Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

[Siggie]

Re: Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

You can make an argument for vaccines that treat especially horrible diseases, so we won't go there. But to sit there and tell me that its okay to get a flu shot once a year (twice now with the swine flu), when each shot contains mercury, heavy metals, and animal DNA, goes against basic science and medicine. Mercury is a known toxin, and it does damage at the scale of parts per Billion, as opposed to most things that are measured in parts per Million. That means a single molecule of mercury can do damage to your body (the damage is not always visible), and these flu shots contain many, many molecules of it (and mercury is just one of the many harmful ingredients)

So these doctors are basically saying its okay to put mercury into your bloodstream. Thanks for the update. While we're at it, maybe we should rewrite all known information in regards to mercury, and give these guys a Nobel Prize for their brilliant discovery

Many doctors and healthcare workers refuse to be vaccinated. Its reached the point where the state has to FORCE people in the medical industry to get vaccinated. Why would people in the medical industry resist vaccination if the risk is worth it? So do most people in the medical industry engage in psuedo-science and conspiracy theories, or do they know something most of us don't?


Watch this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_rKKawZx0I

Pay attention at 5:00. Listen to what the doctor says:

"I'm gonna get it, if that helps at all. But I'll tell you, my wife is not gonna immunize our kids. Cause I've got four of them, and when I go home I'm not Dr. Oz, I'm Mr. Oz."

A red flag if I ever saw one. He's getting one because he has no choice, so he has to put a smile on his face and tell people why the vaccines are good for you. But if children are at the highest risk of this flu, why wouldn't this doctor make his kids get vaccinated? Lets use some common sense, guys.

You're quoting Dr. Oz? A Turk TV doctor who advocate crock alternative medicine? Really?

There's no evidence that thimerosal is harmful. I've already posted countless references about it and MMR showing it's perfectly safe. Mercury is in air, water, and soil, so there are trace amounts in everything (even plants). If you eat tuna once a year, you're likely getting more mercury than is in an influenza vaccine.

You're assuming that all metals are bad for us, but zinc, iron, magnesium, etc are all "metals" and are essential for health. And animal DNA? Do you eat meat, eggs, and dairy?

[ArmSurvival]

Re: Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

You're quoting Dr. Oz? A Turk TV doctor who advocate crock alternative medicine? Really?

He's saying most people should get vaccinated, except his own family. This is not very different from most other pro-vaccine doctors. So if you think he's a quack, then we're in agreement.

There's no evidence that thimerosal is harmful. I've already posted countless references about it and MMR showing it's perfectly safe. Mercury is in air, water, and soil, so there are trace amounts in everything (even plants). If you eat tuna once a year, you're likely getting more mercury than is in an influenza vaccine.

Countless references? In this thread you posted a blog from 1 doctor (Novella). In most of what I've seen from his blog, he just talks about how there is no link between mercury and autism (a controversial topic), even though he doesn't post any of the actual studies conducted. If he does, then link it, because I don't have time to go through the thousands of posts he has written. However, autism is not the only side-effect of mercury exposure---Try various forms of cancer. Do you have any studies on that as well?

And, you're basically saying that Barbara Loe Fisher is a quack, and is engaging in psuedo-science. Let me share with you some of her credentials (from wikipedia):

National Vaccine Advisory Committee (1988-1991), US Department of Health and Human Services; Chair, Subcommittee on Vaccine Adverse Events
Vaccine Safety Forum, Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences (1995-1998)
Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee of the Food and Drug Administration (1999-2003), US Department of Health and Human Services
Vaccine Policy Analysis Collaborative: A US Government Experiment in Public Engagement (2002-2005)
Blue Ribbon Panel on Vaccine Safety, Centers for Disease Control (June 3-4, 2004)
Consumers United for Evidence Based Healthcare, The Cochrane Collaboration - U.S. (August 2006 - present)

Notice she was part of the CDC panel that dealt with vaccine safety. So you're saying she is just a conspiracy theorist, because she happens to bring to light much of the dangers of vaccines through her years of experience?

[KanadaHye]

Re: Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

You're quoting Dr. Oz? A Turk TV doctor who advocate crock alternative medicine? Really?

There's no evidence that thimerosal is harmful. I've already posted countless references about it and MMR showing it's perfectly safe. Mercury is in air, water, and soil, so there are trace amounts in everything (even plants). If you eat tuna once a year, you're likely getting more mercury than is in an influenza vaccine.

You're assuming that all metals are bad for us, but zinc, iron, magnesium, etc are all "metals" and are essential for health. And animal DNA? Do you eat meat, eggs, and dairy?

Mercury is not needed as part of the vaccine, it's a preservative. They have removed the use of mercury in childhood vaccines (so they claim). Mercury is not GOOD for your health, don't even start with that b.s. Zinc, iron, magnesium, sodium are not toxic where as mercury IS. Next thing you're going to say is that lead is ok to consume. I don't know too many babies or toddlers that are fed tuna or swordfish. Even still, not all tuna can be expected to contain the same amount of mercury.

"Removing thimerosal from U.S. vaccines has had several effects, Pichichero says. Since vaccines don’t last as long without a preservative, the elimination of thimerosal caused some vaccine makers to produce single-dose vials, which are more expensive to produce, store, and ship. For some vaccines, manufacturers use thimerosal throughout the manufacturing process, then remove the compound, which also adds to the cost of the vaccine. Such actions raised the cost of vaccines, making it less likely that they’ll be used as widely as possible.

Thimerosal is still part of vaccines widely used in other nations. In October the World Health Organization announced guidelines suggesting that thimerosal-containing vaccines are safe and should continue to be used, a conclusion based partly on Pichichero’s findings.

“In countries that are still confronting diseases like whooping cough and tetanus and measles, where millions of children die of the disease, there is no argument. Where people are dying of these diseases, switching to a thimerosal-free vaccine would raise the prices such that millions of children would go unvaccinated.

“Although America can afford to pay a higher price for newly formulated vaccines, much of the rest of the world cannot afford the increased cost of thimerosal-free vaccines. For them, it’s a critical issue of life and death."

http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/s...dex.cfm?id=160

[Siggie]

Re: Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

Countless references? In this thread you posted a blog from 1 doctor (Novella). In most of what I've seen from his blog, he just talks about how there is no link between mercury and autism (a controversial topic), even though he doesn't post any of the actual studies conducted. If he does, then link it, because I don't have time to go through the thousands of posts he has written. However, autism is not the only side-effect of mercury exposure---Try various forms of cancer. Do you have any studies on that as well?
...

Notice she was part of the CDC panel that dealt with vaccine safety. So you're saying she is just a conspiracy theorist, because she happens to bring to light much of the dangers of vaccines through her years of experience?

I wasn't exactly hiding the references...

I linked to the other thread where I gave citations and I gave more here in this thread as well . It was you who asked for them last time.
Both of these are on the first page of this thread.

Her quote is about influenza vaccine for healthy populations. Most people healthy adults don't get vaccinated for seasonal influenza and many who do get vaccinated have still been exposed because the vaccine match the strains that circulate each year varies. So, all of us have had some exposure to influenza.
She was on the safety committees and those committees have approved these vaccines, so she probably also found that they were safe.

What about H1N1 though? Post her opinion about H1N1 vaccinations or her thoughts on vaccinations for those in high risk populations. Show me something where she says that high risk people shouldn't get the H1N1 vaccine. Or something where she says the vaccines (seasonal or H1N1) are unsafe. So far all you've got are her concerns about vaccine dependency in regards to seasonal influenza only. That statement doesn't support what you claim it does, i.e. that the vaccines are unsafe.
She's talking about A and you're citing her as evidence for Z.

Mercury is not needed as part of the vaccine, it's a preservative. They have removed the use of mercury in childhood vaccines (so they claim). Mercury is not GOOD for your health, don't even start with that b.s. Zinc, iron, magnesium, sodium are not toxic where as mercury IS. Next thing you're going to say is that lead is ok to consume. I don't know too many babies or toddlers that are fed tuna or swordfish. Even still, not all tuna can be expected to contain the same amount of mercury.



http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/news/s...dex.cfm?id=160

You do realize the article you posted cites research that concluded that the mercury levels are SAFE and that the mercury is eliminated very quickly, right?

Calm down Mister. I didn't start with any BS. ArmSurvival said there are heavy metals as if they are ALL bad. That is what I addressed. My point was that not all metals are bad. Yes, mercury can be toxic at high enough doses, but the evidence supports the conclusion that these levels are not met by the tiny quantities in vaccines. Don't build strawmen with feeding babies lead. Stick to the claim I am actually making. Just in case you conveniently missed it in this post as well, I'll paste it here: the evidence supports the conclusion that these levels are not met by the tiny quantities in vaccines.

[ArmSurvival]

Re: Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

I wasn't exactly hiding the references...

I linked to the other thread where I gave citations and I gave more here in this thread as well . It was you who asked for them last time.
Both of these are on the first page of this thread.

Again, these are studies that only deal with autism, of which I have seen studies that support either side of the argument. However, mercury causes a wide array of complications in the human body, which is in no way restricted to autism. Would you happen to have a study that focuses on the correlation of cancer rates? What about other behavioral problems or neurological problems?

Her quote is about influenza vaccine for healthy populations. Most people healthy adults don't get vaccinated for seasonal influenza and many who do get vaccinated have still been exposed because the vaccine match the strains that circulate each year varies. So, all of us have had some exposure to influenza.
She was on the safety committees and those committees have approved these vaccines, so she probably also found that they were safe.

Actually, she was saying that being exposed to influenza through a vaccine is different than having natural exposure to it. She said that natural exposure is what builds long-lasting immunity, and that vaccines only provide temporary immunity at best, and actually sap the long-term immunization of the general population.

What about H1N1 though? Post her opinion about H1N1 vaccinations or her thoughts on vaccinations for those in high risk populations. Show me something where she says that high risk people shouldn't get the H1N1 vaccine. Or something where she says the vaccines (seasonal or H1N1) are unsafe. So far all you've got are her concerns about vaccine dependency in regards to seasonal influenza only. That statement doesn't support what you claim it does, i.e. that the vaccines are unsafe.
She's talking about A and you're citing her as evidence for Z.

If you listened to the entire interview I posted (3 parts), she covers all these topics.

She says H1N1 is completely overblown, and that most people diagnosed with H1N1 (around 90%) do not actually have H1N1, and that she has yet to meet anyone who has caught H1N1. She said the fact that doctors are rushing to diagnose ANY flu-like symptoms as “H1N1” is alarming, and it highlights the basic problem with the medical community at large.

She talks about the safety (more like lack of safety) of vaccines, and she talks about the risks of mercury exposure through the vaccines.

[KanadaHye]

Re: Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

You do realize the article you posted cites research that concluded that the mercury levels are SAFE and that the mercury is eliminated very quickly, right?

Calm down Mister. I didn't start with any BS. ArmSurvival said there are heavy metals as if they are ALL bad. That is what I addressed. My point was that not all metals are bad. Yes, mercury can be toxic at high enough doses, but the evidence supports the conclusion that these levels are not met by the tiny quantities in vaccines. Don't build strawmen with feeding babies lead. Stick to the claim I am actually making. Just in case you conveniently missed it in this post as well, I'll paste it here: the evidence supports the conclusion that these levels are not met by the tiny quantities in vaccines.

Yes, and you do realize that the part that I posted explains how regardless of their "evidence", the use of mercury isn't necessary and it is used because it makes it cheaper.

The claims you are making are evidence given by the same organizations that promote the vaccines. They remind me of a used car salesman that will say just about anything to push their product onto you knowing very well that there are problems with it. Not all children are as easily susceptible to autism, and mercury free vaccinations would be ideal.

[Federate]

Re: Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

Doubts cast on H1N1 scare

Video report from Al Jazeera English


The severity of the H1N1 outbreak was deliberately exaggerated by pharmaceutical companies that stood to make billions of dollars from a worldwide scare, a leading European health expert has claimed.

Wolfgang Wodarg, head of health at the Council of Europe, has accused the makers of vaccines for the virus of influencing the World Health Organisation's (WHO) decision to declare a pandemic.

The council, a Strasbourg-based body responsible for the European Court of Human Rights, has decided to investigate Wodarg's claims in an emergency debate on the issue to be held later this month.

Wodarg said the crisis led to governments around the world ordering and stockpiling millions of doses of anti-flu drugs which were not needed.

'Inefficient work'

Speaking to Al Jazeera, Wodarg said: "There is a very inefficient work of our agencies. They made a big panic with the bird flu and they made big panic with the swine flu.

"The national governments spent billions of euros to buy their vaccines [for H1N1] so we have to investigate what was behind it, we cannot afford such agencies that spent the money for useless health measures."

In a statement to Al Jazeera, Aphaluck Bhatiasevi, a media officer for WHO, said: "Providing independent advice to member states is a very important function of WHO, we take this work very seriously and guard against the influence of any vested interests.

"We welcome any legitimate review process that can improve our work."

In response to Wodarg's comments, GlaxoSmithKline, one of the makers of H1N1 vaccines, said: "Allegations of undue influence are misguided and unfounded. The WHO declared that H1N1 swine flu met the criteria for a pandemic.

"Responding to it has required unprecedented collaboration. As WHO have stated, legal regulations and numerous safeguards are in place to manage possible conflicts of interest."

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/eu...330498806.html

[Siggie]

Re: Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

It's about freakin' time... This study was thoroughly discredited and retracted by nearly all co-authors so long ago. Wakefield is possibly one of the most unethical researchers I have ever read about. This article doesn't even cover the crap he did (e.g. fabrication of data).

Lancet Retracts Study Tying Child Vaccine to Autism (Update2)


By Michelle Fay Cortez

Feb. 2 (Bloomberg) -- The Lancet medical journal retracted a 1998 study that linked a routine childhood vaccine to autism and bowel disease after a U.K. investigation found flaws in the research.

The U.K. General Medical Council, which licenses doctors, concluded in a report last week that three researchers led by Andrew Wakefield at the Royal Free Hospital in London carried out invasive, unnecessary tests, failed to act in the best interest of the children, and misused public funds. It also said Wakefield didn’t disclose a conflict of interest as he was involved in legal claims against the vaccine makers.

“It has become clear that several elements of the 1998 paper by Wakefield et al are incorrect, contrary to the findings of an earlier investigation,” the editors of the Lancet wrote in a statement today.

Immunization rates plunged in the U.K. to less than 80 percent by 2003, as parents concerned about the possible health risks refused the vaccine, according to the Health Protection Agency. Ten of the 12 authors, in a 2004 article in the Lancet, backed away from the suggestion that autism and bowel disease were linked to the vaccine. A panel of U.S. government advisers found the same year that childhood vaccinations probably don’t raise the risk of autism.

The original study, involving 11 boys and one girl aged 10 and under, found bowel disease and developmental disorders in the previously normal children. The parents reported symptoms in eight of the children after they were vaccinated for measles, mumps and rubella.

‘Outrageous’

“It was outrageous,” Jeffrey Boscamp, a pediatrician at Hackensack University Medical Center in New Jersey, said by email. “Most of the authors asked for their names to be removed from the study. It’s unfortunate that it undermined confidence in vaccines when in fact it wasn’t true at all.”

With today’s action by the Lancet, the paper was retracted from the published record, stripping it of its scientific claims.

Wakefield oversees the research program at Thoughtful House, a treatment center for children with developmental disorders, in Austin, Texas.

“The allegations against me and against my colleagues are both unfounded and unjust, and I invite anyone to examine the contents of these proceedings and come to their own conclusion,” Wakefield said in a statement provided by Thoughtful House today.

source

[Siggie]

Re: Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

Helpful explanation of (ir)rational choice theory a couple paragraphs in...

True Believers
Why there's no dispelling the myth that vaccines cause autism.
By Arthur Allen
Posted Tuesday, Feb. 2, 2010, at 1:56 PM ET
On Tuesday, the medical journal the Lancet retracted a 1998 paper that linked the MMR vaccine to autism. The controversial paper was challenged and debunked by the scientific community, but it nevertheless sparked a panic among many parents. In 2007, Arthur Allen explained why scientists are unlikely to convince the parents of autistic children that vaccines are not to blame. The original article is reprinted below.

At the recent 12-day hearing into theories that vaccines cause autism, the link between the disorder and the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine came across as shaky at best. As for the mercury-containing preservative thimerosal, which was used in other vaccines, witnesses showed that in all known cases of actual mercury poisoning (none of which caused autism), the dose was hundreds or thousands of times higher than what kids got during the 1990s. Powerful population studies showed no link to either MMR or thimerosal-containing shots.

None of that moves Mary Wildman, 47, whose son's case is before the court and who drove from her home near Pittsburgh to watch the hearing, which ended this week. "I know what happened to my son after he got his MMR shot," she told me. "I have no doubt. There's no way they'll convince me that all these kids were not damaged by vaccines."

It is difficult to challenge a mother's knowledge of her own child. And also to fight off the staying power of the vaccines-cause-autism theory and other such notions that verge on the irrational.

People who study irrational beliefs have a variety of ways of explaining why we cling to them. In rational choice theory, what appear to be crazy choices are actually rational, in that they maximize an individual's benefit—or at least make him or her feel good.

Blaming vaccines can promise benefits. Victory in a lawsuit is an obvious one, especially for middle-class parents struggling to care for and educate their unruly and unresponsive kids. Another apparent benefit is the notion, espoused by a network of alternative-medical practitioners and supplement pushers, that if vaccines are the cause, the damage can be repaired, the child made whole. In the homes of autistic children it is not unusual to find cabinets filled with 40 different vitamins and supplements, along with casein-free, gluten-free foods, antibiotics, and other drugs and potions. Each is designed to fix an aspect of the "damage" that vaccines or other "toxins" caused.

"Hope is a powerful drug," says Jim Laidler, a Portland scientist and father of two autistic boys who jumped ship from the vaccine conspiracy a few years ago. In reality, autism has no cure, nor even a clearly defined cause. Science takes its time and often provides no definitive answers. That isn't medicine that's easy to swallow.

Another explanation for the refusal to face facts is what cognitive scientists call confirmation bias. Years ago, when writing an article for the Washington Post Magazine about the Tailwind affair, a screwy piece of journalism about a nonexistent attack on American POWs with sarin gas, I concluded that the story's CNN producers had become wedded to the thesis after interviewing a few unreliable sources. After that, they unconsciously discounted any facts that interfered with their juicy story. They weren't lying—except, perhaps, to themselves. They had brain blindness—confirmation bias.

The same might be said of crusading journalists like David Kirby, author of Evidence of Harm, a book that seemed to corroborate the beliefs of hundreds of parents of autistic children, and UPI reporters Dan Olmsted and Mark Benjamin (the latter now with Salon).

Systems of belief such as religion and even scientific paradigms can lock their adherents into confirmation biases. And then tidbits of fact or gossip appear over the Internet to shore them up. There's a point of no return beyond which it's very hard to change one's views about an important subject.

Then, too, the material in discussion is highly technical and specialized, and most parents aren't truly able to determine which conclusions are reasonable. So they go with their gut, or the zeitgeist message that it makes more sense to trust the "little guy"—the maverick scientist, the alt-med practitioner—than established medicine and public health. "History tells us that a lot of ground-breaking discoveries are made by mavericks who don't follow the mainstream," says Laidler. "What is often left out is that most of the mavericks are just plain wrong. They laughed at Galileo and Edison, but they also laughed at xxxo the Clown and Don Knotts."

And to be sure, there was some basis for suspecting vaccines several years ago, before definitive studies had discounted a link. When the first vaccine theory was proposed in 1998, it appeared in the prestigious British medical journal Lancet and was published by an established London gastroenterologist, Andrew Wakefield. Two years later at a congressional hearing, Wakefield and an Irish pathologist and molecular biologist, John O'Leary, announced they had found measles viral RNA in the guts of autistic kids with severe bowel problems.

The air of respectability fell away over the years as we learned that Wakefield had serious conflicts of interest (including a 1997 patent application on a measles vaccine to replace the potentially soon-to-be-avoided MMR shot) and that a subsequent publication on measles RNA was probably an artifact of false positives, a common problem in polymerase chain-reaction technology.

The thimerosal theory emerged in a different context. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, concerned about cumulative mercury exposures in young children, asked manufacturers in 1999 to phase out thimerosal-containing vaccines. In other countries, such as Denmark and Canada, thimerosal was removed because of new vaccine combinations that either didn't require thimerosal or would be damaged by it. Nowhere was thimerosal removed because of evidence of harm.

But the first CDC study of children's exposures to thimerosal-containing vaccines was difficult to interpret. And anti-mercury activists jumped on the transcript of a 2000 meeting at which the study was scrutinized to argue that something improper was going on. The transcript shows no such thing. But the activists unleashed a public-relations campaign alleging a government and "big pharma" coverup.

That, in turn, proved to be eye candy for environmental groups already enraged by the Bush administration's enlistment of former industry officials in the squashing of environmental regulations. Anti-pollution lawyer Robert F. Kennedy zealously jumped on the thimerosal bandwagon in an "expose" published in Salon and Rolling Stone.

No surprise there. What editor or writer doesn't want to "reveal" that drugmakers and the government conspired to poison a generation of innocent kids. (Kirby's book won a 2005 Investigative Reporters and Editors award.) Where's the passion in the story that some public-health bureaucrats quietly moved to blunt a danger that turned out to be nonexistent?

In the pre-Internet days, the parents of an autistic child living in a small city might have found a handful of other parents in their predicament. Now, they instantly find thousands online. The denominator—healthy children—has disappeared. This is a good thing if you're looking for answers. But the answers may not be good ones. Joined together on the Internet, these actors create a climate of opinion that functions as an echo chamber for conspiracy dittoheads. Even the women's division of the Methodist Church has gotten in on the act, presumably on the grounds that it is fighting for social justice by decrying mercury poisoning, although there was no mercury poisoning, and social justice would be better met by promoting confidence in vaccines.

Kennedy, who wrote blithely in the Huffington Post during the trial that "overwhelming science" had confirmed the link, continues to believe it. So does Rep. Dan Burton, R-Ind., whose circuslike hearing room aired many such claims. Neither cites any solid studies, because they do not exist.

If and when the vaccine court rules against Michelle Cedillo, the 12-year-old autistic girl at the center of these first hearings, it won't change their minds. Long ago, the famous Dr. David Livingstone interviewed a rain doctor in Botswana. When Livingstone accused the rain doctor of being irrational or a cheat, the rain doctor replied, "Well, then there is a pair of us." If it rains, I take the credit, he said, and if your patient gets better, you take the credit. In neither case do we lose faith in our professions. You see, the rain doctor said, "what we believe is always more important than what actually happens.

source

[armogrid]

Re: Vaccinations (Countering the misinformation of Anti-Vaxx Movement)

After reading your back-n-forth regarding vaccination, I want to make a comment not about vaccination, autism, H1N1, or mercury... I want to comment on how this topic (and many other open-ended, controversial topics) waste your time, energy, focus, and life. They interfere and distract with your true purpose as a human.

Listening to puppets (Maher & Shermer) zealously defending their [pointless] point-of-view only causes emotional reactivity. They are arguing over two-sides of the same coin. Keep tossing that coin and settle on heads or tails. In the end, you will stick to your heads/tails families and divide from the rest. This applies to most divisive subject matter (politics, religion, history, ethics, etc.). In the end, we suffer through our continued division and inability to unite for REAL solutions.

And, despite saying I wouldn't mention it, I must say the H1N1 scare came and went... just like Y2K, SARS, bird flu, Mad Cow/prions, [insert any issue the media will bombard you with to the point of disgust/exhaustion/complacency]. I see the last time anyone commented here was 02/2010... that's more than half a year ago.... about the same time the media stopped their H1N1 propaganda and started focusing on: the Winter Olympics, Tiger Woods, Healthcare Bill/Reform, Toyota brakes, Avatar the [shettiest] movie, airport body scanners, and eventually the BP oil spill. The revolving door of fear-based news leading to a fear-based existence.

Whatever you believe regarding vaccination, it's a personal choice and should not be dictated or enforced upon others (regardless if you deem their beliefs as "irrational"). Furthermore, talking heads like [douche bag] Maher and [douche bag] Shermer provide biased information, as do many websites packed with disinformation, even when disguised with "randomized, double-blinded, blah-blah-blah studies". Be critical in your approach to all information, from both sides, and make a decision for yourself.... not parroting some douche bag.