I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one • Hacker News Board

Re: I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one

#61

Post by calinet6 » Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 3:01 PM UTC

vox_mollis wrote: post #56

astalwick wrote: post #17

I'm so not surprised by the comments here, so far. The core points here are good ones: - In a fundamentally emotional argument, you 'win' with empathy, not by beating people over the head with the same (very reasonable) arguments they've heard a hundred times. - Vaccines are certainly effective, they are the correct choice, but there are also absolutely legitimate reasons to distrust the medical and scientific argume…

In a fundamentally emotional argument, you 'win' with empathy Except you don't actually win. In conceding to their fears with an empathetic approach, you are enabling their delusions. That's the problem with placating unreasonable people - doing so inevitably emboldens them.

You're thinking too logically. It is a human connection you're building with empathy, not a strategy. Play the long game.

Re: I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one

#62

Post by sharemywin » Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 3:02 PM UTC

Rotavirus Vaccine (RotaShield®) and Intussusception

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd-vac/rotavirus/vac-rotashield...

And what does it protect against? a bad case of diarrhea.

An intussusception is a medical condition in which a part of the intestine invaginates (folds into) into another section of intestine, similar to the way the parts of a collapsible telescope slide into one another.[1] This can often result in an obstruction. The part that prolapses into the other is called the intussusceptum, and the part that receives it is called the intussuscipiens. Intussusception is a medical emergency and a patient should be seen immediately to reduce risk.

Re: I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one

#63

Post by pc86 » Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 3:02 PM UTC

sharemywin wrote: post #57

pc86 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be addressed with legislation making it a felony not to vaccinate your children by a reason early childhood age (e.g. 6 years or something), whether put in public school or not, and making proof of vaccination a requirement for federal aid for that person (e.g. student loans or assistance). There are certain things that should be up for public debate and discourse, left to the courts, or up to personal pref…

just like buying a gun since more people die from guns in the US than the diseases we vaccinate against. The troll is on the other foot now...

You want to make it a felony not to give your child a gun by the age of six? :)

Re: I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one

#64

Post by calinet6 » Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 3:03 PM UTC

chillingeffect wrote: post #24

drglitch wrote: post #14

The author tries to make some fair points based on anecdotal evidence, but at its core, the article simply states that "I had a strong opinion about X that i imposed upon others. After being influenced by a romantic interest, I biased in another direction. Now I have a (new) strong opinion that i wish to impose upon others.". In other words, the fundamental act is still same, it is just opinion that has changed.

This is a deep observation and it's how a lot of Art works: it's not the immediate object/product/action that makes sense. It's when you put it into a context to generate meaning. To persevarate: I'm sure if the author ever breaks up, he'll cop to being led around by his hormones. In the meantime, his unaware writing is a bold sample of the process of mental rationalization. And in that way, the artist is often in a…

He didn't work to change his opinions at all, if you read the article. He simply came up with a strategy to try to change others opinions in a different way.

This ain't no artist.

Re: I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one

#65

Post by chrisbennet » Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 3:07 PM UTC

bluedino wrote: post #30

I almost married an anti-vaxxer. And then I realized there are another couple million people in this country I could marry and not have to fight over that stuff about the rest of my life. It wasn't just vaccines she was worried about. She was also vegan. Only ate organic. I'm fine if those are your choices but I don't want them forced upon me, or a lecture when I eat a hotdog, take an aspirin, or drink milk. Constant…

Asprin is derived from the bark of the willow tree.

From Wikipedia: "The therapeutic properties of willow tree bark have been known for at least 2,400 years, with Hippocrates prescribing it for headaches"

"By definition, alternative medicine has either not been proved to work, or been proved not to work. You know what they call alternative medicine that's been proved to work? Medicine;" (From Tim Michin's poem "Storm") http://www.timminchin.com/2011/04/08/storm/

Re: I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one

#66

Post by condescendence » Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 3:08 PM UTC

cname wrote: post #34

condescendence wrote: post #16

You're missing a big part of the argument here: >Go tell arachnophobic parents that you must put spiders on their child because society depends on it, and see how that goes When children don't receive vaccines it is not just seen that they are endangering themselves, but other children aswell because of the possibility of spread/mutation (whether this is true or not it doesn't really matter, that's just a majority of…

If you read the whole article, it's pretty clear that he hasn't missed any aspect of "the argument". From the article: "But vaccines only work when everyone buys in. Public health depends on anti-vaxxers confronting their greatest fears for the benefit of others."

I'm pointing out the fact that this person is playing mental mind games to justify the SO's point because he is head over heals so to speak.

I read the full article, and your comment furthers my point. The author is playing on both sides of the fence. It's like my SO for example, I hate when people chew with their mouth open I find it a little disrespectful and yet she does it and I don't find it disturbing. My preferences and beliefs are strayed because of my love for her.

This is basically a blog post explaining how someone can have an affect on even the strongest of beliefs solely because of emotions....no matter how ridiculous. Powerful stuff.

Re: I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one

#67

Post by Silhouette » Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 3:10 PM UTC

pc86 wrote: post #36

astalwick wrote: post #17

I'm so not surprised by the comments here, so far. The core points here are good ones: - In a fundamentally emotional argument, you 'win' with empathy, not by beating people over the head with the same (very reasonable) arguments they've heard a hundred times. - Vaccines are certainly effective, they are the correct choice, but there are also absolutely legitimate reasons to distrust the medical and scientific argume…

It should be addressed with legislation making it a felony not to vaccinate your children by a reason early childhood age (e.g. 6 years or something), whether put in public school or not, and making proof of vaccination a requirement for federal aid for that person (e.g. student loans or assistance). There are certain things that should be up for public debate and discourse, left to the courts, or up to personal pref…

I wonder, do you also believe the rest of the world should impose crippling sanctions on the US because it knowingly causes potentially catastrophic damage to the environment and consumes absurd amounts of finite natural resources?

Should everyone actively undermine the US farming industry, which uses large amounts of antibiotics in ways that could reduce their effectiveness for treating humans?

There are a lot of government policies that, for better or worse, are not set entirely based on scientific merit. There is also, frankly, a lot of "science" that gets presented as evidence in these kinds of debates that isn't very scientific (though I am not suggesting the vaccination question specifically is an example). In any case, trying to shift attitudes towards more scientifically supported positions through threats is rarely successful.

With the vaccination issue, you also have to remember that we're mostly talking about parents trying to do what is right for their kids. Those parents may be ignorant, but again the best available solution to that is probably education and showing them convincing arguments that changing their position really is in the best interests of their child. If you can't make a solid case with real evidence, legislation is just forcing your personal beliefs on someone else down the barrel of a gun, and I think we should be extremely wary of governments interfering so aggressively in the way a loving parent wants to raise their child.

Re: I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one

#68

Post by Alex3917 » Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 3:11 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #21

The CIA did more for the anti-vaccination movement than any kind of scientific publication ever will. People that are afraid of vaccination are so for many reasons (some of them totally nonsense, others with some basis in fact). But to have actual proof that a three letter agency used a (fake) vaccination drive to gather DNA from large numbers of innocents in order to get at a fugitive was something we could have rea…

Also the HIV epidemic is thought to have been started by government vaccination programs:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_HIV/AIDS

But a lot of 'pro-vaccine' folks just completely ignore the black swan problem, which is wrong.

Also the flu vaccine lowers your chances of dying in any given winter, but many studies show that it increase your chances of the flu dying over the course of your life. This is because the flu vaccine only confers immunity against those strains for 6 - 18 months, whereas getting the flu confers immunity against those strains for decades:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2870374/

http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2014/11/study-add...

Also a lot of vaccines have had very little human testing. E.g. if you look at the CDC webpage for the japanese encephalitis vaccine, it says "There are no efficacy data for Ixiaro. The vaccine was licensed in the United States on the basis of its ability to induce JE virus neutralizing antibodies as a surrogate for protection."

http://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/yellowbook/2016/infectious-disea...

I think there is a major lack of critical thinking of both sides of the issue.

Re: I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one

#69

Post by jacquesm » Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 3:11 PM UTC

vdaniuk wrote: post #33

astalwick wrote: post #17

I'm so not surprised by the comments here, so far. The core points here are good ones: - In a fundamentally emotional argument, you 'win' with empathy, not by beating people over the head with the same (very reasonable) arguments they've heard a hundred times. - Vaccines are certainly effective, they are the correct choice, but there are also absolutely legitimate reasons to distrust the medical and scientific argume…

>both medicine and the science behind drugs have been spectacularly wrong more than once On the other hand, non-medicine (alternative medicine) and non-science (pseudoscience) have been spectacularly right more than once. That's the point. Agree with empathy angle and need for emotional arguments, though.

Can you give some examples of what you're thinking of here?

Re: I thought all anti-vaxxers were idiots. Then I married one

#70

Post by jacquesm » Thu, Dec 24, 2015, 3:12 PM UTC

Ensorceled wrote: post #59

slavik81 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "anti-aeronautical-engineers" who "believe" through common sense that planes can't fly? There are plenty of people who won't fly because they're afraid it will crash, despite that being tremendously unlikely. > Electricity is reading our brainwaves. I got some great pamphlets in my mailbox about how the neighborhood powerlines were going to affect my mood. But, no. They are not in need of psychiatric help. They're…

> There are plenty of people who won't fly because they're afraid it will crash, despite that being tremendously unlikely. I know people like this. They don't think their view is rational and they do things like buy plane tickets for their kids.

Regardless of how irrational their views are they are actually less likely do die in a plane crash.