Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have a neighbor couple, both with college degrees. They are more religious than most but not zealots. They have 8 children. The eldest of which is autistic. Because of that and the likes of the charlatan doctor that made up a link between vaccines and autism and the Jenny McCarthy's of the world they have not vaccinated the other children. They are also anti-GMO organic only proponents.
They also smoke cigarettes. A lot. Frequently drafting into our windows.
How have we as a society managed to produce educated people who are scared of vaccines and GMO food with no scientific basis for that fear but have no problem lighting up something with well documented risks and sharing that second hand with their kids?
I could go on about this for DAYS. I'm not smarty pants researcher. I haven't published any scientific papers. I have, however, taken many courses in my day that taught me what a good source is (at least, how to question a source I am reading), and what a decently executed scientific study looks like. Again, no expert, but I know that a few doctors in Argentina finding a correlation somewhere doesn't mean that it's causation, or even a good study.
It truly breaks my heart to see people citing clickbait pseudocience on their facebook walls in the midst of some "heavy" debates. I am not saying anything is without question, but for the love of God, look at what you are posting. I had someone tell me a few weeks ago that they KNEW autism was caused by vaccines because they had "hundreds of friends who have children with autism that developed right after vaccination!". Really, you have HUNDREDS of friends with autistic children? Also, she told me to "watch the documentary". Apparently there is some documentary out there with compelling stories on this stance. People don't realize you can make a documentary about anything, and likely make it compelling.
I'm not saying I know for sure, but I am so taken aback by how people refuse to see or even entertain both sides.
People take issue with the fact that I am willing to take a risk to vaccinate, because the risk of not vaccinating is even larger. I wish I could say it's just my "opinion", but due to my educational background (again, just pre reqs for medical programs, not licensed yet) and great conversations I have had with a medically trained spouse, vaccination is the best route. I think it bothers people that there is a risk that a vaccine will have a side effect (they do, and I am not denying this, and it is very unfortunate when it happens). People want to have NO risk, which is just impossible. Medicine inherently will always have risk. You do what you can, with what you have, and hope for the best.
I think it comes down to control. People see one thing on the internet that validates them and they run with it. Nobody wants to ever have side effects, so maybe they avoid it altogether, ignoring the fact that the vaccine could help avoid even WORSE things. Maybe when previously eradicated diseases come sweeping back, people will smarten up. I really hope it doesn't get to that though.
I also don't think a lot of these folks understand how basic immunity works. I guess it's not their fault if they didn't take any sort of science courses, but you'd think something you are SO passionate about would be something you would at least read a book on. As for the cigs? Who knows. Maybe they think lung cancer is also caused by a vaccine and not by smoking.
I just refuse to believe the entire health/medical world is misinformed/lying to us. I'm sure there is corruption and misinformation, but to this level? It's absurd.
I think that in some cases , it is a mater of being a rebel, with out much thought about the ramifications of their stand. Or possibly they simply like being a "outsider ". One who runs in the opposite direction to what they consider to be "the herd ".
Unfortunately, in the original situation above, the 8 off spring are like a menacing cloud over their peer group, with the ability to really seriously affect the health of others around them.
The smoking is just a civil nuisance in my opinion .
People form their own opinions. Then, rather than seeking the truth, they seek for anything to validate their own opinion.
To be sure, there are areas of legitimate debate (global warming and it's effects on the ice caps and the extent to which man plays...) but in the end few people have the intellectual or emotional ability to seek facts. Maybe a better example is party politics and people who are partisan about one side or another.
Heaven forbid that anybody fail to accept all indoctrination. This makes them dumb?
A century from now, people will howl at some of the stuff that was widely accepted back in the relative dark ages of 2016.
No one in this thread has called anyone dumb. The question is focused on the willingness of intelligent people to rely on pseudoscience (a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly regarded as being based on scientific method). That's not to imply that relying on pseudoscience makes you dumb. If anything, it points out that even intelligent people can refuse to believe a scientific study and rely on pseudoscience.
The escape from the last round of Dark Ages was largely attributed to the birth of the Scientific Method, simply because it actively tries to strip apart the pseudoscience and rely only on provable facts. Everything is subject to being challenged, so there is no need to "accept indoctrination" however the key to science is not just saying "I don't believe that." Belief is the realm of religion.
In science, if you think something is false despite a scientific study proving it to be true, then the onus is on you to challenge in a reproducible method. If a person said they think everything we know about gravity is wrong, that's their hypothesis, and they're welcome to it. For people to take it seriously, they should go to the next step and try to prove their hypothesis.
As for why this rarely happens and people rely on pseudoscience, it typically comes down to the simple fact that it's hard. I know there's no way I can ever examine the particles that make up atoms to challenge it one way or another. So I have to rely on the evidence and studies put together by other people.
That's where things start to break down, because in modern times, it's very easy to make a source seem reliable on facebook and most people won't go beyond seeing the headline. So the study by an expert researcher that has been peer reviewed is just as likely to get a quick glance as the drunk ramblings of someone turned into a meme.
It seems it simply comes down to information overload. Reality is that scientists don't run out posting on facebook constantly because they want to make sure they get it right. Pseudo-scientists don't have that problem and can create thousands of quick headline grabs to every one real research based post.
All of that likely explains a good part of why people rely on Pseudoscience... it's simply in their face more. And that's without the distrust of "studies" due to corruption, which while I'm sure happens, I don't think is quite as prevalent as some would believe.
And yes, my post is not a scientific post, hence my use of the word believe. If we wanted to find the real answer, we would need to set up a study involving multiple groups of people, expose some to actual scientific claims and others pseudo science, then see how likely each group was to believe each statement. We would need to try to account for intelligence as well as things like preconceived positions(confirmation bias is a big thing), and then check if the results match my theory(that seeing more studies reduces ones willingness to check sources).
I'm not willing to go that far... and that's why pseudoscience exists. Not everyone is a scientist, and some people can make compelling arguments in the absence of science.
Just a guess, but most likely they were looking for something to blame on their oldest's autism. Way too many people believe that all bad things can be removed from the world, or at least be mitigated; therefore anything bad that happens must be someone's fault.
Son was diagnosed with autism, so they looked for someone to blame and found the Jenny McCarthy's of the world (thanks Oprah!). Then once they started down the pseudoscience rabbit hole they kept finding more and more things to follow. It's the easy answer; a way to blame troubles on someone or something instead of their own genes or random chance.
You can ask the same question about highly educated individuals becoming religious zealots.
I can't find it now, but someone did the numbers on a random chance vaccine/autism observation. It's based on the number of children who get a vaccine shot every year (about 4million children born each year) combined with the number diagnosed with some level of autism (about 1 in 68, or about 52,000 each year). The numbers work out to show that, based purely on random chance with zero causal link, signs of autism will be observed in about 150 children within 24 hours of receiving a vaccine every year, or 1,000 within a week of receiving a vaccine. If even a small percentage of these take to social media to proclaim the "truth" about vaccines and autism it will scare off more and more skittish young parents.
Diagnoses of autism are increasing, but not because of vaccines or chemicals or anything else. The increase is because 1) more people working in child-care fields (day-care workers, teachers, etc.) are more educated about how to spot the signs of autism; and 2) more and more levels are being added to the "autism spectrum". A child who, 20 years ago, would be diagnosed with something like dyslexia or "he's just a little slow" will today get an autism diagnosis. It's the same child with the same learning disability, just a different name.
Last edited by An Einnseanair; 07-14-2016 at 11:26 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
