Are We Really Letting Michelle Bachmann Shove Dangerous Anti-Vax Propaganda Upon Us?

[HuckleB]

How safe is the HPV vaccine? New data available.
http://drjengunter.wordpress.com/2011/06/17/how-safe-is-the-hpv-vaccine-new-data-available/

Report: Vaccines Generally Safe, Cause Few Health Problems
http://children.webmd.com/vaccines/news/20110825/report-vaccines-generally-safe-cause-few-health-problems

Michele Bachmann's HPV Vaccine Safety and 'Retardation' Comments Misleading, Doctors Say
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/michele-bachmanns-hpv-vaccine-safety-retardation-comments-misleading/story?id=14516625

This would be a great time for Democrats to focus on the actual science that is available.

[laconicsax]

1. But science is scary!!!

K&R

[HuckleB]

7. Uh oh. She's convinced Rebecca Watson.

http://skepchick.org/2011/09/michelle-bachmann-and-hpv/

Ah, it's mildly amusing, at least to the likes of me.

[gateley]

2. No, she's been called on it and weaseled out of it "I'm not a doctor,

I'm not a physician. I was just relaying what this woman told me."

[MineralMan]

5. Well, that's OK. Marcus isn't a psychologist, either, but that

doesn't stop him from providing "therapy."

Ignorance is no bar to these folks speaking their minds, regardless of what thoughts are in there. :rofl:

[gateley]

14. Martin Bashir really nailed her, and now he's going on about

"what type of Christianity do these people follow?".

I hope it spreads beyond MSNBC and others to the Nightly News! And, I hope future moderators don't let this stuff slide.

[Indydem]

3. BECAUSE CORPORATIONS MAKE VACCINES!

AND CORPORATIONS ARE EVIL!

Duh!

[MineralMan]

4. Oh, it's not just Bachmann. Lots of people believe the

anti-vax propaganda. Science is hard, you know. All those big words and stuff. It's much easier to just be afraid. Simpler and all.

[CoffeeCat]

9. Since when has science won in our political process?

Science has repeatedly lost nearly every time--when it comes to current politics.

Science has lost when it comes to energy policies--with the oil and gas corporations destroying
our environment and hurting people. The science is being hidden, in spades, with the BP Gulf Oil disaster.

Science has lost when it comes to evolution--with most politicians siding with Fundies over
evolutionists.

When it comes to climate change, the science is being drown out by the climate-change deniers who our politicians
and the corporations brainwash on a daily basis, through talk radio.

Science loses when it comes to food safety--how crops are grown, what pesticides are used and how
farm animals are treated and processed. Diseases and death result as our government sides with the
corporations and deregulates the science and safety out of agribusiness.

So, all of a sudden--science wins when it comes to the pharmaceutical companies? I don't think so.

I think the jury is still out on Gardasil. It's certainly not out on other vaccines, such as the MMR.
As I said in a previous post, my children most definitely are up to date on all of their vaccines. However
those vaccines have passed the test of time. Gardasil is relatively new. No long term studies on the
effects of children have been done.

Furthermore, many pharmaceutical companies have put greed and profit before health and safety. Many have
suffered and also died as a result of bad product from pharmaceuticals, such as VIOXX.

So really, I don't understand how you can suggest that this rigorous, hard-to-understand science is a factor
at all. I have a degree in science writing and read a great deal on these matters because I care about my
kids and I'm trying to make the best decisions for them. I'm certainly not afraid of "big words" nor
"science", but without long-term studies, I don't see how anyone could make such definitive conclusions about
the science being so sound when it comes to the pharmaceutical companies.

Considering the corruption that exists between our paid-off politicians and ALL corporations--such as
the pharmaceutical industry--you have to wonder where the science really is? It certainly was not there
when it came to VIOXX and many other pharmaceuticals that killed people.

[MineralMan]

11. What college offers a degree in science writing?

I've been writing about science for many years. I never knew there was a degree in that.

[lumpy]

17. Whippersnapper, you lose the argument when you use

personal attack methods questioning their statements.

[MineralMan]

18. OK. That was funny for a minute. Please knock it off now.

That joke is done, and it was in another thread. I'm 66 years old.

[lumpy]

19. I didn't know you are approaching your 'golden years'.

I am sorry if I have offended you. I guess we all have a lot to learn. Peace.

[CoffeeCat]

26. I graduated from...

Iowa State University's journalism school. I have a Bachelor of Science
in Journalism and Mass Communication with a concentration in Science Communication.

ISU's journalism school offers tailored programs that allow students to focus on specific
areas--such as public relations, agriculture journalism, science communications, etc.

You're required to take 15 hours of additional journalism coursework in your concentration
and complete an internship in that area. You're also required to complete a minor related to your
specialized concentration. I earned minors in biology, psychology and economics.

Very cool program if you have a very specific area about which you are interested in writing.

I ended up on the flack side--leveraging biotech, tech and medical information/stories for high-tech companies.

What about you? Are you a geologist? A writer?

It's a fascinating field. I have a great deal of respect for science writers and communicators, which is why I
enjoy PR in that area. I love to help science reporters and provide them with interesting science news stories
and ideas.

[xchrom]

25. Links w/ serious science credibility to back up your personal opinion, please.

Other wise you are spouting horse shit.

[HuckleB]

28. It appears that it's "otherwise."

[kestrel91316]

20. [phone]

[CoffeeCat]

6. I won't allow my daughters to get the Gardasil vaccine...

...but I am not some raving lunatic.

Gardasil has only been on the market for a few years. I don't think we know the long-term
health consequences of this vaccine and how it will affect children long term. There
are no studies.

I get my children vaccinated. Both of my girls are in middle school and they've had their
full vaccinations and I took them to those appointments with no reservations. Those vaccines
have been around for a long time. Yes, side effects happen--but these vaccines are generally
safe and prevent the spread of horrible disease, such as measles, mumps, small pox, etc.

However, today's pharmaceuticals are approved and disseminated in a very corrupt process
in which these drug companies pay off our politicians for speedy FDA approvals and often
deleterious side effects are covered up. Merck makes Gardasil. Merck also made Vioxx
and spent a great deal of time shushing people who had concerns about that drug. Turns
out, it killed many people and the company settled in many wrongful death cases.

We live during a time when pharmaceutical companies have the politicians in their pockets
and this often puts profits and sales before safety and the best interests of the public.

That's a fact.

Like I said, I got my children their vaccines. However, Gardasil just isn't worth the risk
to my children. Regular pap smears can detect irregularities and the precursors to the cancers
that the Gardasil vaccine allegedly protects against. Gardasil can't protect against all
strains of the HPV virus, and it doesn't. It vaccinates against SOME of them. You have
to get regular check-ups anyway. I just don't see the benefit.

Michelle Bachman is a nut. I've never heard that Gardasil "causes retardation". However,
many parents have reported horrendous side effects and conditions as a result of this vaccine.
I think we need more studies. In the meantime, I just don't think the risk is worth the
benefits of Gardasil. There are no long-term studies.

Just thought I'd chime in here. There is a middle ground--between the greedy, corrupt pharmaceutical
companies and Michelle Bachman--and there are plenty of moms just like me in that middle ground.

[HuckleB]

8. The HPV vaccine was approved over a very long process, and follow-up studies...

... continue to indicate that it is safe:

http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/mercola-gardasil-and-toyota/

and...

http://drjengunter.wordpress.com/2011/06/17/how-safe-is-the-hpv-vaccine-new-data-available/

[trotsky]

10. "many parents have reported horrendous side effects and conditions as a result of this vaccine"

Where are they? What are the side effects and conditions? Surely you must have some extensive information about these terrible risks?

[lumpy]

15. Sensible reply. Watch out you'll be called ignorant or

anti-science for being cautious. I have always been thankful that I questioned and refused using Thalidomide and I also turned down a Vioxx prescription my Doctor wanted me to 'try'. If I had a young daughter I would be just as careful.

[HuckleB]

27. No one needs to call anyone that.

On the other hand, the posts in reply to hers seem to have shown that to be the case.

[kestrel91316]

21. You need to read the post upthread with the FDA report on the utter lack of

serious side effects to Gardasil. That was after 23 million doses had been given. Now it's up to 35 million and AFAIK nothing has changed.

IMHO your fear of "long-term consequences" is misplaced and obviously comes from an utter lack of understanding of what a vaccine is, and how safe vaccine technology is in general.

[dtexdem]

12. I'm not.

The issue with Perry's order was his connection to Merck, not the vaccine itself.

[HuckleB]

13. I doubt Michelle Bachmann gives a crap about Merck, however.

At least, I don't think she even mentioned the company.

[CoffeeCat]

16. But this CORRUPTION is DANGEROUS...

I totally agree that there are two separate issues here, as you said.

Perry had a connection to Merck. He has a political relationship with Merck. I would
add that most of our politicians have taken substancial campaign funds from most of the
big pharmaceutical companies.

That creates a big problem. A big conflict of interest. Suddenly, what the corporations
want takes a backseat to the health and safety of Americans.

So we have a tainted system.

We would have to be naieve to believe that a tainted, corrupt system dominated by a quid-pro-quo
relationship between dirty politicians and corporations--would not detrimentally affect how
safe these pharmaceutical drugs are.

These pharmaceutical companies grease our politicians--and suddenly the FDA approval process
is affected, side effects are ignored and information is hidden about possible dangers.

With the system rotten--rotten things happen.

[antigop]

22. +1,000,000

Merck's Vioxx. Says it all.

[HuckleB]

23. So hearsay and suspicion means a vaccine for which all evidence indicates is safe and effective...

... should be vilified?

That just doesn't seem wise.

[xchrom]

24. Recommend

[HuckleB]

29. .

:kick: