Anti-Vaxxers Are Child Abusers of Their Own Children and Ours

This article comes from HuffPost and is by Dr. Sanjeev K. Sriram, thank you for putting into words my feelings on the matter.

It angers me when people make bad

 decisions that threaten the health and 

safety of other people. Whether you're 

driving drunk, parading loaded firearms 

in public, or choosing to not vaccinate 

your child (exceptions for children with 

health conditions that contraindicate 

vaccinations), you are a danger to your

 own health and to the health of others 

-- and I am fed up with the ignorance 

and arrogance behind these decisions.

To be fair, I have to briefly clarify my 

frustration with drunk driving. Knowing

 what we now know about the 

interactions between genetics, 

neurobiology and the social variables of

 alcoholism and substance abuse, I can 

wrap a little compassion around those 

drunk drivers who are struggling with 

addiction. By no means will I condone 

or pardon drunk driving, but there is 

some tiny fragment of that 

phenomenon that eventually warrants 

patience and understanding.

Anti-vaxxers, on the other hand, are no

 longer deserving of my patience and 

compassion. People who purposely 

choose not to vaccinate themselves or 

their children against diseases like

 measles, whooping cough, rubella, and

 so on are endangering the lives of 

others. In the current measles 

outbreak 

that started in Disneyland,

 six babies have contracted measles. 

All 

of these babies are younger than 1 year

 old, which is the age at which the first

 MMR (measles-mumps-rubella) 

vaccine 

is done. These infants were counting on

 us, their herd, to provide them with 

community immunity until they were

 old enough to get vaccinated. It is not

 science's fault that these children, our

 fellow Americans, caught the measles.

 It is not their parents' fault. It is the 

fault of the anti-vaxxers, the vaccine 

cynics.

Let's all stop calling anti-vaxxers

 "vaccine skeptics" because it is unfair

 to genuine skepticism. As a

 pediatrician, I have seen the difference

 between skeptical parents and cynical 

parents. Skeptics are driven by

 curiosity, and they make it clear that

 health care providers have to earn 

their trust -- but it can be earned. As a 

health care provider, I do not assume 

anyone's trust and appreciate the 

opportunity to earn and maintain the

 trust of my patients and their families.

 Whether we are talking about

 vaccinations, medications, imaging

 studies, or surgical procedures, the 

skeptical parents of my patients want to

 have their concerns acknowledged and

 their questions answered. I am happy

 to oblige. My conversations with them

 are informative and even enjoyable 

because these are transparent 

exchanges about what priorities shape 

our perspectives, where we get our 

information, and how to contend with

 risk. Genuine skepticism can transform

 the doctor-patient relationship from

 patriarchy to partnership, and we ne

ed this now more than ever in modern

 medicine.

Anti-vaxxers are mostly cynics, and 

they are a whole other phenomenon. I

 am fortunate to have only experienced 

cynical parents outside of my direct 

clinical work. Cynics are not driven by curiosity but by an ugly mix of 

ignorance and arrogance. After 

dumpster diving on the Internet for 

pseudo-science, anti-vaxxers have 

decided that their contempt for public 

health guidelines and their distrust of 

modern medicine somehow makes them

more "informed."

As a pediatrician and public health

 policy wonk, the cynical anti-vaxxers

 frustrate me on several levels. First, 

there is no amount of expensive

 scientific research that will assure anti-

vaxxers about the safety, efficacy and

 necessity of vaccines. Where genuine

 skeptics ask questions in order to 

learn, cynics ask questions in order to

 scorn. Presenting legitimate peer-

reviewed scientific data to anti-vaxxers 

does not persuade them because they 

already reached a verdict based on their

fears and contempt. The scientific 

community has diverted so much

 funding and resources towards

 disproving any causal relationship

 between vaccines and autism, but to

 what end? Those who get vaccinated

 don't really need the additional proof,

 and anti-vaxxers don't really care

 about the real work of the scientific

 method. As a result, millions of dollars

 that could have been used to research

 the real causes of autism or to study

 the real toxins in our environment are

 wasted proving what has already been

 proven repeatedly: Vaccines are safe,

 effective, and necessary for public

 health.

It frustrates me that anti-vaxxers

 benefit from herd immunity but refuse

 to contribute to it. Those of us who get

 vaccines are improving our own

 individual lives as well as those around

 us because vaccinated bodies do not 

give dangerous viruses and bacteria 

opportunities to start an infection,

 reproduce, and pass on to others. This 

is exactly how the United States 

declared itself free of measles 15 years

 ago. Regardless of whether the anti-

vaxxers admit it or not, they benefit

 from herd immunity. But anti-vaxxers 

are not the ones for whom herd 

immunity is intended. As a pediatrician, I see infants who are too young to 

receive certain vaccines. I see patients 

whose immune systems are impaired

 because they have organ transplants

 or 

they are undergoing treatments for 

cancer. All of these children are part of

 our herd, our community, and they are

 depending on the rest of us who are

healthy enough to get vaccines to do

 our part in maintaining our collective

 immunity.

Getting vaccinated involves an element 

of social responsibility. The strength of 

our public health is reliant on a web of 

mutuality. When we drive sober and at

 the speed limit, or when we ban 

smoking in public places, we are doing 

the basic but important work of keeping

 each other safe and healthy. 

Vaccinations are an integral part of that

process, and no one should have to 

suffer from preventable diseases. As 

much as anti-vaxxers may think they

 are exercising their right to choose, 

they do not have the right to put others

at risk. It took tough laws against drunk

driving to keep people safe, and there

 has been a slow but welcome cultural 

shift against driving under the 

influence. Similarly, we must urge anti-

vaxxers to look beyond their egos and

 show some responsibility toward public

 health.

AND A BIG HEAR, HEAR FROM THIS 

BLOGGER!!!!

Happy Belated Caturday!!!

Happy Caturday!!

What I Do Not Want To See in a Novel for Entertainment

No where but here will you get the honest word on the newest in Austenalia.  I am also not ashamed to give you my real opinions, when I feel an author has "borrowed" too much from another author, and I will name the names.
I am now (virtually) getting ready to read a new book by an author who is unfamiliar to me.  Through the grape-vine I had heard fairly good things about the books which she has authored.
This particular author (Sharon Lathan) must have two personalities.  I would not call myself a prude; but, her books are just shy of a X-rating.  Even though it is married sex, the fact that the story is set in the early 19th century should have given her the hint to tone it down just a bit.  Then, in addition to being slapped in the face with soft porn, she starts to proselytize to her readers about her religion.  NO, NO, NO!!!  I do not want to have anybody's religion shoved in my face while I am trying to be entertained.  In addition, I have caught her in random acts of racism as well.  Needless to say she is no longer on my Author List.  (She writes Austenalia)
Now I know a certain ilk of writers will use the popular Austenalia genre and stoop very low in their varied attempts at apologetics (LDS, for instance) and even an out-right smarmy-type of "Convert or you'll burn forever" message, I wanted my readers to be aware of it.  The second-type is particularly vicious (Robin Helm).  Many people seem to feel a need to excuse a person who belongs to a cult of personality which preaches some of the worst ethos I have ever seen.  Again, this is the "entertainment" of the arena.
Some people will say that these authors are writing for LDS readers.  Why?  Is it a part of their mind-control programme in order to keep women in their proper place.  One really has to wonder.
Ms. Helm's first trilogy was so ridiculous (I believe it tied Angelology) that I did not attempt it.  However, I DID read the first volume of her second trilogy.  To say I was shocked would be an understatement.  Her major male character (21st century) has multiple psychiatric disorders, which are unacknowledged.    I read this book with an open mind; however, I could not believe that no one else could see the pathology in his behaviour.  This "Gospel of Greed" on which she expounds is vile.  Again, this is not a book for entertainment.  
I much preferred the flawed 18th century character.  He was real.
Well, this is all for today.  I will be bringing you positive reviews soon; but, I just had to get these two off my back.   

I Have My Standards -- Smile, You Are on Camera

When it comes to reading for entertainment purposes only, literary standards tend to slacken a bit.  However, with the trend to self-publishing being offered by mega-corporation Amazon and other companies, many writers are not treating their readers with the respect that they deserve.  Editing has almost disappeared.  Writing levels that are barely out of elementary school have also been noted.  In addition, the so-called "reviews" on many book and e-book buying sites are very questionable.  Many are almost word for word and appear to be written by a claque of followers.  The reviews I have given have ALWAYS been true reviews in that I have read the book, no one has paid me for the review, and I will honestly tell what I think.
So, in that regard, I will now re-publish my Amazon reviews here as well since I have read that authors do NOT read their Amazon reviews.  This is especially true in the Austenalia genre, which I must admit that I do on occasion enjoy.  The authors as a whole hold tight to their bulwark and do not criticize fellow authors.  I am not sure that is a good thing.  Historical novelists certainly criticize each other, especially when important facts are gotten wrong.  Today, for example, I found a series of novels about ancient Alexandria.  However, the author made Heron of Alexandria female which would have surprised HIM greatly.  Heron was also the major character.  These novels also got glowing reviews from the hoi polloi or a claque.  They were not useful at all.  I would have liked to post something to the effect that I had not read the novels but that Heron was male, so I would not waste my time since this was a primary fact.
I will be posting further on this subject as it is important to me.  

Where Did My Blog Go?

Some of my visitors may wonder where the lovely blog I used to have has gone.  I do not know.  The only thing of which I am aware is that Lyndzy, a designer at The Cutest Blog in the World, took my money for a custom blog.  I have not been able to get in touch with her.  When attempting to get in touch with the other owners, they have found the work order; however, they have done nothing as yet to restore my blog.  I am not an expert in this and Lyndzy messed around with the CSS, so I cannot even borrow a temporary design until I can get another done.  
This also happened on my knitting blog when the designer decided to sell her business and did not inform me of it.  It is even worse there because I have no way of even posting to it.  I spent good money for both these blogs and feel that I have been robbed.  People do not RENT a custom designed blog, for goodness sakes.  

Music Which Had No Business Being Composed

Yes, I am a tough critic.  My ears are very sensitive things and are highly evolved.  Even though I can name a number of pieces which I like since Shubert's Unfinished Symphony, it is difficult.  As the 19th Century continued and the Romanticism of the Victorian Age ran rampant, this certainly became even more so.  The more layers of sugar and treacle that a composer could put on a piece of music made it indigestible.  Emotionally over-wrought Verdian operas with their dying heroines vied with wraith-like Willis on the ballet stage.  In the concert hall itself, the pianoforte was further developed in order to provide more of this grand emotion that this new audience seemed to crave.  Instead of the subtle intricacies of the earlier stringed instruments played by the Bach's, Mozart, Beethoven. et al, which you could hear playing with the musical groupings and early orchestras, now it was only a wave of sound.  My husband likes to term it "piano-banging."  I must say that at times it is quite apropos and can leave one with quite the head-ache.
Now, getting to music that probably never should have been composed, there are a number of late 19th century and 20th century British composers who liked to compose what I term "fake Baroque" or "fake Classical" music.  Examples of these are Lady Radnor's Suite and The London Suite.  It was not only the British.  I heard a symphony by an unknown Swedish composer (early 20th century) which I must say had no point to it at all.  Mayhap this is why he is unknown.
There may be unknown masterpieces being played in the repertoires in Europe which have not made it to this country because the few well-heeled who fund the arts only know the boring "war horses" -- the piano-bangers as it were.  At least here in Southeastern Connecticut we are fortunate to host two Early Music festivals in the early summer.
So, yes, I do find noise which claims to be music as obnoxious -- and I will speak up about it.  

According to Myers-Briggs: INFJ

,

 

 

 

INFJs are value-driven individuals who tend to remain mysterious and complex even after you’ve become close to one. They are often creative and inspired individuals. They are good at perceiving emotions and are sensitive to the feelings of others, but they are not very prone to revealing much of themselves until they trust someone completely. That said, they are intensely interested in the well-being of others and are often seen as protectors as well as natural leaders.

 

 

So, who would have thunk it, huh?  Here I am, a certified cat-person who wuvs her kitties (small, medium, large, and huge) being compared to a wolf!  However, I do have a secret love of Dobermanns and Salukis.  If you won't tell, I won't.