Dachel Media Review: Chemist Reverses Daughter's Autism
Dachel Media Review: Media Encourages Bullying of Jenny McCarthy

Debating Vaccines Online

Kristin Cav
Kristin Cavallari

By  Cathy Jameson

Jenny The View
Jenny McCarthy

An honest mom’s response made late last week during an interview opened the doors to a circus frenzy typical of the mainstream media.  If you’ve stayed up with vaccine and autism news since that comment aired then you’re already well aware of the lively conversations that have taken place on the internet about it. 

A great number of people came out of the woodwork offering their opinion about vaccines and about Kristin Cavallari’s choice to not vaccinate.  Some people left a comment or two in online forums while others cranked out a good 10,000 or more.  Everyone had something to say.  Or prove.  Or demand.  Or yell IN ALL CAPS.  Quite a few parents who have children with documented vaccine injuries merely wanted to leave a heartfelt thanks while other people, many of whom appear to hail from a pro-vaccine stance, badgered those parents with malicious responses in reply. 

Karen Ernst
Every Child By Two's Karen Ernst

Baiting parents and belittling them and their well-thought out opinions

Law Professor and Protector of Vaccines Dorit Reiss

became the new discussion.  It wasn’t about Kristin anymore.  The attack turned toward the parents who have wised up about vaccines.  Moms were belittled.  Their science was shot down.  Parents were told their anti-vax choices were putting innocent people at risk.  It never makes sense to argue that point because the majority of people in this country have the choice to vaccinate or not.  It’s quite simple, really.  If we parents don’t want to vaccinate, they don’t have to.  That right is protected by law.  But some people forget that little fact and would rather have an online hissy fit instead.

Even though I had several opportunities to say something as the story went viral, because I too am thankful Kristin’s knows that she has a choice in the matter, I kept out of the fray.  I watched instead.  Many times I wish I hadn’t.  I am all for discussing and offering insight to others in a public forum, but there is no need to point fingers at moms who are vocal about a personal decision.  But that happened repeatedly last week.   

As the days went on, while the media did nothing to calm the drama they started, more people added to online conversations.  What struck me as the most unfortunate after reading thread after thread after thread was that in all the comments, not one person chimed in saying,


Thanks for the info, everyone!  Your incredibly heated discussions have offered me a significant amount of useful insight.  It even helped me make the decision to vaccinate/to not vaccinate my child.  Keep up that fantastic back-and-forth dialogue.  I’m sure it’ll help someone else too!” 

Nope. Not one. 

One lesson can be learned from the internet conversations this week.  It’s that people who believe unequivocally in vaccines are holding steadfast to their beliefs, and that people who believe unequivocally that vaccines cause adverse reactions and autism are holding steadfast to their beliefs too.   I respect that each has the right to hold firmly of their belief.  But no one should be bullied like parents in this community are and with what happened on the red carpet when a mom spoke up.

So, what do we do?  Continue to watch insults being lobbed at us?  With the media leading the way, we’re bound to see that continue.

In today’s world, being vocal about vaccines and autism comes with a risk.  That was an important and hard lesson that I personally learned a long ago.  But even with that risk, when I have spoken up in the past, I didn’t regret it.  I hope Kristin doesn’t either.  

I chose to watch this time.  By the time I could jump in, the pot had been stirred too much for me to think my input could make a difference.  I have no doubt that there will be plenty of other chances for me to chime in though.  I’ll do that when I’m certain that my voice will help someone. 

Cathy Jameson is a Contributing Editor for Age of Autism.



cia parker

Is everyone aware of Ginger Taylor's compilation of 85 studies proving the vaccine/autism link? Great to put up link in online battles. The science is there, and it's on our side.


cia parker

I don't think the doctors are honest or sincere in their religious fanaticism promoting vaccines. It's the carrots and sticks approach. I read Our Daily Meds and was appalled at the large percentage of doctors, over 95%, who take pharma largesse of many kinds. Promote the vaccine party line and you too may become rich and famous, authoritative, respected, powerful. Promote children's welfare and see how fast your career will go down the drain. The Andy Wakefield story was staged precisely to serve as an object lesson to doctors who dared say But what about the children?
So most doctors push this out of their minds, it's easy to go along with the program, it sounds good, Heaven knows there are hundreds of thousands of highly-educated, wealthy, powerful people promoting it. Just mumble to yourself It wasn't the vax, it wasn't the vax, when you're faced with the screaming, suffering, voiceless evidence of vaccine damage.
They know. And they will be judged for their silence and collaboration with evil.


What bewilders me are the doctors. They are more like religious fanatics than the anti-vaxers because they believe without questioning everything the CDC puts out, and only a fool would believe a government agency uncritically. Why? Well, the government lies all the time--like the weapons of mass destruction that led us into war in Iraq, for example. Practically no one believes the government these days.

Think of the old adage that where there is smoke there is fire, and apply this to the thousands of parents that have reported their childrens illnesses after their vaccinations. It doesn't take too much to decide to check it out for yourself and read a couple articles that dispute the safety of vaccines. I'm sure I have read at least 50 myself. But for some reason doctors don't read, don't notice, hear only one voice--that of the CDC. And they are still plunging the old needles into the tiny bodies at ever increased rate. It boggles the mind.

Recently I read an article about a study that showed babies get sick after going in for their "well baby visits" and that doctors should be more vigilant about hand washing, etc. And as if on cue a friend told me her grandson had gotten about 6 shots in one day and had screamed non-stop for hours. Then about two weeks later she told me her grandson had come down with a fever of 107 and had to have a spinal tap and all kinds of terrible procedures. The medical team (because with post vaccine illnesses one doctor usually isn't enough) told her it was a virus, and blamed it on her daughter not thoroughly cleaning the baby when she changed his diapers. I thought about the shots he had gotten two weeks previously and sadly noted that another baby was losing his health due to a doctor visit. And another mom was getting blamed for it--seriously a 107 degree fever from a diaper rash??

And where is our Congress in all of this?

cia parker

It just occurred to me, maybe this has been DR's mission all along, not just to comment 24/7/365 defending vaccines, but maybe this past year was for her to gain followers and adherents who trusted her knowledge and wisdom to spearhead this new initiative to end school vaccine exemptions everywhere. That may make more sense than BP's spending big bucks just on another vaccine commenter.

cia parker

I have never met anyone who supports mandatory vaccination either, but if you look at the ABC Cavallari coverage, there are a lot of shills saying that it is necessary to demand mandatory vaccination. I'm sure that this is their new agenda, and we'll be seeing them promote it ever more strongly. Will it backfire and push even more vaccine fearers into our ranks? How could it not? In the absence of any health emergency, no masses of anyone dying of VPDs, how in the world could they beat up fervor for demonizing and punishing the vaccine-wary? But I think they have no other choice, the handwriting is on the wall, they have just deciphered it sooner than most. A friend of mine said she is reading a new twenty-page paper by DR on revoking the religious exemption in public schools. I'm sure this will be BP's next big push. Will they succeed? Or will we unite and kick their sorry asses into hell a little prematurely? Stay tuned...


According to Dr Mayer Eisenstein:

"...... 40 years ago when I started my practice only 1 in 10,000 children had autism. Today it's 1 in 100. What is the only difference we have seen? The inordinate number of vaccines that are being given to children today. My partners and I have over 35,000 patients who have never been vaccinated. You know how many cases of autism we have seen? ZERO, ZERO. I have made this statement for over 40 years: "NO VACCINES NO AUTISM...."

If anyone even bothered to ask Dr. Eisenstein, I bet he's also reveal that not one of those unvaccinated kids died from measles either. Or from mumps, or from chicken pox, or from rubella.......


I wish just a few more celebs would out themselves as having concerns about vaccines. I think a lot of people vaccinate selectively/ partially or defer until their child is older, not necessarily forgoing them altogether. I wish even more would come out and support Kristin, Jenny, Doutzen, Mayim, Rob, Trumps, etc. etc. because I'm sure there are many who do this and just stay quiet about it.
Sarah Michelle Geller just said something about not buying Vogue anymore after Kim Kardashian's cover. There are more important issues at hand- like children's health.

Carolyn Flannery

The world is topsy turvy. Suppose Jennie had had a dog who ate poisoned dog food and almost died. And then alerted the world to watch out for melamine. She would be a hero and people would laugh at the efforts of the dog food manufacturer shills who defended the dog food and accused her of "not believing" in dog food.

So instead she tells the world about the harm she witnessed happening to her child. Instead of being a hero she is slammed. She is a hero to me motivated by a wish to save other children. and they, the Dorits and the Lilady take blood money or sociopathic soul food because there is no other explanation for their compassion less science-free cruel bullying drivel. If they truly cared about children they would admit the vaccines can cause harm and be the first in line to compensate those harmed. It is clear they are not motivated by health at all because they could not care less if vaccines are safe for all. Since vaccines are meant to save that theoretical 1 in 10,000 (?) who gets seriously harmed by an illness but they don't care about the obvious 1/35 seriously harmed by vaccines it is not about health. . So they are either on a power trip of some kind, too simple-minded to understand genetic vulnerability or toxicology, or getting paid. I hope that hell is what some theorize . That you have to relive every cruel thing you ever did from the perspective of the person you hurt. Lilady and dorit and offit have much to suffer for the infants and their parents they have hurt by refusing to hear us . They Are also responsible for delaying the chance to make vaccines safer and this understandably reduces the vax rate. So they will suffer for those hurt by that as well. It is do very stupid and ultimately counter productive. I wish to God they would see what they are doing and apologize. Have they never seen an autistic child rolling around on the floor in pain or screaming to communicate? Have they never seen an industry lie because it can?

cia parker

If they say that non-vaxxers with their stupid refusal of one or more vaccines are endangering the lives of other children who are too young to take the vaccines, are immune-compromised (often from vaccines), or the vaccines didn't take in them so they're still susceptible, then, from their point of view it would be reasonable to force everyone to vax. But one, our freedom of religious expression protects those who refuse vaccination on religious grounds, and two, since vaccines are extremely dangerous to an extremely large percentage of the people who get them, we cannot allow them to get away with this. They deny all the damage, even if someone drops dead one second after the vax, they could just have had a coincidental heart attack. They say that wacko religious views should not be allowed to take the lives of innocent children. So their approach is two-pronged: play up the wacko image and deny with ever-increasing vehemence that vaccines ever do what they are charged by hundreds of thousands with doing.
We have to cling to our freedom of religious expression, continue to tell people about the reality and the devastation of vaccine damage, and teach them how mild or rare the VPDs are here and now. Measles and pertussis are not killer diseases, and mumps and chickenpox are nearly always inconsequential ones. It's true that Hib meningitis had grown to be not rare in the '80s when the vaccine started, and often very serious or fatal, but its causing sometimes fatal peanut allergy in one in fifty children must be broadcast far and wide, and the fact that breast feeding offers good protection.

I think that this strategy is the only one open to them at this point, but I don't think most people are going to go along with forced vaccination.

Not an MD

@Cia Parker-
Cia, darling, you forgot to mention one little thing in your discussion of measles and the MMR vaccine-- those vaccinated with the killed measles vaccine, or even with the live measles vaccine are at risk of developing atypical measles, if exposed to wild measles:

Atypical measles (and ONLY the vaccinated get this type of measles-- sorry for shouting!) is far more deadly than regular wild type measles is for the unvaccinated. Quite ironic, isn't it?

Here's another interesting article:


The rabid, hate filled, pro pharma vaccine mob are online reputation sock puppets & astroturfers in my experience.

Each operative can manage 20+ online personas using software which creates & runs online presences using FaceBook & Twitter etc.

I have never met one person face to face who thinks vaccines should be mandatory, or that not giving vaccines is child abuse.

When real people are made aware of pharma's serial criminality & malfeasance which has killed & maimed millions, they are shocked & see the connection between the absolute disregard for human life that GSK, Merck, et al demonstrate but sock puppets refuse to discuss & acknowledge this by using ridicule, abuse, ad hominem designed to elicit an emotional response &/or shut people down.

There is a massive pharma presence online & we need to get smart to them & their tactics.

1. Dummy up. If it's not reported, if it's not news, it didn't happen.

2. Wax indignant. This is also known as the "how dare you?" gambit.

3. Characterize the charges as "rumors" or, better yet, "wild rumors." If, in spite of the news blackout, the public is still able to learn about the suspicious facts, it can only be through "rumors."

4. Knock down straw men. Deal only with the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Even better, create your own straw men. Make up wild rumors and give them lead play when you appear to debunk all the charges, real and fanciful alike.

5. Call the skeptics names like "conspiracy theorist," "nut," "ranter," "kook," "crackpot," You must then carefully avoid fair and open debate with any of the people you have thus maligned.

6. Impugn motives. Attempt to marginalize the critics by suggesting strongly that they are not really interested in the truth but are simply pursuing a partisan political agenda or are out to make money.

7. Invoke authority. Here the controlled press and the sham opposition can be very useful.
Dismiss the charges as "old news."

8. Come half-clean. This is also known as "confession and avoidance" or "taking the limited hang-out route." This way, you create the impression of candor and honesty while you admit only to relatively harmless, less-than-criminal "mistakes." This stratagem often requires the embrace of a fall-back position quite different from the one originally taken.

9. Characterize the crimes as impossibly complex and the truth as ultimately unknowable.
Reason backward, using the deductive method with a vengeance. With thoroughly rigorous deduction, troublesome evidence is irrelevant. For example: We have a completely free press. If they know of evidence that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) had prior knowledge of the Oklahoma City bombing they would have reported it. They haven't reported it, so there was no prior knowledge by the BATF. Another variation on this theme involves the likelihood of a conspiracy leaker and a press that would report it.

10. Require the skeptics to solve the crime completely.

11. Change the subject. This technique includes creating and/or reporting a distraction.


Ralph from St Louie; That is what I have been thinking for a long time now, myself.
Any normal human being would know that a parent of an injuried child is not going away and instead of fearing that - worrying about that - they rub salt into the wound.

Some times it just seems they are actually seeing how far they can go, how far they can push-- dangerous game they are playing with people's raw emotions.

cia parker

I think commenting on these sites helps. In this case, there's a doctor (look at the link I posted earlier) who, I believe, is doing his side a great disservice. He's promoting the party line beyond reason, beyond compassion and humanity, and I can't help but believe that everyone who reads the sparring will realize that it's bad when physicians take the side of power and profits over the truth and children's lives.

cia parker

While it is true that vaccination rates are still high everywhere, I think the vaccine companies have used some of their billions to hire experts to do a statistical analysis, which would correctly show that they're not going to be able to put this genie back into the bottle. They're pulling out all the stops to try to make people honestly believe their fanciful fairy tales and keep getting all the vaxes, but they have realized as well as anyone that that's just not going to happen. So they're already floating their big stick tactic, throwing the book at parents who refuse vaccines, take away religious and philosophical exemptions. When someone first said several months ago that that was why DR had been brought in, I didn't believe it, but now I do. She just finished her five-part series at Shot of Prevention on making the legal consequences of not vaxing a lot tougher. Children suing parents for not vaxing! End religious exemptions for school! Throw a non-vaxing parent in the slammer if his child is PROVEN to have given measles or chickenpox to a classmate! Hit them where it hurts! If you refuse vaccines for yourself or your children, picture this! You lose your home! Your car! Your savings! Heh, heh, heh, now wouldn't you rather just go in and let the nice nurse give your child a bunch of harmless, life-giving vaccines? They never, ever do the things some evil nitwits say they do, and if they do them to your child, be assured that it's simply not true, and we will deny it was the vax that did it to our dying breath. I noticed utter silence in the comments to DR's series from ordinary parents: not one said, Oh, yes, I totally support draconian measures to force everyone to take ALL the seventy shots by 18!

cia parker

You're right, even Mayim Bialik (Blossom)has been dragged into the fray because of her attachment parenting, refuse vaccines stance. I read several articles recently dragging her through the mud for her book and her desire to protect children.

cia parker

What I think is really amusing is the way the thugs carefully use the words "contagious" and "incidence." Measles is simply no longer dangerous (as in like for the last seventy years) to well-nourished, previously healthy children. In the '60s, 95% of children got it, and 99% of army recruits had serological evidence of exposure, meaning that basically everyone got it, whether an obvious case or a sub-clinical one. Everyone born before 1958 is presumed to have had the natural disease and is exempt from having to get the vaccine. And yes, it is very contagious, though not as much so as chickenpox. So they say, Measles. One of the most contagious diseases ever known to man. And, because of the vaccine critics who do not vax their children, incidence is increasing! Of this disease which can cause (very rarely) blindness, deafness, encephalitis, SSPE, ear infections, diarrhea, and death. Without mentioning that the vaccine can (not so rarely) cause autism, bowel disease, encephalitis, SSPE, and death. Without mentioning that vitamin A prevents complications and Tylenol or other fever reducers increase them. They put up photos of children with a measles or chickenpox rash, saying Would you want your child to suffer from such an unsightly rash? Without mentioning that a week later there would be no trace of it. Without mentioning that a natural case of measles gives permanent immunity, developmental strides in an era rife with delayed development, the ability to protect babies with placental immunity and breastfeeding, a stronger, more competent immune system, and protection against several cancers and degenerative diseases in later life. What they should do is give advice for preventing complications, stay in bed until the fever is gone, stay at home until two or three weeks after the rash appears, to prevent complications, as the disease depresses the immune system for that long, let the fever go as high as it needs to, the body knows instinctively how high it should go and how long it should last to kill the virus. Take homeopathic remedies if complications are feared or the rash is taking longer than usual to appear. Give symptoms of pneumonia (viral is self-limiting, bacterial should be treated with antibiotics), encephalitis, and meningitis that warrant conventional medical attention. But the bottom line is just to push a dangerous vaccine, not promote children's best interests.

cia parker

Check out this thread on Cavallari's statement:


I and several more stalwart commenters, including several parents of vaccine-damaged children, I believe have carried the day. There are apparently a lot of people still reading them, and I cannot imagine a single one saying, Well, the vaccine defenders are clearly right on this one. I'm going right out to get half a dozen vaxed for myself and my child.

Adam M

I'm reading Dissolving Illusions by Dr. Suzanne Humphries M.D. I can hardly put it down. The amount of trickery, shenanigans, lying and out right fraud used to prop vaccines up to the public from the very beginning two hundred years ago is appalling. Absolutely the most profound book I've read on the subject so far. It not only warns you about what not to do it also tells you what you ought to be doing with nutrition especially moms breast feeding infants and how superior that is to any vaccine. We don't need safer vaccines or any more of them. We'll never have a safe vaccine. Nutrition never harmed anyone if it was done right. Anyway, great book, well worth the read.


Donna K

Those people who write articles and those who post comments accusing vaccine safety proponents of being anti-vaccine and contributing to bringing back deadly infectious disease epidemics need to be introduced to the childhood vaccine schedule and encouraged to show their full support of it by making an appointment with their primary care physician and subjecting themselves to the full schedule just as they are requiring children to do. If each vaccine and the current schedule is so safe and they are so concerned about the spread of infectious disease they will not hesitate to submit themselves to it. Remind them that Dr. Paul Offit said they can safely take thousands of vaccines at a time.

Over the years, I have found that the majority of the writers and commenters on various vaccine stories don't know the first thing about the current birth thru 18-yr vaccine schedule or how it has changed over the years, and that includes the usual pharma shills that pop-in to comment. We need to display the schedule in the comments sections showing what children today are receiving. We need to list each and every vaccine and booster required by the ACIP. And then point out that it is only a matter of time until they will be required to subject themselves to the same schedule because "herd immunity" isn't just for children. Until they have some personal skin in this game they don't have to think about what they are forcing on the most vulnerable. Many still won't care about the damage that is inflicted on children, but they will care about the lack of liability on the part of the pharma companies when vaccine safety affects them personnally.


If more than 50% of Americans rejected the vaccine schedule for them and their children, would that mean that Americans need to be forced to vaccinate and according to the schedule? Or would democratic principles apply? The former scenario, forcing the majority to take medication that they are against, is not exactly democracy in action. Forcing a minority isn't right either, but when justifying a lack of mandates because a certain large people are voluntarily complying, we've got a problem with our democracy.


The other night I watched a story on the news about the sad cases of children that committed suicide after being bullied; in particular those children that experienced cyber bullying from websites such as ask.fm. The cop who was interviewed said that oft times, it appears that there are lots of bullies when in fact it may be down to just one person posting under several names.

I think to a large extent, that is what is going on in many media forums regarding vaccines.

If you haven’t already, read this Modern Alternative Mama piece called Dear Vaccine Pushers: I don’t Vaccinate and You Can’t Make Me

 Bob Moffitt

@ Erik

"There used to be some common sense in the administration of vaccines and a common knowledge that there are risks. The pharmaceutical industry has found a way to change all that."

I suspect that "common sense" was driven from the public square regarding vaccine safety .. the moment the pharmarceutical industry was awarded unlimited "product liability" protection .. making them completely unaccountable and responsible for ANY serious adverse reactions CAUSED by their .. in the words of the US Supreme Court .. "unavoidably unsafe" products.

Does anyone believe General Motors and Toyota would have recalled millions of defective autos .. costing them millions of dollars .. if they had the same "product liability" protections as big pharma?

Ralph from St Louie

Apparently lynch mobs are high water mark of the morally and intellectually superior.

Haunted by Post-Vaccine Encephaletic Scream

I agree with Not an MD, the harassment is so bad that it makes those behind the propaganda look very desperate and unbalanced. Who in their right mind doesn't question both the message and the messenger when they are screaming with rage?

I think it's an indicator of desperate times for the pharmaceutical and chemical companies. The tipping point of consumers waking up is so close. It is literally weeks away.

Just as people are spinning food packages around and looking for azodicarbonamide and other un-pronounceable ingredients and avoiding them like the plague now, it's just a moment's time before they also have that AHA moment, where they stop in their tracks and ask themselves, why in the hell would I inject THAT into myself or my child?!

In due time...right.

I like to think that what we're seeing now is acts of desperation to maximize profits before the fall. Like Coca Cola suddenly promoting their products as natural for the last 100 years as soda sales tank due to the massive shift of consumers to natural beverages.

Maybe we'll see the pharm companies try that next...vaccines are natural...haha!

No. Really. Vaccines are loaded with artificial chemical garbage and they're not natural at all. They confer artificial immunity too....not long lasting hence all the ineffective booster shots.

Bravery is in the air. And everyone should tell their personal truth succinctly early and often. imo.


I believe that peanut butter has not harmed my child.
Other parents believe peanut butter harms their children.

Why? Physical observation, which can be verified by science.
Some call it empirical evidence; others dismiss it as "anecdote."

Vaccine manufacturers and policymakers have too much invested in money and reputation, so they deny consumers' adverse field observations and avoid scientific investigation.

If VAERS and VSD reports of brain inflammation and death aren't enough to motivate industry and government, what is?

In the real world devoid of consumer mandates, lack of accountability by product manufacturers inevitably leads to lack of customers.


Yes, it is a tradegy what happened - a lose of a life, the lose of ability, but not one bit of warm, sincere bit of sympathy is given.


Cathy's referencing a parent's right to vaccination choice is especially appropriate, because restricting those rights is what this recent publicity is really all about. The assault on anyone supporting vaccination choice is part of a national, choreographed, systematic action plan to mis-characterize and de-legitimize any position other than full compliance to the ACIP schedule, and pass legislation state by state to eliminate non-medical exemptions.

What demonizing anyone who questions vaccine mandates accomplishes is that 'non-partisan' people- who do not follow this closely but just skim the media in this area- get a general impression that anti-vaccine fanatics are jeopardizing the public safety. The False Narrative being engineered is that irresponsible, reckless and unscientific parents are ignoring settled science, abusing non-medical exemptions, and completely rejecting all vaccination. And that the only reasonable solution is to prohibit any exemptions not granted by a medical authority.

In reality vaccination rates are higher than they have even been for all vaccines, and the use of exemptions is driven by continual additions to the requirements. http://www.scribd.com/doc/150190637/Oregon-Exemptions-Added-Vaccines-by-Year-Grade

The Vaccine Industry succeeded in restricting exemption rights in Washington, California, and Oregon. The Vaccine Industry was stopped in Vermont only because a very committed group was able to get the actual facts regarding vaccination rates and the responsible use of exemptions directly to the legislators. Colorado is currently fighting legislation being supported with a BS statistic using a .5% kindergarten student sample claiming rates are dropping and exemptions rising.

Preservation of the unrestricted right to exempt should be a plank in every Autism advocates platform.

Sandy MacInnis

What's lacking is actual science and logic. There is a truth to be known, somewhere, but very few appear to be looking for it, while many claim to have already found it but cite no or insufficient evidence.

For a famous example on one side, a recent Pediatrics article that appears to have ignited the latest brushfire, Nyhan et al, "Effective Messages in Vaccine Promotion: A Randomized Trial", talks about "the disproven vaccines–autism link", but it does not cite any science supporting this assertion. To show something has been disproven would require some very well designed and collected data and appropriate analysis. Apparently that hasn't happened. They imply, and readers are left to believe, that parents who don't respond as the authors intended must be irrational. It appears not to have occurred to them that the study subjects logically do not trust unsupported claims of proof.

The recent storm of articles and comments seems to follow a similar plot. Absolute certainty of the underlying truth, with little solid evidence nor relevant analysis, with bold, unsupported claims. Those who are skeptical of what they are told are branded as irrational or simply wrong.

And people on each side express amazement that those on the other don't share their conclusions.

Betty Bona

Take a look at last night's Chris Hayes show on MSNBC. He was one of the worst bullies I've ever seen. He put Jenny McCarthy's picture up next to Kevin Trudeau (who was recently convicted of fraud) as if she was also a fraudster. He didn't present anyone from the non-"vacines" are safe" side. I'm surprised there aren't more comments yet. Maybe no one watches him.

One has to wonder

Kristine, "Joe and Sue parent" is probably feeling uneasy about their choices- maybe their child has one of the many soft sign brain damage problems we are seeing so commonly now. Maybe it's almost a reaction formation type of thing where they do not want to believe in the possibility that their choice, their trust in the medical carers could have resulted in a consequence for their loved one.
I also agree with others who said that the pushback is getting stronger against the tidal wave of pro- vaccine articles and online thugging. People don't like to feel coerced into anything and it is getting obvious that something is wrong with the vaccine schedule. Even though that study came out recently that showed this approach is ineffective, they keep pushing. I often wonder if they had never put hep b on the list, or chicken pox or Gardasil and if they offered separate measles, mumps, rubella vaccine if things would have been a lot different. Parents wouldn't have felt so pushed in a corner. Never mind the fact that it's getting obvious that any type of vaccinated- non vaccinated study threatens the crap out of them.



Mayim Bialik on why she doesn't bite on this debate.

Erik Nanstiel

Unfortunately, I fear that the role vaccines play in autism causation will be clear to everyone... only after we've reached a critical tipping point... where so many kids are vaccine injured, it's obvious to EVERYONE.

We are trying to help avoid that. The pro-vax community are shooting everybody in the foot, including themselves. Vaccines can and do work... but at a cost to the body. And they should never be given in combination. And certain people should be exempt based on their family's medical histories. There used to be some common sense in the administration of vaccines and a common knowledge that there are risks. The pharmaceutical industry has found a way to change all that.

We are now fighting a desperate war of generations...

Not an MD

I think that the more often the vaccine industry uses their legions of paid trolls, to attack Dr. Wakefield, Ms. McCarthy and now Ms. Cavallari, the greater the pushback amongst parents, and even teenagers, will be, and the industry will only hurt its image even more. We live in a world full of bullies, and the more bold the bullies become and the louder their voices, the greater the reaction and blowback will be from everyone else. The bullies are clearly outnumbered.

Pharma is waking the vaccinating, trusting public from their slumber of dogmatic brainwashing by shaking them and dumping large buckets of cold water over them. It is very interesting to watch.


What I will never understand is just regular Joe and Sue Parent, people I know of facebook that are not pharma shills, when they chime in with their smug proclamations that non-vaxxers are "killing children" and then they just repeat the usual pharma/media/govt talking points. The same old tired refuted points over and over that have NO basis in science. For example, the recent article that was "Thanks Anti-vaxxers...." about measles "outbreak". The article spouted off a bunch of unsupported beliefs and made them as if they were facts. Did anyone care about this author's sources of information? No! Why do these people care about vaccines and vaccine-injury when they don't have a dog in the fight? It's sad to see people who are so heavily brainwashed that they can't think for themselves. I really hope I'm not so ridiculous about issues that I don't know anything about. I hope that I continue to stay agnostic about topics that I really don't understand the arguments.


At vran.org there's an article called "So who's disgraced now ?" about the Murdochs,(Rupert Murdoch owns Fox news) and his son James is a director on the board of GlaxoSmithKline. The Murdochs are the people who went after Andrew Wakefield and tried to discredit him, they hired Brian Deer. http://vran.org/in-the-news/so-who%E2%80%99s-disgraced-now/.

It just shows how biased the media is, because the same people who own the media are making money from the vaccine companies.


Has Jenny McCarthy yet even mentioned vaccines on the View? I would suppose such conversation is limited.

She could have a vaccine damaged child and their parents on EVERY DAY for the next 50 years without every running out of children.

They give her a difficult time with some of her previous jobs, but at least she has not had a vaccine pulled off the market because it was killing children.

False Skeptics Make me Laugh

The thing I enjoy the most is that it's apparent that even they don't buy their own bullshit.

Let's look at facts. We'll begin with the vaulted "Herd-Immunity" theory.

According to the CDC, for herd immunity to be achieved for measles, 83-94% of the population must be immunized.

In New York, where this "deadly" outbreak of 20 cases has occurred, the vaccination rates are at 99% or above:


So, wait a second...New York is well above the "Herd-Immunity" threshold, so how is it that there are so many (err..20) cases of measles in such a highly vaccinated population. And why are they blaming non-vaccinators? Looking at the numbers, it's apparent that the vaccine isn't as effective as the Pharma companies and the CDC are proposing.

These articles bullying and shaming vaccine-concerned parents are nothing but scare-mongering and propaganda. And, according the them, only anti-vaxxers use propaganda and scare-mongering.

These hypocrites amuse me to no end...seriously, I just can't get tired of ridiculing their false skepticism.


I find it disgusting the way they are dragging these moms through the mud. The big pharma thugs are way too vile at this point. My gut is they are mad McCarthy is on the View and their attempt to stop that didn't work, so they will continue to try to take her down. Also, they feel like if they keep repeating their mantras that people will eventually believe them. The reality is, the more that are injured, the more the word spreads to stop vaccinating.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)