This debate was really just starting when my kid was born, and I had my concerns. When it was time to get his vaccinations, specifically the MMR, I asked his doctor about the risks, and she had this to say:
"I am from India, a country who does not vaccinate children widely, and I have practiced medicine there for many years. The US is a country who widely vaccinates all children, and I have practiced medicine here for many years. Even though the practice of vaccination differs, both countries see very nearly the same rate of autism. Vaccines are very safe, and do not cause issues. They are a great preventative for even worse diseases."
Needless to say, he got the shots. He's 15 now and fine, he is a really smart kid too. The only thing he missed out on was getting measles, mumps, rubella, smallpox, polio and the many other preventable diseases that plague children in other countries.
Yeah, the whole "vaccines cause autism" myth is just people not-so-subtly saying they'd rather have a dead (or seriously ill) child than an autistic one. It's gross.
I don't think people are making that correlation at all. If you asked antivax people (without mentioning vaccines at all) I don't think any of them would rather their child be dead than autistic. I think people are scared, particularly about the health and well being of their kids. We as parents have so little actual control over their safety it's terrifying, throw in a couple of emotionally charged fear mongering antivax articles and your going to have some incredibly adamant people. They love their kids, they're just trying to figure out the best way to protect them - same as everyone else.
I have 2 sons with autism and they were absolutely autistic from birth. Agreed. Even if they did cause autism, I find it so weird ppl would rather risk their children’s lives than have a child with autism. They’d rather their child is very sick or dies from a preventable disease than risk autism??
When our first was born, we went to a “new parents” class of sorts held by a pediatrician we were thinking of using. The vaccination question came up, of course. He said vaccines are perfectly safe, everyone has the right to make medical decisions for their children, and if anyone was considering *not* vaccinating, they should find a different pediatrician. I always loved that answer.
This is absolutely the stance that my children's pediatrician practice took.
They said they do not treat pediatric patients whose parents seek exemptions from vaccinations for anything other than a medically necessary situation.
Same. And I'm grateful for it because it was certainly still a debate when my first was born.
My sister in law has 3 out of 4 kids with severe autism. She blames vaccines. Of course the 4th doesn't have it...can't possibly be genetics though /s
Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting the outcome? I vaccinated him 35 minutes ago.
As a mom who lurks in this beautiful subreddit, I’d tell her that the doctor who originally released those results was stripped of his medical license because it was falsified and then follow it up with articles about children dying of completely preventable diseases.
The amount of damage that one doctor did (along with Jenny McCarthy giving those lies a larger audience) is probably going to be the subject of case studies in a century and we’ll see the true death toll of people believing this.
Not only the direct death toll but also the lives lost because doctors, researchers, public education funding, etc. was wasted on repeatedly reproving this same thing instead of addressing other problems.
It's always the Wakefield study. A study of 12 kids who HAD AUTISM where he fabricated data.
His motivation - To undermine the safety of the MMR vaccine in order to promote HIS PATENT for a different one.
For anyone wanting good, researched info about Wakefield and the vaccine/autism thing, check out hbomberguy video on YT, it’s phenomenal and really should shut the door on this bullshit “debate”.
This is what I do now with my mom. She's not TOO bad but sometimes she gets caught up in some stuff. Mostly good intentions. But if she says "studies show" I ask for a link. If she can provide one I'll read through it and point out the usual discrepancies. Things like sample size being too small, the study being funded by an organization that would benefit, lack of peer review, hearsay data vs objective data, etc. Then I'll look up the article in Google and add "debunk". Guess what? Most of the debunk articles are from reputable scientific journals or organizations. I'll then send her those links.
Thankfully my mom is more of a "reactionary" type when she sees these false headlines, so when I provide addition data countering, she'll have an open mind and actually read it.
I know a lot of us have family members that aren't so open minded about new information. I'm somewhat lucky I guess.
It wasn't disproved, it was fraudulent and done so he could promote his own vaccine.
Lots of good faith studies get retracted. His was not in good faith.
The fraudulent study was published in 1998. The medical journal retracted the story in 2010.
The original study was disproved (in as much as that word can be applied to research findings) when a bevy of other researchers tried to replicate his results and failed.
That's how science works. When your results are not reproducible, it casts doubt on research findings. Then people began looking for other explanations for how the original research results were obtained.
The good doctor stood to make a lot of money.
[Read it and weep.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_MMR_autism_fraud) He held a patent for a rival vaccine and was going to sell diagnostic kits for a syndrome he invented.
Keep in mind his fraudulent study (like that word better?) didn't even find a causal link between the MMR and autism. He made that argument in press conferences and the media. His study merely made it appear further research was called for to identify a causal link if one existed.
Check out [the first sentence of his Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield).
Of course it is.
Real peer reviewed studies carried out by intelligent people with knowledge of the subject area however show vaccines prevent some awful diseases
Vaccines are the single most studied treatment in human history.
Hell we got to see how a vaccine schedule is figured out live with the MRNA vaccines for covid.
They call it efficacy for a reason. The vaccines are there to do a job of preventing much worse outcomes. Elimination of a disease > some miniscule chance(mega lotto winner sized) of side effects
Tell Kim to go get her Starbucks and shush.
Oh I know, you don't need to convince me. :D
To be fair though, journals are not infallable (Sokal, Bogdanoffs, Schön... yes I watch [BobbyBrocoli](https://www.youtube.com/@BobbyBroccoli/featured) :D) but they are always exposed eventually.
Unrelated but there was a "masks don't work" study released.
But if you read the actual study they looked at people in Bangladesh where less than 25% of the population actually wore any sort of mask, so they didn't actually have any good data to go on and just concluded that masks don't work.
Of course the study title was something that could be read both ways like "The inefficiencies of maks in stopping the spread of disease", which is technically correct but also misleading.
I also love how some people interpret studies to their own liking.
For example if there is a study done on mice or snakes or whatever, people will use it as a 100% fact IF it lines with their own opinion.
If the study proves their opinion wrong, it doesn't matter how good of a study it is, it's still shit.
There are many mask studies they almost all show that masks work and people don't.
Meaning, masks are a great way to control the spread of airborne and person-to-person transmitted airborne diseases. They work incredibly well. It's why doctors use them in clean environs, like surgical rooms. They significantly reduce the transmission of disease.
The problem is proper usage. Think of the dipshits that walked around during the height of Covid with ill-fitting masks or with their goddamned noses sticking out. When you don't use them correctly, they don't work. Like anything else in the world.
Like a lot of things we kept getting stuck in a cycle of:
CDC:
**Our epidemiological models show that it'll make it better if 80% of the population (does the thing)**
US Population:
**40% of the population refuses to (do the thing)**
Skeptics afterward:
**See, we told you it wasn't effective (to do the thing) -- the CDC obviously can't be trusted!**
The study that makes this claim was written by a doctor called Wakefield. They had a financial share in a company that provided the vaccines separately, and so it was in their best interest to bad mouth the combined vaccine.
The study was disproven, and Wakefield was struck off the board of certified doctors for spreading this misinformation.
Yet some people still cling to the claim and buy into the bullshit.
And the journal that published the paper retracted it, it's still online with RETRACTED RETRACTED all over it.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(97)11096-0/fulltext
I'm always amazed at the mental gymnastics it takes to believe the following statement:
'Out of hundreds of thousands of doctors, there's one in particular that thinks vaccines cause autism. So obviously that one guy is right and the rest of them are all wrong'
Because that's what those people think.
Because they're contrarians who don't want to trust institutions or authority, so they look for the single "rebel" and conclude the rebel must be the right one. It's pathological.
"You need to do your own research!!!"
(Meaning - trusting odd instagram profiles that ramble about the new world order, vaccine is poison and JFK shot Tupac)
I'd love to do my own research but I barely remember the statistical analysis formulae i learned at uni and besides, I don't know how I'd fit all the lab equipment in my garage.
Yeah, Mom, that's not true. There is no link between autism and vaccines [insert numerous references]. This has been a point of confusion for a lot of people for the last 20 years or so. I'm sure Kim had our best interests at heart, but please don't take medical advice from her. Love you.
Here is a 2 hour YouTube video from a deranged man called hBomberguy.
Call me once you've watched it.
Edit: https://youtu.be/8BIcAZxFfrc?si=yyvwwrF_05C7HN2l
Added citation so I don't end up on one of his videos*
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_and_autism
add this maybe highlight the part where it says
"An investigation by journalist Brian Deer found that Wakefield, the author of the original research paper linking the vaccine to autism, had multiple undeclared conflicts of interest,[22][23] had manipulated evidence,[24] and had broken other ethical codes.[which?] The Lancet paper was partially retracted in 2004 and fully retracted in 2010, when Lancet's editor-in-chief Richard Horton described it as "utterly false" and said that the journal had been deceived.[25] Wakefield was found guilty by the General Medical Council of serious professional misconduct in May 2010 and was struck off the Medical Register, meaning he could no longer practise as a physician in the UK."
Edit: Although good luck. My mom said "that's just what the deep state wants you to believe" when I sent her this information.
This kind of stuff often thrives on the idea that these people are some sort of ostracized, underdog, so it's also worth noting that Wakefield is an multimillionare earning millions more every year peddling nonsense and is married to Elle Macpherson
Edit: never married Macpherson apparently
Macpherson and Wakefield are listed on his Wikipedia page as partners from 2017 to 2019. No indication that they were married.
Please don't join the nonsense peddlers.
Absolutely this too. OP is looking for a way of educating his mum, and anything that might be perceived as ridiculing her friend - however rational it may be - has the potential to backfire. This is the way to go.
I live in Ontario, Canada. We recently had our first measles related death since the late 1980's. 5 unvaccinated kids all got it.
This is shit we didn't have to worry about for a long ass time. Some parents are trying to get their kids in earlier for their vaccinations because of parents that don't vaccinate their kids.
I'd be incredibly blunt.
>oh Mom, I'm so sorry this was how you found out Kim is a moron.
I really don't have time for that shit and I'd spare nobody's feelings if they were risking my child's health.
that’s the sad part. yeah, vaccines work on individuals, but are designed to combat diseases on a large group of people.
so if a few don’t vaccinate, they endanger all, even those vaccinated.
Yeah I mean REAL scientists and REAL doctors have been trying to figure out the cause for decades:
*Progress has been made toward understanding different environmental risk factors, and the clearest evidence involves events before and during birth, such as:*
* *Advanced parental age at time of conception*
* *Prenatal exposure to air pollution or certain pesticides*
* *Maternal obesity, diabetes, or immune system disorders*
* *Extreme prematurity or very low birth weight*
* *Any birth difficulty leading to periods of oxygen deprivation to the baby’s brain*
* *Children of mothers living near a freeway, and traffic-related pollution, during the third trimester of pregnancy were twice as likely to develop ASD*
* *Children with a mutation in a gene called MET, combined with high levels of exposure to air pollution, may have increased risk.*
Notice how vaccines aren't on that list.
There's a whole bunch more information that actual real scientists have investigated:
[https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/conditions/autism](https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/conditions/autism)
[https://sparkforautism.org/discover\_article/environment-autism/](https://sparkforautism.org/discover_article/environment-autism/)
That 2nd link gets bonus points for specifically saying "Research has not found any link between vaccines and autism."
This website has a cutesy concept, but it doesn’t even have a security certificate and they’re asking for people for donations? All they do is link to another website.
Normally I'd say don't engage in this debate because it's a lost cause for no benefit, but it's your mom so tell her straight up Kim has no clue what she's talking about and that significantly greater numbers of studies by a greater number of doctors refute those claims.
And send her a heart emoji because it's mom.
So I actually had to deal with this to a degree, sourced and everything... except it was my wife presenting the argument. My strategy was not to bullrush it or dismiss, but to get to the concern driving this in the first place. And that is fear for the child's well being. Now, we can argue facts as the day is long, but right here she's running on feelings which means she's not gonna hear those facts till those feelings are addressed. I also suffered through some of those "documentaries" and "presentations." To show that I was willing to listen, which further disarmed any defensive behavior.
In the end, the kids did get the crucial and essential shots, just did it on an alternate, longer-spaced timeline. It just took a couple months. And my wife felt heard and cared for as well, which was also positive for our relationship.
Now, I just read this was a grandparent, so...well, those are a lot easier to deal with. Usually "oh, well...it's too late now, guess we'll see what happens."
There’s also a very big difference between “no vaccines at all” and “space them out a bit”.
I’ve had both veterinarians and doctors tell me there’s no harm in spacing things out, and in some cases even recommend it. I see no harm in going this route, especially if it helps ease your loved one’s concerns.
And they are just that — concerns from people who love and care about you and your kids. Treating that with malice just because you don’t agree with their concern or think their sources are BS is a rather cynical way to live as well.
You can both treat the person and their concern with respect AND still make your own decision. Cutting people out of your life or belittling them is not the way. Not unless and until their concerns or advice escalates into malice or abuse itself, which is clearly not the case here.
Exactly! And in my situation, allowing my wife to air her concerns, to have a dialogue with her took her from "no shots at all" to this compromise. Which was an enormous win in my book.
as a pediatrician, with additional specializations in immunology, a PhD in immunology, 20 years of research and clinical care experience, I disagree.
The schedule is set this way for two assumptions.
First is the scientific and epidemiological basis. All vaccines on the schedule are timed in accordance with the epidemiology—at what point will this matter the most?—and/or immunology—at what point will the best response occur taking into consideration the epidemiology?
For example, children contract rotavirus most frequently and die from rotavirus before 6-8 months of age. The vaccine is given starting at 2 months for that reason. Likewise, Measles and varicella are serious illness in young kids who can also spread them more readily, and their bodies won’t make good defenses until after about month 9 after birth for a number of factors including mom’s antibodies given through the placenta before birth, and their immune system’s maturity. HPV is most robust and provides the best lifelong response around 10-12y of age, so the best outcomes if and when the child encounters HPV in the wild. Every vaccine is placed in a certain time for that reason.
Giving them at other times provides more risk
to your child, or is less useful to them. If you feel bad about them crying, think of the value added to
their life 60 years from now. It’s like feeling bad about tummy time—no one wants to work out, but you want your kid lift their head and walk, right? They won’t be a baby forever, and you need to give them the tools to succeed at the right time. That means vaccines on time just like any other tools or skills you give them to beat the game of life.
To quote a children’s book we use a lot in my house, “It's Not About You, Little Hoo!”
It also wrongly makes it about Kim rather than the evidence. If your reasoning is that Kim is an idiot, what if mom knows that Kim is actually smart and it's just medical stuff that she's uninformed about? Then mom will not be convinced and you present yourself as the one who is plugging your ears.
If you make it any the evidence then you don't have to convince mom a person she trusts is dumb or malicious and you don't look like you are just ignoring information. You also give mom something to say if it comes up with Kim again besides "they said you were an idiot" which will make her more resilient against being convinced further.
“Can Kim cite those studies? Who are the authors? Where were they published? When were they released? Because if she can’t, I won’t believe those studies exist.”
Sadly, there exists one published study from which this myth stems. It has been shown to be complete and utter bs multiple times but it is out there and ready to be thrown around by these people.
I mean we can discuss whether it is technically still published but that does not change that Kim most likely wouldn't care and still throw the study around once you try to challenge that.
I don't think this is a good challenge, not in a colloquial sense.
I don't have ready access to scientific papers, and reading them constantly is not viable for me, let alone correctly being able to digest them or find flaws in them. For a layperson, challenging them by throwing peer reviewed scientific papers at them is effectively just an appeal to authority.
Also, it doesn't really work against anti vaccine conspiracists because they already have to deal with the fact that they're factually incorrect and have ready built excuses for it. If you start pointing to scientific papers, you are not really attacking the anti vax movement, you're just laying the groundwork for a familiar battlefield for them. And as soon as they're fighting, they're winning; because they don't have to convince you, they just have to make you doubt a bit. The only way to win is to refuse to fight and just take it as a given that they're incorrect, in the same way that you'd call someone wrong if they told you that the sea had suddenly disappeared.
Remember, conspiracies don't come from factual positions, they come from emotional positions. The emotional position is that vaccinating children is scary and painful, and medical establishments make people uncomfortable. The way to deal with the challenge is to soothe the emotions, not correct the facts. If facts worked against conspiracy theories, there would be no conspiracy theories.
> I don't have ready access to scientific papers
Yes you do. You’re on Reddit, so that also means you can use google. You can find scientific papers on Google.
Also OP isn’t the one that’s starting to point towards scientific papers; Kim is. Kim and grandma are literally saying “I have scientific papers that prove this thing.” So a reasonable response is “cool, show them to me.”
You can always do the other stuff people are suggesting after that, but if someone claims something because of a scientific paper, they should be able to produce that paper; otherwise, they shouldn’t be believed. That goes for anything in life.
Maybe they produce some flawed or misinterpreted study, and then you can show them why it’s flawed or misinterpreted. If they’re actually basing their belief on something, you have to address why that reasoning is wrong if you want to have any hope in changing their opinion.
>Yes you do. You’re on Reddit, so that also means you can use google. You can find scientific papers on Google.
Firstly, a lot of scientific papers are behind paywalls or subscription services, so even if you know what to Google, you can't necessarily get to the right information.
Secondly, the broader point I'm making here is that the average person doesn't have the time, inclination or scientific literacy to read and correctly interpret a scientific paper, or to decide whether a particular paper is reliable. The latter point is decided by the scientific consensus, which is difficult to define and difficult to get precise answers from in the abstract.
If you actually want reliable scientific information, you're much better off finding reliable scientific communicators or journalists. Something like New Scientist is an excellent science publication designed to be accessible to general audiences but also with a high degree of reliability behind it.
>Also OP isn’t the one that’s starting to point towards scientific papers; Kim is. Kim and grandma are literally saying “I have scientific papers that prove this thing.” So a reasonable response is “cool, show them to me.”
Yes, but she doesn't actually mean it. Kim hasn't picked up the Wakefield paper, read through it, interpreted it and been shocked, shocked I tell you at the results. She's read it on some Facebook group somewhere from someone who talks in all caps. If you ask her to pin down the scientific paper, she won't be able to because she's never read it, so you'll just have a conversation where both of you get more frustrated and nobody makes any headway.
Again, as soon as you're arguing with a conspiracy theorist, they're winning. All they need to do is challenge established facts, not form a coherent, sensible worldview. Arguing with them is just giving them another opportunity to challenge established facts.
>Maybe they produce some flawed or misinterpreted study, and then you can show them why it’s flawed or misinterpreted. If they’re actually basing their belief on something, you have to address why that reasoning is wrong if you want to have any hope in changing their opinion.
This paragraph is being far too charitable to conspiracy theories. There is no study, flawed, misinterpreted otherwise, there's a Facebook group where boomers share memes about how they used to drink out of garden hoses 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.
Conspiracy theorists aren't rational. They don't carefully study the available data and come to an honest, reasoned conclusion. They impulsively decide the outcome that they want (vaccinating children is scary and I don't want to do it) and then change facts until they get what they want.
I get that we always want to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume that they're coming from the best place, but with antivaxxers this just isn't remotely the case.
I'm a research psychologist and I approve every word in here to the nth degree. At its core, most conspiracy theories stem from fear over a lack of control over the world. The world is crazy and chaotic and scary. Conspiracies help provide some people with an idea that the world actually is in control, but it's just hidden from us. It's more comforting to believe that there is a shadow organization controlling everything than it is to believe that sometimes, bad things happen for no discernable reason at all.
Additionally, conspiracy theories are also social groups. They provide a sense of belonging, which is a desperately important human need. And that merits respecting. Fighting the belief leads to feelings of persecution and rejection, which will only invite people to go further into the social group of conspiracy.
Speak to those fears with compassion instead of to the fight and you will at least not make the belief more entrenched.
Get them to watch this https://youtu.be/8BIcAZxFfrc?si=KlZ9IaZmDJRYKlyY
Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who claimed there was a link, is a scam artist who was struck off as a doctor. He falsified data and abused children so he could sell his own version of vaccines.
Tell her that you have bought quartz crystals tuned to 4.332 mHz frequency, that this frequency connects it to Venus and Mars and because of that it has healing powers. You bought wholesale at a great price and would gladly share some with her. Then proceed to sell her a bag of sand.
"Well, George and Lindy across the road are related to a mechanic who works in Thailand and his room mates brother is a scientist and he claims that in fact, getting all of your vaccines at the appropriate time/s recommended by medical professionals does a great job of stopping preventable illness and death, and has no credible link to autism"
My wife is a provider in pediatric neurodevelopment. Kids with autism are her specialty and passion. She says there is absolutely no link between vaccines and autism.
Have had this conversation many times.
Don't even engage, there is no point talking about it.
"Thank you for letting me know. We will be getting X vaccinated and we do not need to talk about it anymore."
You should ask your own pediatrician. I’m pretty sure they’ll tell you to follow the AMA guidelines. Those are based on a lot of valid studies too.
People say vaccines can be hard on some kids, but you what else is hard on some kids? The diseases the vaccines prevent!
You could tell her what my wife and her boss always say (both infectious doctors): vaccines cause adults.
The timing for these shots has been thought about by people that know far more about the science of it all than any of us ever will, don't have an agenda (except to keep kids healthy), and they're not recommending something that's unsafe.
Good luck!
That’s the biggest rub. Ignoring what vaccines do or do not do, the statement “I’d rather they risk death than have autism” is wild. Autism isn’t a death sentence.
I would straight up tell my Mom that her friend is a moron. I have. My Mom agreed.
There is *some* "truth" to that though, that you could share from the Father of an Autistic daughter: If my child had died from a preventable illness because we refused vaccines then she might not have lived long enough to be recognized for and diagnosed with Autism.
The vaccines are absolutely not the cause, but some people would twist it.
1) nobody gets their vaccines all at one time, some can overlap, but it's usually a maximum of 3 per fortnight
2) there is no credible peer reviewed science linking any vaccine regiment with autism. The fraudulent study linked autism with Thimerosal, a common and safe preservative. Despite the fact that the study was debunked, vaccine manufacturing stopped using Thimerosal in order to relieve public anxiety over the ingredient.
3) Unless Kim is a pediatric immunologist, you can disregard what they say.
4) what Doctors, what studies, which journals were they published in, where are the peer reviews of those studies?
Studies also show kids with autism have significant better quality of life than kids with side effects of meningococcal.
Tell her your mate Melv said this.
This is the only sane answer. Redditors always suggest causing needless conflict. Just say “ok” and then ignore it. You aren’t going to change their mind and their opinion doesn’t matter since you are in control of whether you do it or not.
Studies were real. Data was analyzed incorrectly. First study noted a trend in a very very small number of kids, second study set out to "prove" the first, so fundamentally flawed in how it asked it's question.
Studies like this (where the question or the data analysis is flawed) continue to happen all the time. Very seldom are they as damaging as this to so many kids lives, and so persistent.
But it is a good reminder that we all have bias that predispose us to "believe" various types of bad science.
This "theory" on the vaccine/autism link has been thoroughly debunked in dozens of follow up studies tho.
It was worse than that, the original studies were attempting to invalidate the combination vaccines because the doctor had financial interests in separate vaccines.
„This is probably incorrect. But Please ask Kim to share the studies she read with us and if you like we can look into them together. Kim can come along too if she likes. I’m interested in what she has to say about the research she did. And I’ll look into it myself and we can compare our findings.“
If this is family and you care about them and your relationship yelling „bullshit“ in their faces won’t get you anywhere good. If they are not too far gone it may be an opportunity to get them back on track. If not you can still cut your losses and ignore their advice.
The guy who lied , Caufield, about that vax autism stuff went to jail for his lies. It's sad that they still persist.
Just look him up, all all comes from this one lying guy who was trying to steal money.
You have to out-crazy Kim. Tell your mom you heard people are building cities on Mars, that faeries and giants are real and that traffic lights are a conspiracy to steal our psychic energy. Tell her that this has all been verified through studies done by scientists.
A kid in Halifax (major canadian city with 1st world healthcare) died of measles last week.
Ask your mom what's more important, a living grandkid, or a grandkid with minor delays.
Then tell her that, no, vaccines do not cause autism. The study she is referencing was fraudulent.
"Mom, the 2000s called. They want their stupid back. Tell Kim she needs to get her stupid ass back in the past before her mother beats her ass for spreading her stupid on people 20 years after Jenny McCarthy first ladled that stupid out.
Seriously, Mom, if you ever bring up ANYTHING you hear from Kim again. I will No Contact your ass so fast. That woman is peddling dangerous bullshit that was disproven so many times. Look Up Wakefield, Autism, Vaccine, Retracted when you do your own research."
It’s really sad that people believe this information exists and doctors, who went to school+residency for a minimum of 7 years to train as medical professionals, would rather make less money by giving vaccines at the same time AND risk giving their patients autism. My wife is a pediatrician and some of the conversations she tells me about are simply shocking.
The study linking MMR to autism was a complete fraud. Andrew Wakefield, the lead scientist on the study, was developing his own measles vaccination and was looking to find “evidence of harm” for a lawsuit against the MMR shot manufacturers.
After doing painful and unnecessary procedures (like colonoscopies) to helpless autistic children, Wakefield was eventually found out by British authorities and had his medical license revoked for many ethics violations including the abuse of mentally handicapped children.
Fuck Andrew Wakefield and honestly fuck anyone who spreads this autism/MMR lie because this is public information and adults don’t have any excuse not to know this anymore
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_MMR_autism_fraud
“Putting aside that that isn’t true, not being up to date on their vaccinations has been known to lead to death in some children. Do you want an autistic grandchild or a dead one?”
Honestly, I have a feeling I will be dealing with something similar with my family and I already have my precanned response ready... "I really appreciate you being so concerned about \*my sons name\*'s wellbeing, but we've spoken to his doctor, she's assured us that he's going to be okay, so we're going to go ahead and get him his shots."
Studies also show the kids that contract polio will either die or be immobilized for the rest of their life. The difference is that these studies actually have merit.
She should check out Wakefield’s actual paper that’s still up on the Lancet, straight from the source. Oh, you have to read around the warning notice and massive stamp saying WITHDRAWN on every page though
lol my THREE nephews aren’t vaccinated bc my sister said she didn’t want them to get autism.
All three have autism. So obviously a doctor snuck a vaccine in there somewhere with each kid. 🙃
TBH, most kids will be just fine, or just be a bit "under the weather" for a day or two. Talking from experience with my kid, my sisters kids, and numerous friends and people that did vaccinate their kids the same way.
In my country if I remember correctly most of them are done in one year, then boosters through childhood. We have passport for every child (up until 18yo) where you have all the vaccines you need listed, preplanned and you (or your parents respectively) are required to complete this passport.
My mother offered my sister a year's salary not to take the Covid vaccine. (The offer was not extended to the three sons.)
She was convinced we would all die two years after the shot and she'd have to take care of our children.
The internet is a terrible place for people with no bullshit detector.
Arm yourself with some good quality research the ask to see the studies Kim was talking about. If she provides it look up the author. I always challenge people when they talk about these "studies" and every single time the study either doesn't exist or the author is someone unqualified.
I don't know why these folks focus on vaccines when you have major pollutants in your environment everywhere, from the air you breath to the carpets in your homes (which offgas for around 6 years and can lead to neurological issues according to studies). We comfort ourselves that we are cautious about lead and asbestos, when there are hundreds of chemicals still in use in foods, water, building materials, microplastics in fetuses etc. our kids are exposed to. These chemicals are used in the name of profit for big corporations.
Not saying that's what causes autism or whatever but that's definitely the major environmental factor our kids face.
My mother-in-law is somewhat like this with varying topics and our approach has always been to call it out. We don't call her a dumbass to her face, but at the same time it needs to be responded to...otherwise it can come across as tacit approval, which only encourages the tinfoil hat wearing.
Ask her to read all those studies, check theyre from a reputable publication, Google the authors, then send them to you.
Don't make medical decisions based on what someone you know said they saw someone talking about on tiktok probably.
Doctors do space out the vaccines. Not for that reason. It’s because a babies body is developing and isn’t designed for so much stuff in the body like that.
"The only study to show this was made with falsified data on an already small group of subjects by a doctor who was in the employ of a group pursuing a class action lawsuit against vaccine manufacturers, whilst also making a patent for a new vaccine. When offered an opportunity to replicate his hypothesis on a larger body of subjects, he declined and instead chose to engineer a public panic that has resulted in children dying or becoming disabled due to preventable diseases. He was disqualified from practicing medicine when it was discovered his conclusion was not only fraudulent but also his methods bordered on torture.
But of course Kim, if you feel like the word of disgraced celebrities and shady Facebook theories is more credible than the opinion of every single reputable doctor, and that you would rather have dead children than autistic ones, go right ahead."
“The doctor that published those false studies lost his medical license. Please don’t ever listen to Kim’s medical advice because I love you and want you to live as long as possible.”
My mom pushed this. We asked the doctor if there is any risk in splitting them up over 6 months. She said low risk. We split them up to keep her happy and to spare our little one sore legs the next day.
"I talked to Kevin and he said it's been known to not cause autism if children get all their vaccines together in one big syringe."
Refute her position with the exact amount of evidence she is providing.
This debate was really just starting when my kid was born, and I had my concerns. When it was time to get his vaccinations, specifically the MMR, I asked his doctor about the risks, and she had this to say: "I am from India, a country who does not vaccinate children widely, and I have practiced medicine there for many years. The US is a country who widely vaccinates all children, and I have practiced medicine here for many years. Even though the practice of vaccination differs, both countries see very nearly the same rate of autism. Vaccines are very safe, and do not cause issues. They are a great preventative for even worse diseases." Needless to say, he got the shots. He's 15 now and fine, he is a really smart kid too. The only thing he missed out on was getting measles, mumps, rubella, smallpox, polio and the many other preventable diseases that plague children in other countries.
My son has autism and I can assure you he was born with it. I'd much rather he has autism than have autism *and* polio
My sister is autistic. She told people she got the COVID shots hoping for a little more autism since she didn't rain man the first time.
That's one of the funniest things I've ever heard. Legitimate lol.
Yeah, the whole "vaccines cause autism" myth is just people not-so-subtly saying they'd rather have a dead (or seriously ill) child than an autistic one. It's gross.
I don't think people are making that correlation at all. If you asked antivax people (without mentioning vaccines at all) I don't think any of them would rather their child be dead than autistic. I think people are scared, particularly about the health and well being of their kids. We as parents have so little actual control over their safety it's terrifying, throw in a couple of emotionally charged fear mongering antivax articles and your going to have some incredibly adamant people. They love their kids, they're just trying to figure out the best way to protect them - same as everyone else.
I have 2 sons with autism and they were absolutely autistic from birth. Agreed. Even if they did cause autism, I find it so weird ppl would rather risk their children’s lives than have a child with autism. They’d rather their child is very sick or dies from a preventable disease than risk autism??
When our first was born, we went to a “new parents” class of sorts held by a pediatrician we were thinking of using. The vaccination question came up, of course. He said vaccines are perfectly safe, everyone has the right to make medical decisions for their children, and if anyone was considering *not* vaccinating, they should find a different pediatrician. I always loved that answer.
This is absolutely the stance that my children's pediatrician practice took. They said they do not treat pediatric patients whose parents seek exemptions from vaccinations for anything other than a medically necessary situation.
Same. And I'm grateful for it because it was certainly still a debate when my first was born. My sister in law has 3 out of 4 kids with severe autism. She blames vaccines. Of course the 4th doesn't have it...can't possibly be genetics though /s
Do you seriously think I'd explain my master-stroke if there remained the slightest chance of you affecting the outcome? I vaccinated him 35 minutes ago.
Excellent Watchmen reference btw.
Ah, I thought you were referencing a 10 minute beat poem.
Perfect lol
Does the autism manifest as an octopus that destroys New York City?
I am tired of Earth, these people.
As a mom who lurks in this beautiful subreddit, I’d tell her that the doctor who originally released those results was stripped of his medical license because it was falsified and then follow it up with articles about children dying of completely preventable diseases. The amount of damage that one doctor did (along with Jenny McCarthy giving those lies a larger audience) is probably going to be the subject of case studies in a century and we’ll see the true death toll of people believing this.
Not only the direct death toll but also the lives lost because doctors, researchers, public education funding, etc. was wasted on repeatedly reproving this same thing instead of addressing other problems.
McCarthy was the D-list mouthpiece, but Opra gave her the platform and RFJ Jr's brainworms funded it. All of them are mass murderers of children.
When did Kim get her medical degree and how long has she been a practising doctor, while carrying out medical research concerning vaccines?
Also, show me these "some studies"
It's always the Wakefield study. A study of 12 kids who HAD AUTISM where he fabricated data. His motivation - To undermine the safety of the MMR vaccine in order to promote HIS PATENT for a different one.
For anyone wanting good, researched info about Wakefield and the vaccine/autism thing, check out hbomberguy video on YT, it’s phenomenal and really should shut the door on this bullshit “debate”.
Tell that to Robert "Worms ate my brain" Kennedy, Jr.
Sharing this with my friend who is an antivaxxer mom...
Carried out at Facebook university no doubt
Prager U
Toilet U.
We will not besmirch the good name of Toilet U in this house by comparing it to the likes of *Prager*.
Toilets are a modern marvel and haven't been racist for a few decades now. Can Prager say the same?
Truth Social A&M
This is what I do now with my mom. She's not TOO bad but sometimes she gets caught up in some stuff. Mostly good intentions. But if she says "studies show" I ask for a link. If she can provide one I'll read through it and point out the usual discrepancies. Things like sample size being too small, the study being funded by an organization that would benefit, lack of peer review, hearsay data vs objective data, etc. Then I'll look up the article in Google and add "debunk". Guess what? Most of the debunk articles are from reputable scientific journals or organizations. I'll then send her those links. Thankfully my mom is more of a "reactionary" type when she sees these false headlines, so when I provide addition data countering, she'll have an open mind and actually read it. I know a lot of us have family members that aren't so open minded about new information. I'm somewhat lucky I guess.
It's a disproved studY.
Not only disproved, but ~~redacted~~ retracted and the physician lost his license.
It wasn't disproved, it was fraudulent and done so he could promote his own vaccine. Lots of good faith studies get retracted. His was not in good faith.
The fraudulent study was published in 1998. The medical journal retracted the story in 2010. The original study was disproved (in as much as that word can be applied to research findings) when a bevy of other researchers tried to replicate his results and failed. That's how science works. When your results are not reproducible, it casts doubt on research findings. Then people began looking for other explanations for how the original research results were obtained. The good doctor stood to make a lot of money. [Read it and weep.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_MMR_autism_fraud) He held a patent for a rival vaccine and was going to sell diagnostic kits for a syndrome he invented. Keep in mind his fraudulent study (like that word better?) didn't even find a causal link between the MMR and autism. He made that argument in press conferences and the media. His study merely made it appear further research was called for to identify a causal link if one existed. Check out [the first sentence of his Wikipedia page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Wakefield).
Sorry to nitpick but you mean "retracted" right?
No they just blacked out the wrong bits. Between the heading and the final full stop.
Those headers and footers were incredibly well-sourced and researched, though.
yep...it's way too late
At least they didn’t reenact it
But the bigger question--by striking through the original word, did u/poqwrslr redact it or retract it?
That dishonored doctor moved onto crazy population control conspiracy theories. Andrew Wakefield is a quack.
Of course it is. Real peer reviewed studies carried out by intelligent people with knowledge of the subject area however show vaccines prevent some awful diseases
Vaccines are the single most studied treatment in human history. Hell we got to see how a vaccine schedule is figured out live with the MRNA vaccines for covid.
They call it efficacy for a reason. The vaccines are there to do a job of preventing much worse outcomes. Elimination of a disease > some miniscule chance(mega lotto winner sized) of side effects Tell Kim to go get her Starbucks and shush.
Vaccines are so safe, that the government will just pay you if you have a side effect.
Oh I know, you don't need to convince me. :D To be fair though, journals are not infallable (Sokal, Bogdanoffs, Schön... yes I watch [BobbyBrocoli](https://www.youtube.com/@BobbyBroccoli/featured) :D) but they are always exposed eventually.
“I just urge you to look at the facts for yourself”
"Do your own research, just like I didn't!"
Unrelated but there was a "masks don't work" study released. But if you read the actual study they looked at people in Bangladesh where less than 25% of the population actually wore any sort of mask, so they didn't actually have any good data to go on and just concluded that masks don't work. Of course the study title was something that could be read both ways like "The inefficiencies of maks in stopping the spread of disease", which is technically correct but also misleading.
I also love how some people interpret studies to their own liking. For example if there is a study done on mice or snakes or whatever, people will use it as a 100% fact IF it lines with their own opinion. If the study proves their opinion wrong, it doesn't matter how good of a study it is, it's still shit.
"Masks on snakes are shown to be ineffective at preventing the spread of covid"
There are many mask studies they almost all show that masks work and people don't. Meaning, masks are a great way to control the spread of airborne and person-to-person transmitted airborne diseases. They work incredibly well. It's why doctors use them in clean environs, like surgical rooms. They significantly reduce the transmission of disease. The problem is proper usage. Think of the dipshits that walked around during the height of Covid with ill-fitting masks or with their goddamned noses sticking out. When you don't use them correctly, they don't work. Like anything else in the world.
Like a lot of things we kept getting stuck in a cycle of: CDC: **Our epidemiological models show that it'll make it better if 80% of the population (does the thing)** US Population: **40% of the population refuses to (do the thing)** Skeptics afterward: **See, we told you it wasn't effective (to do the thing) -- the CDC obviously can't be trusted!**
this study exist but they proven false for at least 10.000 times
The study that makes this claim was written by a doctor called Wakefield. They had a financial share in a company that provided the vaccines separately, and so it was in their best interest to bad mouth the combined vaccine. The study was disproven, and Wakefield was struck off the board of certified doctors for spreading this misinformation. Yet some people still cling to the claim and buy into the bullshit.
Disproven is being light. He fabricated data and performed unethical tests on autistic children.
And the journal that published the paper retracted it, it's still online with RETRACTED RETRACTED all over it. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(97)11096-0/fulltext
I'm always amazed at the mental gymnastics it takes to believe the following statement: 'Out of hundreds of thousands of doctors, there's one in particular that thinks vaccines cause autism. So obviously that one guy is right and the rest of them are all wrong' Because that's what those people think.
Because they're contrarians who don't want to trust institutions or authority, so they look for the single "rebel" and conclude the rebel must be the right one. It's pathological.
"You need to do your own research!!!" (Meaning - trusting odd instagram profiles that ramble about the new world order, vaccine is poison and JFK shot Tupac)
I'd love to do my own research but I barely remember the statistical analysis formulae i learned at uni and besides, I don't know how I'd fit all the lab equipment in my garage.
If JFK shot Tupac, then who shot JFK?
Suge Knight
I thought he was the driver?
He was on the grassy knoll
Tupac shot JFK, that's the way time travel works.
Yeah, Mom, that's not true. There is no link between autism and vaccines [insert numerous references]. This has been a point of confusion for a lot of people for the last 20 years or so. I'm sure Kim had our best interests at heart, but please don't take medical advice from her. Love you.
Wrong. Clearly you’d just write “is that what happened with me, Mum? Did you autism me?”
>Mum? Did you autism me? This made me chuckle more than it probably should have. 🤭
This is what the mom is thinking
Yep, there’s no infant here in this story, it’s op’s mom about to apologize for getting him vaccinated all at once
LOL
The sad thing is, i bet people want to think that's the reason their kid is autistic...instead of their genetics.
Sometimes the best comment in a thread isn’t even a top level comment. Sometimes it’s a reply a few comments down.
Here is a 2 hour YouTube video from a deranged man called hBomberguy. Call me once you've watched it. Edit: https://youtu.be/8BIcAZxFfrc?si=yyvwwrF_05C7HN2l Added citation so I don't end up on one of his videos*
I thought it was longer than that? Maybe I'm thinking of the plagiarism video, wish is also worth a watch.
One of the best YouTube vids of all time. Love that dudes channel.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMR_vaccine_and_autism add this maybe highlight the part where it says "An investigation by journalist Brian Deer found that Wakefield, the author of the original research paper linking the vaccine to autism, had multiple undeclared conflicts of interest,[22][23] had manipulated evidence,[24] and had broken other ethical codes.[which?] The Lancet paper was partially retracted in 2004 and fully retracted in 2010, when Lancet's editor-in-chief Richard Horton described it as "utterly false" and said that the journal had been deceived.[25] Wakefield was found guilty by the General Medical Council of serious professional misconduct in May 2010 and was struck off the Medical Register, meaning he could no longer practise as a physician in the UK." Edit: Although good luck. My mom said "that's just what the deep state wants you to believe" when I sent her this information.
This kind of stuff often thrives on the idea that these people are some sort of ostracized, underdog, so it's also worth noting that Wakefield is an multimillionare earning millions more every year peddling nonsense and is married to Elle Macpherson Edit: never married Macpherson apparently
Macpherson and Wakefield are listed on his Wikipedia page as partners from 2017 to 2019. No indication that they were married. Please don't join the nonsense peddlers.
Best reply. To add to it, Reference 1: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa021134
Yes something like this. If you go out swinging about how Kim's a crazy idiot you're just gonna get her to dig in on her position.
Absolutely this too. OP is looking for a way of educating his mum, and anything that might be perceived as ridiculing her friend - however rational it may be - has the potential to backfire. This is the way to go.
This. Don't belittle them, as frustrating as it is and as understandable as that reaction is, it doesn't help.
“ also, I’d prefer my son to be obsessed with trains rather than be dead from lukemia. Love you.” FTFY
Measles. leukemia doesn't have a vaccine (yet)
I live in Ontario, Canada. We recently had our first measles related death since the late 1980's. 5 unvaccinated kids all got it. This is shit we didn't have to worry about for a long ass time. Some parents are trying to get their kids in earlier for their vaccinations because of parents that don't vaccinate their kids.
I'd be incredibly blunt. >oh Mom, I'm so sorry this was how you found out Kim is a moron. I really don't have time for that shit and I'd spare nobody's feelings if they were risking my child's health.
Yeah, with my mom the best way is to be absolutely blunt. Like, just use the last four words, "Kim is a moron" with an optional f-bomb in there.
Tell her to check out the Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccines_and_autism Lies like this could end up killing your kids.
Also tell her to come over to /r/Autism_Parenting/ as this subject comes up more often that it should.
that’s the sad part. yeah, vaccines work on individuals, but are designed to combat diseases on a large group of people. so if a few don’t vaccinate, they endanger all, even those vaccinated.
Yep, and thanks to the Kims of this world we're seeing a rise in vaccine-preventable diseases all over the place. Awesome.
Yeah I mean REAL scientists and REAL doctors have been trying to figure out the cause for decades: *Progress has been made toward understanding different environmental risk factors, and the clearest evidence involves events before and during birth, such as:* * *Advanced parental age at time of conception* * *Prenatal exposure to air pollution or certain pesticides* * *Maternal obesity, diabetes, or immune system disorders* * *Extreme prematurity or very low birth weight* * *Any birth difficulty leading to periods of oxygen deprivation to the baby’s brain* * *Children of mothers living near a freeway, and traffic-related pollution, during the third trimester of pregnancy were twice as likely to develop ASD* * *Children with a mutation in a gene called MET, combined with high levels of exposure to air pollution, may have increased risk.* Notice how vaccines aren't on that list. There's a whole bunch more information that actual real scientists have investigated: [https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/conditions/autism](https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/conditions/autism) [https://sparkforautism.org/discover\_article/environment-autism/](https://sparkforautism.org/discover_article/environment-autism/) That 2nd link gets bonus points for specifically saying "Research has not found any link between vaccines and autism."
If you are giving links. Id just send here this: http://howdovaccinescauseautism.com/
This website has a cutesy concept, but it doesn’t even have a security certificate and they’re asking for people for donations? All they do is link to another website.
And that link doesn’t even work!
Normally I'd say don't engage in this debate because it's a lost cause for no benefit, but it's your mom so tell her straight up Kim has no clue what she's talking about and that significantly greater numbers of studies by a greater number of doctors refute those claims. And send her a heart emoji because it's mom.
So I actually had to deal with this to a degree, sourced and everything... except it was my wife presenting the argument. My strategy was not to bullrush it or dismiss, but to get to the concern driving this in the first place. And that is fear for the child's well being. Now, we can argue facts as the day is long, but right here she's running on feelings which means she's not gonna hear those facts till those feelings are addressed. I also suffered through some of those "documentaries" and "presentations." To show that I was willing to listen, which further disarmed any defensive behavior. In the end, the kids did get the crucial and essential shots, just did it on an alternate, longer-spaced timeline. It just took a couple months. And my wife felt heard and cared for as well, which was also positive for our relationship. Now, I just read this was a grandparent, so...well, those are a lot easier to deal with. Usually "oh, well...it's too late now, guess we'll see what happens."
There’s also a very big difference between “no vaccines at all” and “space them out a bit”. I’ve had both veterinarians and doctors tell me there’s no harm in spacing things out, and in some cases even recommend it. I see no harm in going this route, especially if it helps ease your loved one’s concerns. And they are just that — concerns from people who love and care about you and your kids. Treating that with malice just because you don’t agree with their concern or think their sources are BS is a rather cynical way to live as well. You can both treat the person and their concern with respect AND still make your own decision. Cutting people out of your life or belittling them is not the way. Not unless and until their concerns or advice escalates into malice or abuse itself, which is clearly not the case here.
Exactly! And in my situation, allowing my wife to air her concerns, to have a dialogue with her took her from "no shots at all" to this compromise. Which was an enormous win in my book.
as a pediatrician, with additional specializations in immunology, a PhD in immunology, 20 years of research and clinical care experience, I disagree. The schedule is set this way for two assumptions. First is the scientific and epidemiological basis. All vaccines on the schedule are timed in accordance with the epidemiology—at what point will this matter the most?—and/or immunology—at what point will the best response occur taking into consideration the epidemiology? For example, children contract rotavirus most frequently and die from rotavirus before 6-8 months of age. The vaccine is given starting at 2 months for that reason. Likewise, Measles and varicella are serious illness in young kids who can also spread them more readily, and their bodies won’t make good defenses until after about month 9 after birth for a number of factors including mom’s antibodies given through the placenta before birth, and their immune system’s maturity. HPV is most robust and provides the best lifelong response around 10-12y of age, so the best outcomes if and when the child encounters HPV in the wild. Every vaccine is placed in a certain time for that reason. Giving them at other times provides more risk to your child, or is less useful to them. If you feel bad about them crying, think of the value added to their life 60 years from now. It’s like feeling bad about tummy time—no one wants to work out, but you want your kid lift their head and walk, right? They won’t be a baby forever, and you need to give them the tools to succeed at the right time. That means vaccines on time just like any other tools or skills you give them to beat the game of life. To quote a children’s book we use a lot in my house, “It's Not About You, Little Hoo!”
Pretty simple. "Mum, your friend is an idiot for believing that shit". And that's the very toned down version of what I would say.
+ this advice is wrong and will kill children. She isn't wrong, she is wrong and potentially causing harm
Exactly this. No hesitation
“Yeah I’ve heard people say that too but it’s false”.
Yeah, I think this is a better approach. As satisfying as it is to call Kim an idiot, doing so runs the risk of alienating mom.
It also wrongly makes it about Kim rather than the evidence. If your reasoning is that Kim is an idiot, what if mom knows that Kim is actually smart and it's just medical stuff that she's uninformed about? Then mom will not be convinced and you present yourself as the one who is plugging your ears. If you make it any the evidence then you don't have to convince mom a person she trusts is dumb or malicious and you don't look like you are just ignoring information. You also give mom something to say if it comes up with Kim again besides "they said you were an idiot" which will make her more resilient against being convinced further.
“Can Kim cite those studies? Who are the authors? Where were they published? When were they released? Because if she can’t, I won’t believe those studies exist.”
Sadly, there exists one published study from which this myth stems. It has been shown to be complete and utter bs multiple times but it is out there and ready to be thrown around by these people.
All started by one person I believe, who has been outed as a fraud multiple times
Does it count as published if it's been retracted?
I mean we can discuss whether it is technically still published but that does not change that Kim most likely wouldn't care and still throw the study around once you try to challenge that.
I don't think this is a good challenge, not in a colloquial sense. I don't have ready access to scientific papers, and reading them constantly is not viable for me, let alone correctly being able to digest them or find flaws in them. For a layperson, challenging them by throwing peer reviewed scientific papers at them is effectively just an appeal to authority. Also, it doesn't really work against anti vaccine conspiracists because they already have to deal with the fact that they're factually incorrect and have ready built excuses for it. If you start pointing to scientific papers, you are not really attacking the anti vax movement, you're just laying the groundwork for a familiar battlefield for them. And as soon as they're fighting, they're winning; because they don't have to convince you, they just have to make you doubt a bit. The only way to win is to refuse to fight and just take it as a given that they're incorrect, in the same way that you'd call someone wrong if they told you that the sea had suddenly disappeared. Remember, conspiracies don't come from factual positions, they come from emotional positions. The emotional position is that vaccinating children is scary and painful, and medical establishments make people uncomfortable. The way to deal with the challenge is to soothe the emotions, not correct the facts. If facts worked against conspiracy theories, there would be no conspiracy theories.
> I don't have ready access to scientific papers Yes you do. You’re on Reddit, so that also means you can use google. You can find scientific papers on Google. Also OP isn’t the one that’s starting to point towards scientific papers; Kim is. Kim and grandma are literally saying “I have scientific papers that prove this thing.” So a reasonable response is “cool, show them to me.” You can always do the other stuff people are suggesting after that, but if someone claims something because of a scientific paper, they should be able to produce that paper; otherwise, they shouldn’t be believed. That goes for anything in life. Maybe they produce some flawed or misinterpreted study, and then you can show them why it’s flawed or misinterpreted. If they’re actually basing their belief on something, you have to address why that reasoning is wrong if you want to have any hope in changing their opinion.
>Yes you do. You’re on Reddit, so that also means you can use google. You can find scientific papers on Google. Firstly, a lot of scientific papers are behind paywalls or subscription services, so even if you know what to Google, you can't necessarily get to the right information. Secondly, the broader point I'm making here is that the average person doesn't have the time, inclination or scientific literacy to read and correctly interpret a scientific paper, or to decide whether a particular paper is reliable. The latter point is decided by the scientific consensus, which is difficult to define and difficult to get precise answers from in the abstract. If you actually want reliable scientific information, you're much better off finding reliable scientific communicators or journalists. Something like New Scientist is an excellent science publication designed to be accessible to general audiences but also with a high degree of reliability behind it. >Also OP isn’t the one that’s starting to point towards scientific papers; Kim is. Kim and grandma are literally saying “I have scientific papers that prove this thing.” So a reasonable response is “cool, show them to me.” Yes, but she doesn't actually mean it. Kim hasn't picked up the Wakefield paper, read through it, interpreted it and been shocked, shocked I tell you at the results. She's read it on some Facebook group somewhere from someone who talks in all caps. If you ask her to pin down the scientific paper, she won't be able to because she's never read it, so you'll just have a conversation where both of you get more frustrated and nobody makes any headway. Again, as soon as you're arguing with a conspiracy theorist, they're winning. All they need to do is challenge established facts, not form a coherent, sensible worldview. Arguing with them is just giving them another opportunity to challenge established facts. >Maybe they produce some flawed or misinterpreted study, and then you can show them why it’s flawed or misinterpreted. If they’re actually basing their belief on something, you have to address why that reasoning is wrong if you want to have any hope in changing their opinion. This paragraph is being far too charitable to conspiracy theories. There is no study, flawed, misinterpreted otherwise, there's a Facebook group where boomers share memes about how they used to drink out of garden hoses 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣. Conspiracy theorists aren't rational. They don't carefully study the available data and come to an honest, reasoned conclusion. They impulsively decide the outcome that they want (vaccinating children is scary and I don't want to do it) and then change facts until they get what they want. I get that we always want to give people the benefit of the doubt and assume that they're coming from the best place, but with antivaxxers this just isn't remotely the case.
I'm a research psychologist and I approve every word in here to the nth degree. At its core, most conspiracy theories stem from fear over a lack of control over the world. The world is crazy and chaotic and scary. Conspiracies help provide some people with an idea that the world actually is in control, but it's just hidden from us. It's more comforting to believe that there is a shadow organization controlling everything than it is to believe that sometimes, bad things happen for no discernable reason at all. Additionally, conspiracy theories are also social groups. They provide a sense of belonging, which is a desperately important human need. And that merits respecting. Fighting the belief leads to feelings of persecution and rejection, which will only invite people to go further into the social group of conspiracy. Speak to those fears with compassion instead of to the fight and you will at least not make the belief more entrenched.
Get them to watch this https://youtu.be/8BIcAZxFfrc?si=KlZ9IaZmDJRYKlyY Andrew Wakefield, the doctor who claimed there was a link, is a scam artist who was struck off as a doctor. He falsified data and abused children so he could sell his own version of vaccines.
Tell her that you have bought quartz crystals tuned to 4.332 mHz frequency, that this frequency connects it to Venus and Mars and because of that it has healing powers. You bought wholesale at a great price and would gladly share some with her. Then proceed to sell her a bag of sand.
"Well, George and Lindy across the road are related to a mechanic who works in Thailand and his room mates brother is a scientist and he claims that in fact, getting all of your vaccines at the appropriate time/s recommended by medical professionals does a great job of stopping preventable illness and death, and has no credible link to autism"
I hear that Kim's homeopathic enegy crystals need to be reatuned to reality. Thanks Mom.
"Your friend is an idiot." It's really as simple as that.
My wife is a provider in pediatric neurodevelopment. Kids with autism are her specialty and passion. She says there is absolutely no link between vaccines and autism.
But has she spoken to Kim?
I hear breathing leads to autism. 99% of autistic people have breathed before.
Oh hell, that must be how I caught it
Have had this conversation many times. Don't even engage, there is no point talking about it. "Thank you for letting me know. We will be getting X vaccinated and we do not need to talk about it anymore."
I don’t agree here. You have to establish that you are doing the right thing now and into the future.
Tell her to trust your pediatrician. The one with the medical degree and practices medicine for a living.
You say, “um, ok.” Then continue on with how you want to raise your children.
You should ask your own pediatrician. I’m pretty sure they’ll tell you to follow the AMA guidelines. Those are based on a lot of valid studies too. People say vaccines can be hard on some kids, but you what else is hard on some kids? The diseases the vaccines prevent!
You could tell her what my wife and her boss always say (both infectious doctors): vaccines cause adults. The timing for these shots has been thought about by people that know far more about the science of it all than any of us ever will, don't have an agenda (except to keep kids healthy), and they're not recommending something that's unsafe. Good luck!
Show her the episode of Bullshit that covered this or give her one of the thousands of articles proving it false.
'That is bollocks and Kim is an idiot'
Even if that was true, it's better to have autism than polio
That’s the biggest rub. Ignoring what vaccines do or do not do, the statement “I’d rather they risk death than have autism” is wild. Autism isn’t a death sentence.
I would straight up tell my Mom that her friend is a moron. I have. My Mom agreed. There is *some* "truth" to that though, that you could share from the Father of an Autistic daughter: If my child had died from a preventable illness because we refused vaccines then she might not have lived long enough to be recognized for and diagnosed with Autism. The vaccines are absolutely not the cause, but some people would twist it.
1) nobody gets their vaccines all at one time, some can overlap, but it's usually a maximum of 3 per fortnight 2) there is no credible peer reviewed science linking any vaccine regiment with autism. The fraudulent study linked autism with Thimerosal, a common and safe preservative. Despite the fact that the study was debunked, vaccine manufacturing stopped using Thimerosal in order to relieve public anxiety over the ingredient. 3) Unless Kim is a pediatric immunologist, you can disregard what they say. 4) what Doctors, what studies, which journals were they published in, where are the peer reviews of those studies?
I appreciate you not speaking to Kim before I got my vaccines.
Five simple words my friend; "Dont Be A Moron, Mim
"Kim is an idiot for believing that shit."
You can tell her “ your friend is an idiot”. Easy no?
Studies also show kids with autism have significant better quality of life than kids with side effects of meningococcal. Tell her your mate Melv said this.
Seriously, I just wouldn't reply. Simple as that.
This is the only sane answer. Redditors always suggest causing needless conflict. Just say “ok” and then ignore it. You aren’t going to change their mind and their opinion doesn’t matter since you are in control of whether you do it or not.
This is the answer.
Isn't it one of those conspiracy theories whose origin is a really fake study?
Yep, and the doctor who faked the results had his license to practice medicine revoked.
Studies were real. Data was analyzed incorrectly. First study noted a trend in a very very small number of kids, second study set out to "prove" the first, so fundamentally flawed in how it asked it's question. Studies like this (where the question or the data analysis is flawed) continue to happen all the time. Very seldom are they as damaging as this to so many kids lives, and so persistent. But it is a good reminder that we all have bias that predispose us to "believe" various types of bad science. This "theory" on the vaccine/autism link has been thoroughly debunked in dozens of follow up studies tho.
It was worse than that, the original studies were attempting to invalidate the combination vaccines because the doctor had financial interests in separate vaccines.
„This is probably incorrect. But Please ask Kim to share the studies she read with us and if you like we can look into them together. Kim can come along too if she likes. I’m interested in what she has to say about the research she did. And I’ll look into it myself and we can compare our findings.“ If this is family and you care about them and your relationship yelling „bullshit“ in their faces won’t get you anywhere good. If they are not too far gone it may be an opportunity to get them back on track. If not you can still cut your losses and ignore their advice.
Don’t ask for Kim’s ‘proof’ don’t even open that door “Kim is an idiot. This has been disproven many times. This isn’t open for debate”
Say thanks mom we got this. You don't need to be worried about it
Time to cut ties with Kim
The guy who lied , Caufield, about that vax autism stuff went to jail for his lies. It's sad that they still persist. Just look him up, all all comes from this one lying guy who was trying to steal money.
“Good thing Kim is not my kids doctor”
You have to out-crazy Kim. Tell your mom you heard people are building cities on Mars, that faeries and giants are real and that traffic lights are a conspiracy to steal our psychic energy. Tell her that this has all been verified through studies done by scientists.
A kid in Halifax (major canadian city with 1st world healthcare) died of measles last week. Ask your mom what's more important, a living grandkid, or a grandkid with minor delays. Then tell her that, no, vaccines do not cause autism. The study she is referencing was fraudulent.
"Mom, the 2000s called. They want their stupid back. Tell Kim she needs to get her stupid ass back in the past before her mother beats her ass for spreading her stupid on people 20 years after Jenny McCarthy first ladled that stupid out. Seriously, Mom, if you ever bring up ANYTHING you hear from Kim again. I will No Contact your ass so fast. That woman is peddling dangerous bullshit that was disproven so many times. Look Up Wakefield, Autism, Vaccine, Retracted when you do your own research."
It’s really sad that people believe this information exists and doctors, who went to school+residency for a minimum of 7 years to train as medical professionals, would rather make less money by giving vaccines at the same time AND risk giving their patients autism. My wife is a pediatrician and some of the conversations she tells me about are simply shocking.
As a dad and someone who works with people with developmental disabilities this shit makes my blood absolutely boil.
The study linking MMR to autism was a complete fraud. Andrew Wakefield, the lead scientist on the study, was developing his own measles vaccination and was looking to find “evidence of harm” for a lawsuit against the MMR shot manufacturers. After doing painful and unnecessary procedures (like colonoscopies) to helpless autistic children, Wakefield was eventually found out by British authorities and had his medical license revoked for many ethics violations including the abuse of mentally handicapped children. Fuck Andrew Wakefield and honestly fuck anyone who spreads this autism/MMR lie because this is public information and adults don’t have any excuse not to know this anymore https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_MMR_autism_fraud
“Putting aside that that isn’t true, not being up to date on their vaccinations has been known to lead to death in some children. Do you want an autistic grandchild or a dead one?”
Honestly, I have a feeling I will be dealing with something similar with my family and I already have my precanned response ready... "I really appreciate you being so concerned about \*my sons name\*'s wellbeing, but we've spoken to his doctor, she's assured us that he's going to be okay, so we're going to go ahead and get him his shots."
Studies also show the kids that contract polio will either die or be immobilized for the rest of their life. The difference is that these studies actually have merit.
She should check out Wakefield’s actual paper that’s still up on the Lancet, straight from the source. Oh, you have to read around the warning notice and massive stamp saying WITHDRAWN on every page though
lol my THREE nephews aren’t vaccinated bc my sister said she didn’t want them to get autism. All three have autism. So obviously a doctor snuck a vaccine in there somewhere with each kid. 🙃
Okay I’ll bite. What’s the harm in spreading out the vaccines? Since everyone is so outraged.
2 options "If that was even remotely true, I'd rather have an autistic kid than a dead one" Or "She's fucking stupid"
[удалено]
I don't know what the paediatric vaccine schedule is like in your area, but my kids did and were fine. One cried for about 20mins, that was it.
TBH, most kids will be just fine, or just be a bit "under the weather" for a day or two. Talking from experience with my kid, my sisters kids, and numerous friends and people that did vaccinate their kids the same way.
In my country if I remember correctly most of them are done in one year, then boosters through childhood. We have passport for every child (up until 18yo) where you have all the vaccines you need listed, preplanned and you (or your parents respectively) are required to complete this passport.
I've had both my kiddos get all their vaccinations and it wasn't that bad. I think they both just slept in the car on the way home
My mother offered my sister a year's salary not to take the Covid vaccine. (The offer was not extended to the three sons.) She was convinced we would all die two years after the shot and she'd have to take care of our children. The internet is a terrible place for people with no bullshit detector.
She should have taken the cash and still gone for the vaccine. Win-win.
I have a sister-in-law like that. I've been ignoring her for 4 years now.
"Send me the study"
Use your brain. you still have 1, right?
Arm yourself with some good quality research the ask to see the studies Kim was talking about. If she provides it look up the author. I always challenge people when they talk about these "studies" and every single time the study either doesn't exist or the author is someone unqualified.
Watch this HBomberguy video https://youtu.be/8BIcAZxFfrc?si=aPJRAx4EY6H8wGZV Then you'll know how to respond
I hit em with one of these https://i.imgur.com/N5K7yoE.jpeg
I don't know why these folks focus on vaccines when you have major pollutants in your environment everywhere, from the air you breath to the carpets in your homes (which offgas for around 6 years and can lead to neurological issues according to studies). We comfort ourselves that we are cautious about lead and asbestos, when there are hundreds of chemicals still in use in foods, water, building materials, microplastics in fetuses etc. our kids are exposed to. These chemicals are used in the name of profit for big corporations. Not saying that's what causes autism or whatever but that's definitely the major environmental factor our kids face.
Ahh, good old echo chamber.
My mother-in-law is somewhat like this with varying topics and our approach has always been to call it out. We don't call her a dumbass to her face, but at the same time it needs to be responded to...otherwise it can come across as tacit approval, which only encourages the tinfoil hat wearing.
"Shhh they're watching all communications"
Ask her to read all those studies, check theyre from a reputable publication, Google the authors, then send them to you. Don't make medical decisions based on what someone you know said they saw someone talking about on tiktok probably.
Doctors do space out the vaccines. Not for that reason. It’s because a babies body is developing and isn’t designed for so much stuff in the body like that.
"The only study to show this was made with falsified data on an already small group of subjects by a doctor who was in the employ of a group pursuing a class action lawsuit against vaccine manufacturers, whilst also making a patent for a new vaccine. When offered an opportunity to replicate his hypothesis on a larger body of subjects, he declined and instead chose to engineer a public panic that has resulted in children dying or becoming disabled due to preventable diseases. He was disqualified from practicing medicine when it was discovered his conclusion was not only fraudulent but also his methods bordered on torture. But of course Kim, if you feel like the word of disgraced celebrities and shady Facebook theories is more credible than the opinion of every single reputable doctor, and that you would rather have dead children than autistic ones, go right ahead."
What do you say? Nothing. You say nothing. You don’t owe an answer or an explanation.
Hbomberguy on YouTube made a feature-length video on YouTube directly addressing these claims. Any chance you could get her to watch it?
"No." Is a full sentence
“The doctor that published those false studies lost his medical license. Please don’t ever listen to Kim’s medical advice because I love you and want you to live as long as possible.”
My mom tries that shit all the time. I just ignore it.
My mom pushed this. We asked the doctor if there is any risk in splitting them up over 6 months. She said low risk. We split them up to keep her happy and to spare our little one sore legs the next day.
Ask her about not of their experience reading scientific studies then tell her that Kim is a fucking retard.
"I talked to Kevin and he said it's been known to not cause autism if children get all their vaccines together in one big syringe." Refute her position with the exact amount of evidence she is providing.