What do anti-vaccination movements gain from lying?

[Up_Tilt_390]

So I stumbled across this article published two days ago in regards to the so-called links between vaccinations and autism that was recently claimed to be confirmed by the FDA. Except it wasn't.

https://www.acsh.org/news/2017/11/20/another-false-vaccination-autism-linkage-fringe-12174

InShapetoday's headline is that the “FDA announced that vaccines are causing autism” I will spare you the web address link because this level of disingenuous misinformation may be contagious. Here is the subheadline:

"THE FDA HAS PUBLISHED CONCLUSIVE PROOF ON THEIR WEBSITE THAT THE DTAP VACCINE CAN CAUSE AUTISM. … A VACCINE MANUFACTURER ADMITS ON ITS PACKAGE INSERT THAT THEIR VACCINATION CAN CAUSE AUTISM AS ONE OF MANY ADVERSE REACTIONS"

The full article reveals that there was no admission of a link between vaccines and autism, merely the legal requirement to report possible adverse effects. There still remains no proven link between autism and vaccinations aside from Andrew Wakefield's report, which was filled with manipulated and fraudulent evidence, and he was struck off from the UK medical register as a result.

Yet anti-vaccination groups such as Generation Rescue still perpetuate this lie despite the fact that it's been debunked. Are they genuinely ignorant, or do they have something to seriously gain from this? I know creationists will deny evolution because it gets in the way of their beloved fantasy of 'god did it', even if there is still a great deal of ignorance behind it, but I don't know what anti-vax movements gain from this.

The difference between creationists and anti-vaxxers are that the former doesn't really put anyone at risk as far as I know, whereas the letter puts not only their children at risk, but other children who, for medical or genetic reasons, cannot get a vaccination. So I really want to know what they gain from perpetuating the debunked lies that autism is linked to vaccines? I simply cannot comprehend...

 

[alxndr]

I don't think there's any ulterior motive—or at least I can't think of one—I think it's just ignorance, aided by a cohort of people perpetuating the myth, egging each other on, and refusing to listen to reasoned discussion. They think they're right, the government/pharmaceutical companies/whoever are out to get them (although what they're supposedly gaining either I'm not sure), and anyone arguing for vaccines has been brainwashed.

It seems almost cult-ish, I imagine it could be quite tricky for anyone to leave the anti-vaxxing community once they've been sucked in.

I can't comprehend it either, even if vaccines did have the potential to cause autism, would they really rather risk having a dead child than an autistic child?

 

[TheNewNo2]

The same thing all disinformation campaigners gain - people who will give them money.

 

[edwin_m]

There are people that consider the end justifies the means, and that if you repeat a lie often enough people will start believing it. Plenty of examples in recent history of people in positions of power or influence, or vying for them, saying things that mean they are either exceptionally stupid or are aware that they are telling lies.

 

[Busaholic]

I don't think there's any ulterior motive—or at least I can't think of one—I think it's just ignorance, aided by a cohort of people perpetuating the myth, egging each other on, and refusing to listen to reasoned discussion. They think they're right, the government/pharmaceutical companies/whoever are out to get them (although what they're supposedly gaining either I'm not sure), and anyone arguing for vaccines has been brainwashed.

It seems almost cult-ish, I imagine it could be quite tricky for anyone to leave the anti-vaxxing community once they've been sucked in.

I can't comprehend it either, even if vaccines did have the potential to cause autism, would they really rather risk having a dead child than an autistic child?

I know someone, seemingly otherwise intelligent, who not only believes this, but that 9/11 was organised by the CIA, the moon landings were fake etc etc. He's a member of Momentum, by the way!

 

[Bevan Price]

I don't think there's any ulterior motive—or at least I can't think of one—I think it's just ignorance, aided by a cohort of people perpetuating the myth, egging each other on, and refusing to listen to reasoned discussion. They think they're right, the government/pharmaceutical companies/whoever are out to get them (although what they're supposedly gaining either I'm not sure), and anyone arguing for vaccines has been brainwashed.

It seems almost cult-ish, I imagine it could be quite tricky for anyone to leave the anti-vaxxing community once they've been sucked in.

?

I think that other factors can be considered.

1. Some people are very stubborn. Once they get an idea into their brains, they are reluctant to believe that they might be wrong. Moreover, having decided that they are right, they grasp for any evidence - however flimsy" - that seems to support them, and they reject or ignore evidence that is contrary to their own theories. If that person seems to be an "expert", there is always a possibility that other people will believe him/her

2. Parts of the media are willing to believe almost anything that comes from a so-called "expert", especially if that apppears in one of the "technical" journals. this may be because some "non-technical" journalists have little comprehension of scientific methods / technology. Ideas - even those that might be untrue (deliberately - or unintentionally) - get widely propagated as if they are definite "truths". And there are rather too many people who believe every word they read in daily / weekly "news"papers / magazines.

So - someone like Dr. Wakefield propagates an idea that vaccines have side-effects, the story gets in the wider media, and many people believe that he might be correct.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I tend not to buy into conspiracy theories, and I don't believe that the majority of anti-vaccine people have any ulterior motives in propagating the myth. However many of that contingent do seem eager to buy into conspiracy theories, which actually distracts attention from more important issues... in fact there's a conspiracy theory: that the anti-vaccine movement is in fact driven by those in power as a distraction from the on going corporate takeover of society!

The issue I do have with the movement, besides them being idiots (well-meaning or otherwise), is that as a member of the autistic community (are we a community?) I find the idea that people would rather their child dies a horrible and preventable death than have comparatively minor difficulties in certain areas of society offensive in the extreme.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

The issue I do have with the movement, besides them being idiots (well-meaning or otherwise), is that as a member of the autistic community (are we a community?) I find the idea that people would rather their child dies a horrible and preventable death than have comparatively minor difficulties in certain areas of society offensive in the extreme.

I'd say Autistic people can have their own community. If different races and ethnic groups can have their own I don't see why not. Interestingly though, I had an idea for a book where Autistic people had their own society (bit like the wizarding world in Harry Potter) but I'm getting off track. I've had a two vaccines in the past five years, and aside from a bit of bleeding and numbness in the area, all they've given me is immunity to mumps, measles and rubella. Can't remember the second jab I got, but I know for sure it wasn't for flu because I don't get flu jabs.

As for conspiracy theories on the whole. Well, some of them I can see having some elements of truth... and by some I mean just JFK and 9/11, and possibly Roswell. Moon landing? Nope. Flat earth? Nope. The government suppressing information of other inhabitable worlds so we don't try to escape? Nope... and yes there are people who genuinely believe that. Guess that's the product of someone watching nothing but InfoWars and thinking that Alex Jones is an independent genius who has nothing to gain from lying. I guess he doesn't really... except of course viewership, and therefore a great amount of money.

 

[najaB]

Are they genuinely ignorant...

Yes. Genuinely and willfully. Next.

 

[cjp]

busaholicI know someone, seemingly otherwise intelligent, who not only believes this, but that 9/11 was organised by the CIA, the moon landings were fake etc etc. He's a member of Momentum, by the way!

It is called blind faith.
There are even people who believe there are gods and will pray to them for aid rather than help themselves.

 

[GW43125]

It is called blind faith.
There are even people who believe there are gods and will pray to them for aid rather than help themselves.

As Russell Howard put it when Trump said the best thing to do in response to the attacks was to pray.
"There's no magic man in the sky; you're the president of the United States, you are that magic man!"

 

[najaB]

It is called blind faith.

That's the willful part of it - they don't want to know anything that contradicts their belief/faith.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's ignorance. They aren't wilfully lying, they have just genuinely become convinced that they are correct. It doesn't help that they are dismissed as heretics rather than people looking to spend time explaining why they are wrong - someone who is treated as a heretic will always end up with their view reinforced.

The kind of (non-)"evidence" they come up with is the likes of "almost all autistic children had MMR" while disregarding that it is also true that "almost all children had MMR" which effectively negates the former.

 

[t_star2001uk]

This article explains.....

https://www.snopes.com/autism-is-now-disclosed-as-dtap-side-effect/

 

[najaB]

It's ignorance. They aren't wilfully lying, they have just genuinely become convinced that they are correct. It doesn't help that they are dismissed as heretics rather than people looking to spend time explaining why they are wrong - someone who is treated as a heretic will always end up with their view reinforced.

I disagree. They are in the same boat as flat-Earth believers - it isn't simply ignorance as they have chosen to believe something which lacks any evidence to support it, and then actively dismiss anything that contradicts their view.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I disagree. They are in the same boat as flat-Earth believers - it isn't simply ignorance as they have chosen to believe something which lacks any evidence to support it, and then actively dismiss anything that contradicts their view.

If you treat people like that, you'll never convert them to sense.

By and large people do things for reasons. Often they are wrong reasons, but you have to start from the premise that most actions are rational to those carrying them out, even if they are actually irrational to someone in the know.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

I disagree. They are in the same boat as flat-Earth believers - it isn't simply ignorance as they have chosen to believe something which lacks any evidence to support it, and then actively dismiss anything that contradicts their view.

There’s a story going round that this guy in California is going to launch himself in the air with a steam powered rocket just to prove the earth is flat. Unfortunately, he he will only be going 1,800ft, nowhere near the required height to see the curve of the earth. The oceans are deeper than that on average, never mind it’s deepest points.

 

[nlogax]

There’s a story going round that this guy in California is going to launch himself in the air with a steam powered rocket just to prove the earth is flat. Unfortunately, he he will only be going 1,800ft, nowhere near the required height to see the curve of the earth. The oceans are deeper than that on average, never mind it’s deepest points.

He - Mike Hughes - is doing this on Saturday (can't see it succeeding tbh) and he plans to go higher in the future using a rocket initially assisted by a balloon. All very sciencey, right? Until you read..

"I don’t believe in science," Hughes said, according to the AP. "I know about aerodynamics and fluid dynamics and how things move through the air, about the certain size of rocket nozzles, and thrust. But that’s not science, that’s just a formula. There’s no difference between science and science fiction."

To some people, facts are just a conspiracy.

 

[najaB]

If you treat people like that, you'll never convert them to sense.

The problem is that - generally speaking - presenting them with the facts is like trying to push a donkey. If you search the Internet you'll find any number of videos/discussion fora where people have tried to get them to see sense and they stubbornly refuse.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

He - Mike Hughes - is doing this on Saturday (can't see it succeeding tbh) and he plans to go higher in the future using a rocket initially assisted by a balloon. All very sciencey, right? Until you read..

"I don’t believe in science," Hughes said, according to the AP. "I know about aerodynamics and fluid dynamics and how things move through the air, about the certain size of rocket nozzles, and thrust. But that’s not science, that’s just a formula. There’s no difference between science and science fiction."

To some people, facts are just a conspiracy.

Oh my god! You can't "believe in science", you can either accept it or deny it. I bet he's one of those religious nutjobs who also "doesn't believe in" evolution. Even as tolerant as I am, I really cannot fathom such ignorance!

 

[TheNewNo2]

2. Parts of the media are willing to believe almost anything that comes from a so-called "expert", especially if that apppears in one of the "technical" journals. this may be because some "non-technical" journalists have little comprehension of scientific methods / technology. Ideas - even those that might be untrue (deliberately - or unintentionally) - get widely propagated as if they are definite "truths". And there are rather too many people who believe every word they read in daily / weekly "news"papers / magazines.

There's also the "both sides" fallacy, the idea that just because someone is saying something different they deserve equal time and attention, which leads to dissemination of false beliefs (for instance that Climate Change is a hoax).

 

[najaB]

There's also the "both sides" fallacy, the idea that just because someone is saying something different they deserve equal time and attention, which leads to dissemination of false beliefs (for instance that Climate Change is a hoax).

They deserve equal access to media (denying access just reinforces their claim that their ideas are being suppressed) , but they don't deserve an equal amount of respect. The BBC, etc. should be able to introduce them as 'This crackpot has a ridiculous theory...'

 

[r37]

I had an idea for a book where Autistic people had their own society (bit like the wizarding world in Harry Potter)

That actually sounds like a great book idea! I'd read it for sure.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

That actually sounds like a great book idea! I'd read it for sure.

Thanks! I've been trying to structure a story and what the world would kind of be like. I think it'd either be much more advanced or much less advanced.