the actual, you know, fuck-ton of science that shows there's no link and never has been?

No, that doesn't phase me in the slightest. If rumours of someone claiming to be from the CDC having said something provocative are a form of evidence to you, then I feel sorry for you.

Your childish insults have no effect on me.

My post was.neither childish nor an insult.

Facts have no effect on you either then?

http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cdcwhistleblower.asp

Wakefield is no longer a Doctor... quit calling him one.

It's not limited to the US - I know anti-vaxxers here in Germany, and it really doesn't help that most scientific studies are in English and hard to understand for non-nerds. Conspiracy theories are much easier to digest.

I think the people I know have simply seen the establishment fuck them over so many times (think [1], [2], TTIP, NSA, whatever) that they automatically believe the opposite of what "science" & the government want them to. Especially because "science" can be transparent bullshit too - the non-esoteric doctor we have on the countryside treats absolutely everything with a cocktail of antibiotics that never help. Why trust him to vaccinate anyone's children?

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-ind... [2] https://corporatewatch.org/company-profiles/monsanto-influen... (Links with government)

I imagine part of it is the Streisand effect. So many news outlets gave attention to fringe groups that they became less fringe.

The other part is a side effect of elitism and marketing. "Natural", organic, hand processed goods command higher prices and margins than contemporary products, as such more individuals push "natural" living as a superior lifestyle. Ignoring science based medicine fits in nicely with this movement.

It's not a political thing at all, I'd say it's on both sides of the isle.

>I know that anti-vaccination and climate change are heavily politicized in US

I'll add the fear of GMO food in the list. To be fair though, Europeans behave much more stupidly when it comes to GMO.

Dumb yet aggressive celebrities who push spout their own ignorance and their fans believe everything they say.

The biggest obviously is Jenny McCarthy.

But some may surprise you such as the Foo Fighters who said AIDS wasn't real, I think they revered that point of view but I am not sure.

It pretty sad when one profoundly dumb celebrity can cause so much harm to so many people.

jameskilton explained the origin with links, but...

I would like to believe most people would want the best for the kids

I'll believe it started out that way, but now I think people have a narrative to support, the well-being of their kids be damned. Not that the anti-vaccination folk would say so in so many words, but after the guy behind the original study admitted it was faked, how else to explain it? Jenny McCarthy isn't going to back away from the only shred of relevance she has left. And those Mommies and Daddies who have been so shrill all this time? Many reasonable people change their minds every day on topics as they digest new information, but I argue that the people that look to Playboy models for their medical advice aren't reasonable people. So you're probably not going to get a lot of "mea culpa"s out of them.

How does it continue? Read some of the comments on this page.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com