What should be done with this **** (and those like him)?

[CitizenCain]

"Vaccines cause autism" cunt is back in the news, it seems...

"In the September Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Gregory Poland, M.D. writes that 'More than 150 cases of measles have been reported in the United States already this year and there have been similar outbreaks in Europe, a sign the disease is making an alarming comeback (abstract). The reappearance of the potentially deadly virus is the result of unfounded fears about a link between the measles shot and autism that have turned some parents against childhood vaccination.'"

This follows the recent release of a massive review of studies into the side effects of vaccination, summarized here by Nature, which did not find convincing support for the idea that MMR shots caused autism.

So, it seems that thanks to one fraudulent cunt who lied in the guise of science (linkage for anyone who doesn't know/remember the story), we have a potential resurgence of a once dangerous and deadly disease. He's been stripped of his license, 13 years too late, but that hardly seems like enough. Anyone have any thoughts on what ought to happen to pieces of shit like this, and/or maybe those who made him possible? (The fraudulent study, was, of course paid for by some pharma interest with a competing product that didn't contain any mercury compounds, IIRC.)

I'm all for beating the cunt to death with the next unvaccinated kid to die of measles, as problematic and unlikely as that may be. But the whole thing also seems to raise interesting issues of law and speech and what responsibility really means (or should).

[Lebanese Dragon]

I wouldn't want to stifle opinions and expression, but a dislcaimer that he is not scientist, or his information has not been extensively peer reviewed or what have you, I would support a government mandate of such a thing. Those violating it to face charges propotional to impact of the violation.

[Aimless]

Well, Cain, what do you think should be done to a parent who neglects to vaccinate their kid?

[CitizenCain]

Too vague. That's a pretty big blanket situation, with any particular case having too many different mitigating (or aggravating) factors to impose one single rule on. I say just let natural selection do its thing - too many stupid morons fucking with my freedom on this planet as it is without breeding new ones.

[Steely Glint]

Put in a dustbin, kicked down a hill.

[GGT]

Anyone have any thoughts on what ought to happen to pieces of shit like this, and/or maybe those who made him possible? (The fraudulent study, was, of course paid for by some pharma interest with a competing product that didn't contain any mercury compounds, IIRC.)

I'm all for beating the cunt to death with the next unvaccinated kid to die of measles, as problematic and unlikely as that may be. But the whole thing also seems to raise interesting issues of law and speech and what responsibility really means (or should).

Quite the quandary for a libertarian who despises gummint regulations and idolizes Freee Market behavior, eh?

Looks like frauds and corporate pharma are allowed to exploit free speech and test limits of the law (judicial branch of government)....yet you're complaining.

The only reason we were able to (almost) eradicate measles is because of mandatory vaccinations for public school-aged children. Same for smallpox, whooping cough and polio.

Damn those public health/safety regulations, with a large centralized federal government with the power to tell people what to do, in order to protect the greater-good, huh.

[Aimless]

Too vague. That's a pretty big blanket situation, with any particular case having too many different mitigating (or aggravating) factors to impose one single rule on. I say just let natural selection do its thing - too many stupid morons fucking with my freedom on this planet as it is without breeding new ones.

Ultimately the responsibility rests with the parents, so whatever you want to do to him you might want to consider doing to the parents as well. Thank gov for vaccination

[CitizenCain]

And GeeGee weighs in on the issue (sort of), from the I-don't-know-what-"libertarian"-means-but-am-still-going-to-attack-it corner.

Ultimately the responsibility rests with the parents, so whatever you want to do to him you might want to consider doing to the parents as well. Thank gov for vaccination

No. You're missing the part I'm interested in, and the parties I care about. For clarity's sake:

The part I care about is the unforeseen and unintended consequences of reckless and fraudulent declarations (ex: vaccines cause autism), which impact "the rest of us" (in this case, the breeders who have children who could be exposed to measles before their scheduled vaccinations).

Sad as it is, kids of parents who believe this kind of crap are probably screwed anyway, given that they've got 18 years with unfit, morons as their parents. Better luck next life, if the Buddhists are right, or something like that.

[Aimless]

According to google, mandatory vaccination of children doesn't mesh well Libertarianism. Google's proprietary algorithms do not lie, Cain. Although it seems as if the Libertarian Party doesn't have anything to say about this in their platform anymore.

[EyeKhan]

Measles isn't going away no matter how many people get vaccinated and the only people at risk here are the kids of the morons not getting their kids protected. Soooo.... Well, there is the cost of treating disease that should be prevented, I guess. But kids with responsible parents aren't at risk, right?

[Aimless]

Measles isn't going away no matter how many people get vaccinated and the only people at risk here are the kids of the morons not getting their kids protected. Soooo.... Well, there is the cost of treating disease that should be prevented, I guess. But kids with responsible parents aren't at risk, right?

Anyone who hasn't yet been or can't be immunized for whatever reason is at risk

[CitizenCain]

According to google, mandatory vaccination of children doesn't mesh well Libertarianism.

It doesn't, nor should it.

Google's proprietary algorithms do not lie, Cain. Although it seems as if the Libertarian Party doesn't have anything to say about this in their platform anymore.

Probably too nuanced and involved for general consumption... anything they'd put up would be immediately interpreted as "no vaccinations for anyone" or "forced vaccinations for everyone." Stupid fucking general public. Ultimately, the root of the problem is in forced associations (government-mandated or encouraged), like forcing everyone to go to school and spend thousands of hours a year around disease-infested incubators more commonly known as children. In a truly voluntary environment/society, this wouldn't be a problem. Private groups and organizations would set their own rules, and if you don't want to get vaccinated (or get your kids vaccinated), fine - but good luck interacting with the 99%+ of society that doesn't want to associated with measles carriers and what have you. Resolves the issue cleanly without forcing anything on anyone.

Measles isn't going away no matter how many people get vaccinated

Smallpox?

and the only people at risk here are the kids of the morons not getting their kids protected. Soooo.... Well, there is the cost of treating disease that should be prevented, I guess. But kids with responsible parents aren't at risk, right?

There are some people who cannot be immunized against measles for health reasons, or who are incredibly susceptible to it (like people with HIV or other immune system disorders), and of course, kids aren't generally vaccinated at birth, so there's the risk to infants. The vast majority of the people who aren't immunized aren't immunized for want of parents with a brain, but that still leaves a significant number who are vulnerable due to factors outside anyone's control.

[Loki]

If it can be proven that this person knowingly wrote something he knew to be false and could reasonably believe that his actions would lead to personal injury, then he should at least be held civilly responsible for the damage his writings caused.

[Steely Glint]

Private groups and organizations would set their own rules, and if you don't want to get vaccinated (or get your kids vaccinated), fine - but good luck interacting with the 99%+ of society that doesn't want to associated with measles carriers and what have you.

How is a private organization supposed to enforce that?

[CitizenCain]

If it can be proven that this person knowingly wrote something he knew to be false and could reasonably believe that his actions would lead to personal injury, then he should at least be held civilly responsible for the damage his writings caused.

Natch. Should he have any criminal liability?

How is a private organization supposed to enforce that?

Same way they enforce any other rules they have.

It's not like there's a lack of private organizations with rules to pick from. For example, I have to wear clothes at work, independent of what the law says, because my boss doesn't want to turn around and have my wiener flopping about a few inches from his nose. And that's reasonable... it was pretty awkward the first time. And I bet other private organizations would have effective methods of keeping my wiener from wagging about in their establishments, too, by whatever means they feel to be best or most cost effective, all without the need to force anything on anyone.

[Loki]

Natch. Should he have any criminal liability?

Publishing false information is not a crime, as far as I know. That makes it very difficult to claim that the person should be criminally responsible for the consequences of his actions. Ultimately, it's the parents who cause harm to their kids; if anyone should be held criminally liable, it's them. The way I see it, this is no different to Glenn Beck calling "liberals" Satan-lovers, resulting in some idiot killing a "liberal". No court would find Beck guilty of any crime.

I also think that whoever is in charge of policing M.Ds. is civilly responsible for not revoking this person's credentials, because they knew his credentials gave him added legitimacy.

[CitizenCain]

Publishing false information is not a crime, as far as I know. That makes it very difficult to claim that the person should be criminally responsible for the consequences of his actions. Ultimately, it's the parents who cause harm to their kids; if anyone should be held criminally liable, it's them. The way I see it, this is no different to Glenn Beck calling "liberals" Satan-lovers, resulting in some idiot killing a "liberal". No court would find Beck guilty of any crime.

Fair enough, I guess... I'm kind of curious about it along the "incitement to riot" lines. Seems like you could use the same underlying logic there to charge for a crime here, which makes me wonder whether dragging Wakefield through criminal court is a good idea, or if "incitement to riot" style statutes are a horrible idea.

I also think that whoever is in charge of policing M.Ds. is civilly responsible for not revoking this person's credentials, because they knew his credentials gave him added legitimacy.

Good luck with that. Wakefield had a British M.D., so no chance of finding any accountability on that socialist island.

[Steely Glint]

Same way they enforce any other rules they have.

It's not like there's a lack of private organizations with rules to pick from. For example, I have to wear clothes at work, independent of what the law says, because my boss doesn't want to turn around and have my wiener flopping about a few inches from his nose. And that's reasonable... it was pretty awkward the first time. And I bet other private organizations would have effective methods of keeping my wiener from wagging about in their establishments, too, by whatever means they feel to be best or most cost effective, all without the need to force anything on anyone.

You can't tell if someone's been vaccinated by looking at them, though.

[Loki]

Fair enough, I guess... I'm kind of curious about it along the "incitement to riot" lines. Seems like you could use the same underlying logic there to charge for a crime here, which makes me wonder whether dragging Wakefield through criminal court is a good idea, or if "incitement to riot" style statutes are a horrible idea.

I don't think a general incitement to riot in the US would lead to a criminal conviction. You'd need to call for violence against a specific place/person/group. This guy didn't explicitly call for specific individuals to not get a vaccine.

[CitizenCain]

You can't tell if someone's been vaccinated by looking at them, though.

Nor can you tell if they're a gay, or a high-school graduate, or a legal adult, or a licensed driver, or even if they're >=25% j00ish, just by looking. Yet, somehow private organizations are able to figure out those qualities and act accordingly (never mind much more obscure or detailed qualities). See what happens when the government stops interfering? People find a way... like how we're able to divine all these non-visible traits, now that government bans on witchcraft and sorcery have been eliminated.

[Steely Glint]

Nor can you tell if they're a gay, or a high-school graduate, or a legal adult, or a licensed driver, or even if they're >=25% j00ish, just by looking. Yet, somehow private organizations are able to figure out those qualities and act accordingly (never mind much more obscure or detailed qualities). See what happens when the government stops interfering? People find a way... like how we're able to divine all these non-visible traits, now that government bans on witchcraft and sorcery have been eliminated.

Over half of the examples you gave only exist because the government exists. That is to say, if there were no government there would be no such thing as a high-school graduate, legal adult or licensed driver. They're easy to verify because the government maintains records which what a candidate says can be checked against. The other two would be fairly easy to figure out with some background checking - it would be far more difficult to prove that when someone says that, in early childhood, they'd once had a certain needle stuck in their arm, they are in fact lying. Unless, of course, there were some organization charged with maintaining a centralized record of who'd had that needle stuck in their arm and, by omission, who hadn't. Is this the role you see the government playing - as sort of neutral record keeper/arbiter for private organizations?

[Enoch the Red]

Over half of the examples you gave only exist because the government exists. That is to say, if there were no government there would be no such thing as a high-school graduate, legal adult or licensed driver. They're easy to verify because the government maintains records which what a candidate says can be checked against. The other two would be fairly easy to figure out with some background checking - it would be far more difficult to prove that when someone says that, in early childhood, they'd once had a certain needle stuck in their arm, they are in fact lying. Unless, of course, there were some organization charged with maintaining a centralized record of who'd had that needle stuck in their arm and, by omission, who hadn't. Is this the role you see the government playing - as sort of neutral record keeper/arbiter for private organizations?

Eh? How hard would it really be for an independent organization to track immunizations?

Go to a participating clinic, get stuck, move a bit in a database and lo-and-behold, instant, verifiable recognition that you are not one of the great unwashed masses. They could even print you out a nice shiny certificate.

[Loki]

Over half of the examples you gave only exist because the government exists. That is to say, if there were no government there would be no such thing as a high-school graduate, legal adult or licensed driver.

Ever heard of guilds? They were in the business of certifying professions long before any government thought of doing the same. There were also schools, which granted diplomas, long before governments got into the business of providing a public education. Do you think a degree from Oxford means as much as it does because the government accredits the place?

[Steely Glint]

Eh? How hard would it really be for an independent organization to track immunizations?

Pretty easy. Harder would be figuring out which independent organizations are actually trustworthy. Or what might happen if the independent organization keeping a record of your various vaccinations goes bust, or trying to make sure that all your vaccinations end up in the same database so that everyone wanting to employ you doesn't have to do some kind of pan-American fact checking expedition to make sure you're not contagious. etc.

Ever heard of guilds? They were in the business of certifying professions long before any government thought of doing the same.

Populations were tiny back then, and people had very limited opportunities to travel. So, it would be perfectly feasible to employ someone based on their membership of some (local) guild because you would likely know that that (local) guild was reliable and produced quality people. That's not so feasible if you're based in Florida and the person sitting on the other side of the desk did his training with a guild in Wyoming.

Do you think a degree from Oxford means as much as it does because the government accredits the place?

No, it means as much as it does because Oxford university has a reputation over 800 years old which marks it as one of the most elite universities in the world. Most universities aren't Oxford (or Cambridge, or Harvard, Yale or MIT). They're East Pondookshire University College and the only reason a degree from there means anything at all is because the government accredits them. We have the problem of degree mills as it is.

[Enoch the Red]

Pretty easy. Harder would be figuring out which independent organizations are actually trustworthy. Or what might happen if the independent organization keeping a record of your various vaccinations goes bust, or trying to make sure that all your vaccinations end up in the same database so that everyone wanting to employ you doesn't have to do some kind of pan-American fact checking expedition to make sure you're not contagious. etc.

Release to Wikileaks with each record being a one way hash using birthday, social security number, etc...

Furthermore, how would this be any different from someone finding a disreputable clinic, unscrupulous doctor, or med student at the local pharmacy who doesn't give a shit, and getting them to forge papers saying you had your shots? It's not like children here are given their full regimen of shots by CIA agents who keep meticulous records stored securely in servers at the NSA.

[Loki]

Populations were tiny back then, and people had very limited opportunities to travel. So, it would be perfectly feasible to employ someone based on their membership of some (local) guild because you would likely know that that (local) guild was reliable and produced quality people. That's not so feasible if you're based in Florida and the person sitting on the other side of the desk did his training with a guild in Wyoming.

Because national unions don't exist today, right?

No, it means as much as it does because Oxford university has a reputation over 800 years old which marks it as one of the most elite universities in the world. Most universities aren't Oxford (or Cambridge, or Harvard, Yale or MIT). They're East Pondookshire University College and the only reason a degree from there means anything at all is because the government accredits them. We have the problem of degree mills as it is.

I think you got your cause and effect reversed. The government accredits the college because it's not crap, not the other way around. Without the government accrediting the place, there could easily be private entities that do the same (like in the US: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Eng...s_and_Colleges). And I should add that the American Bar Association decides whether someone has the right to call themselves a lawyer, not the US government.

[CitizenCain]

And, directly on point, it would seem that Mr. Glint is unaware of how we currently determine people's vaccination records for things like enrolling in school (public or private) for the first time. With, zomg, certificates and/or databases from the private vaccination provider.

No government requirements required.

[Steely Glint]

Yeah, look... you ain't seen me, right? *swift exit*