The other day, LBC broadcast a breathtaking programme where presenter Jeni Barnett used her expertise as a parent to pooh-pooh the entire medical and scientific community. MMR is dangerous. There’s no evidence for it, but it’s a scientific fact. You know the kind of thing.
That first link is to the audio; there’s a transcript here.
I particularly like the bit where Barnett demands that a doctor explains how somebody who’s been immunised against flu can still catch a cold. As he explains:
That vaccine protects you from influenza, it doesn’t protect you from colds.
It seems she’s unrepentant:
I thank those of you who have sent me information about sites that may be of use to me.
I thank the Bad Scientist for being just that. Sarcasm doesn’t shift peoples opinions. Making another person feel small because they don’t have a Bad Science degree and then nit-picking over semantics is not the answer either.
Since when has providing a great deal of evidence that somebody’s been talking out of their arse been “nit-picking over semantics”?
In other news, it seems that the discredited Wakefield study that kicked off the stupid and dangerous anti-MMR scare was even more flawed than previously suspected. The Sunday Times reports:
THE doctor who sparked the scare over the safety of the MMR vaccine for children changed and misreported results in his research, creating the appearance of a possible link with autism, a Sunday Times investigation has found.
Confidential medical documents and interviews with witnesses have established that Andrew Wakefield manipulated patientsâ€™ data, which triggered fears that the MMR triple vaccine to protect against measles, mumps and rubella was linked to the condition.