Vaccine Rejectionism Disorder

It's been a while since I've posted anything. To be honest I don't have the time to post anything now. I've got about a month of solid work ahead of me and until then blogging will need to take a third or forth place. Having said that I will repost the occasional thing that catches my eye. It doesn't take much to do that.

So, first up, a new disorder. Originally found at Autism News Beat, it offers a clinical definition of the Disorder that those that won't vaccinate suffer from.

Vaccine Rejectionism Disorder (VRD)

Definition

Vaccine Rejectionism Disorder is an umbrella term applied to individuals who mislead others, through spoken and/or written communications, about the risk of vaccines and vaccination.

The five VRDs are Pervasive Anti-Science Disorders. They are classified as Crank Disorder, Handley Disorder, Reason Disintegrative Disorder, Jay’s Disorder, and Pervasive Anti-Science Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (PAD-NOS).

Pervasive Rejectionism Disorders are characterized by severe and pervasive impairment in several areas of reasoning skills; communication skills; or the presence of stereotyped talking points, interests and activities.

The qualitative impairments that describe these conditions vary significantly compared to the individual’s investment in vaccine rejectionism.

Crank Disorder

  1. A total of six (or more) items from (1), (2) and (3) with at least two from (1), and one each from (2) and (3):
    1. Qualitative impairment in logic and reasoning, as manifested by at least two of the following:
      1. belief that vaccines have never been proven effective
      2. failure to understand the difference between virus and bacteria
      3. belief that it is better to “get the disease” than the vaccine
      4. belief that all disease can be prevented by proper nutrition, exercise, and chakra balancing
    2. Reliance on certain primary communication sources for health information:
      1. whale.to
      2. mercola.com
      3. naturalnews.com
      4. Rescue Angels
    3. Restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests and activities, as manifested by at least one of the following:
      1. encompassing preoccupation with the Amish and/or Somalis
      2. apparently inflexible adherence to the DAN! protocol
      3. stereotyped and repetitive anti-vaccine talking points, e.g., “Allopaths kill people, too!”, “Only a pharma shill would say that atoms have electrons.”
      4. persistent preoccupation with the Simpsonwood Conference
  2. Delays or abnormal functioning in at least one of the following areas: (1) providing relevant links in web comments, (2) proper use of capital letters (3) admitting a mistake
  3. The disturbance is not better accounted for by Handley Disorder or Reason Disintegrative Disorder.

Handley Disorder

  1. All of the following:
    1. stubborn adherence to baseless ideas, even when those ideas contradict one another
    2. projecting one’s own lack of integrity on others (see Offit Derangement Disorder)
    3. normal head circumference at birth
  2. Onset of all of the following while surfing the internet:
    1. inflated sense of importance
    2. loss of any previously acquired purposeful reasoning skills
    3. loss of empathy (although often social interaction with D-list celebrities develops later)
    4. appearance of poorly coordinated media relations strategy
    5. severely impaired moral compass

Evidence Disintegrative Disorder

  1. Apparently normal understanding of scientific method until interaction with peers who harbor vaccine rejectionist attitudes and beliefs
  2. Clinically significant loss of previously acquired reasoning skills in at least two of the following areas:
    1. understanding the difference between “correlation” and “causation”
    2. listening respectfully to your child’s pediatrician
    3. healthy skepticism
    4. ignoring day-time talk shows
    5. recognizing one’s own biases
  3. Abnormalities of functioning in at least two of the following areas:
    1. qualitative impairment in answering relevant questions
    2. vacuous appeals to authority
    3. strawman argumentation
  4. The disturbance is not better accounted for by another specific Evidence Developmental Disorder or by Palin Infatuation Syndrome

Jay’s Disorder

Qualitative impairment in mounting a coherent argument, as manifested by at least two of the following:

  1. Qualitative impairment in social interaction, as manifested by at least two of the following:
    1. marked impairment in the use of the empirical evidence
    2. failure to develop peer relationships
    3. a preference for personal observations and anecdotes over data and evidence
  2. Restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests and activities, as manifested by at least one of the following:
    1. encompassing preoccupation seeking the approval of celebrities
    2. embarrassing oneself in front of a national television audience
    3. confusing what might be true with what is proven
    4. persistent preoccupation with junk science

    The disturbance causes clinically significant impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning

    1. There is no clinically significant general delay in billing for services
    2. There is no clinically significant delay in adaptive behavior (other than in peer interaction)
    3. Criteria are not met for another specific Pervasive Anti-Science Disorder or Dr. Bob Syndrome

Pervasive Rejectionism Disorder Not Otherwise Specified

This category should be used when there is a severe and pervasive impairment in the development of reasoning skills, or when stereotyped anti-vaccine talking points, interests and activities are present, but the criteria are not met for a specific Pervasive Anti-Science Disorder, Warrior Mom Personality Syndrome, or Mercola Personality Disorder. For example, this category includes atypical anti-vaccine presentations that do not meet the criteria for Crank Disorder because of atypical symptomatology, or sub-threshold symptomatology, or both of these.

Trackback URL for this post:

http://skepticsinthepub.net.nz/trackback/287

Re ; Vaccine reactionism disorder

Junk Science = Pseudo Science = Corporate Science.

Favorite Statement used: "No evidence has been found to link....with...." (a popular example being autism and vaccinations.)

People overlook the important fact that all this means is that they have not looked into it deeply enough...ie asked the right questions.
It is not of itself a safe conclusion.

People also overlook the fact and reality that vaccines are just another product of pharmaceutical companies which are very large. Profit comes before people at any cost.

Which brings me to the final most underconsidered fact that:

It is ALWAYS a GIVEN that a pharmaceutical company will NEVER admit liability.
Consider what you would do if your multi million dollar profits were set to evaporate
almost overnight, not only that but the prospect of being sued for damages big time??

Junk Science = Pseudo Science

Junk Science = Pseudo Science = Corporate Science.

I guess that explains http://www.boiron.com/

Favorite Statement used: "No evidence has been found to link....with...." (a popular example being autism and vaccinations.)

Re: autism and vaccinations; This would be due to the massive amount of research that has not found a link.

People overlook the important fact that all this means is that they have not looked into it deeply enough...ie asked the right questions.
It is not of itself a safe conclusion.

The fallacy you're committing here is the Argument from final Consequences. You've already made up your mind that there is something there to be found and no amount of research that doesn't find your pet theory correct will convince you otherwise.

speaking of autism/vaccines- latest news on Fox

By the way, Latest news: 83 Cases of Autism Associated with Childhood Vaccine Injury
Compensated in Federal Vaccine Court. Look it up - www.prnewswire.com (or just Google "
it. Or you can Google Dr. Sarah Bridges autism.
Millions of dollars paid. They say it's only the tip of the iceberg

Well all that remains for us

Oh right so a statement from "safeminds" constitutes news? LOL!

Well all that remains for us to decide is whether you are at best Overly Credulous or at worst a Shrill Shill..

I put a fiver on you being Overly Credulous as no one would pay you for your efforts

Sincerely
Rob

Did you investigate the news report

Did you check out the latest (11MAY) news report or the actual interview with Dr.Sarah Bridges whose child was injured?

Yes I did and it is yet more

Yes I did and it is yet more "static hiss" of in group reaffirmation.

These are generated within the mutual interest groups and promulgated as news but are just self referential.

"It is ALWAYS a GIVEN that a

Smartgirl you say and I quote:

"It is ALWAYS a GIVEN that a pharmaceutical company will NEVER admit liability."

Well Smartgirl, how about GlaxoSmithKline, they admit liability of wrongdoing .... Cost them $750,000,000 USD including 150,000,000 in criminal fines.

www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/October/10-civ-1205.html

So it seems your much vaunted "FACTS" are left a little fictional.

Sincerely
Rob

Well of course they have to

Well of course they have to admit wrong doing AFTER they've been sued!

The court process sure would

The court process sure would be sped up if everyone admitted wrongdoing prior to litigation!

You really should look at the sociopathic actions of a few of the alt med companies when it comes to admitting wrongdoing and causing harm. Here's one.. http://www.miraclemineral.org/

Some companies behave badly. It would be disingenuous of you to try and say it is solely the domain of pharmaceuticals, large or otherwise.