New York Times Print Headline About Vaccine Science Radically Different from Online Version
Not much to say here. The print version of the New York Times had a strong headline for the op-ed by Melinda Wenner Moyer. It had a very different implication than the online version on the same op-ed.
The Censorship of Vaccine Science is nothing like Anti-Vaccine Activists Have Taken Vaccine Science Hostage. Nothing. Not even a wee bit. Science censorship is a serious topic. Anti-vaccine activists as science hostage takers is nonsense. Are we putting out studies at break neck speed? No. Are the few studies that get funding and show a negative side to vaccination retracted, squelched, derided and fodder to ruin careers? Yes.
Thanks to J W Tobin for the photograph.
Some days back I finally got around to reading the online version, and then posted a commentary on it.
it was a ridiculous piece, in my opinion. And though it took me a long time to both get through it and then produce my commentary, it was worth it. That's only because it is so refreshing to be on the side of science and then be reminded of how lacking in science "vaccine science" can be. (And how poorly it can be articulated.)
Posted by: Pat | August 13, 2018 at 09:54 PM
Wow!
Posted by: Autism Investigated | August 13, 2018 at 08:59 PM
Similar shenanigans went on with Offit's recent Salon piece bashing Gwyneth Paltrow. Originally it was her picture headlining the article then it switched to Jim Carrey, Jenny McCarthy and Rob Schneider. Kind of sad really, Offit knows there is no shortage of brilliant scientists that could easily point out how absurd his vaccine religion is, so all he has to fall back on is propaganda and spin. If not for the millions of lives his pseudo-science has destroyed I would almost feel sorry for the guy.
Posted by: annie | August 13, 2018 at 09:11 AM
We have the lying thieving scoundrels cornered !
That's the truth of it .
Posted by: Sophie Scholl | August 13, 2018 at 06:55 AM