Anti-vaccers 700% more likely to believe study if shared by anti-vaccine website and contains ridiculous statistic

Anti-vaccers 700% more likely to believe study if shared by anti-vaccine website and contains ridiculous statistic

NEW YORK, NY – In a new study released today, it was shown that anti-vaccine advocates are nearly 700% more likely to believe a study if it was shared by an anti-vaccine website and contains a ridiculous statistic.

“Some of the most shared and believed “studies” on anti-vaccine sites state things like “autism rate will be 100% by 2020” or “vaccines responsible for over 2 million deaths a year” or another┬áridiculous statistic,” said Dr. Neil Stephens, pharma shill. “Anti-vaccine cult leaders like to shock their members with outlandish claims and stats because they know they will eat it up and parrot it across the internet.”

Anti-vaccers have long since been proven to have an aversion to facts, science and truth according to multiple studies.

“We know anti-vaccers are very, very slow to grasp the finer points of chemistry, medicine, immunology, etc. so it’s no surprise that they struggle immensely with statistics as well,” said Dr. Stephens.

While most people would question an outlandish statistical claim in an article or study, it appears as though anti-vaccers will believe it straight away without hesitation so long as it comes from a page or person they trust such as Mike Adams, Sherri Tenpenny or other scientifically-challenged individuals.

“The people I trust are the ones who go against the mainstream, the renegades who are only trying to blow the lid off of the vaccine global conspiracy…and sell supplements to help us all of course,” said anti-vaccine cult member Joe Gooding. “Everyone knows that if someone doesn’t have an online store selling things, they can’t be trusted.”

 

 

  • Betsy Smith

    Well, here’s the truth.
    Vaccines damage the immune system and are responsible for a wide array of human suffering.
    How’s that for you?

    • Chris

      Not quite sufficient. What would work better if you provided the PubMed indexed studies by reputable qualified researchers that any vaccine on the present American pediatric schedule causes more harm than the actual disease.

      But since you failed this site’s intelligence test by not reading its full title, I doubt you will come up with anything approaching reality any time soon.

      • Betsy Smith

        There is plenty of evidence to support my claims available to anyone interested in the subject. It is not my responsibility to educate those who assume the experts are always accurate and honest.
        I was 6 years old and weighed 36 lbs when I was given the series of “shots” required for international travel in the ’50s. When I was 8 I got them again for the return trip.
        When I was 11, I got them again.
        Do you really want the details of what that did to me?

        • Chris

          “It is not my responsibility to educate those who assume the experts are always accurate and honest”

          Bah hah hah… so you have nothing. This is a satirical site about science, and is mostly laughing at people like you who make claims but cannot support them, and the excuses they use. You just used two very silly ones. First the “look it up yourself” gambit, and then not knowing the plural of anecdote is not data.

          By the way, if you knew any science (or history) you would have realized that the vaccines in the 1950s are not the same as modern vaccines. For one thing, a couple of them are not given anymore. You are hilarious, and I can see how you failed this site’s basic intelligence test.

          • Betsy Smith

            And I know now you are paid to be stupid.
            Congratulations on having a job.
            Good day.

          • Chris

            Ah, it is the old tired unoriginal Pharma Shill Gambit, and argument by insult because you were not getting anywhere with your argument with blatant assertion. That is adorable.

            Though I should point out that when I asked for actual scientific evidence about the present American pediatric schedule, you came up with your little story from the 1950s about international travel. Hardly pertinent to this century and the United States of America. Hilarious, and illiterate.

            Here is some reading for you, ask someone who passed 9th grade English to explain it to you:
            Economic Evaluation of the Routine Childhood Immunization Program in the United States, 2009

        • shay simmons

          “There is plenty of evidence to support my claims available to anyone interested in the subject. ”

          Then why can’t you produce them?

        • Simon Tucker

          I think we can all guess: brain damage seems most likely – but I suspect you were actually born that gullible and are just looking for something to blame.

    • shay simmons
    • poppy72

      And your evidence for that is?

      • Betsy Smith

        This series should be very informative. https://go.thetruthaboutvaccines.com/?a_bid=62acb2d5&a_aid=astke
        Other than that, personal experience, research, observation and common sense.

        • Chris

          A video series? One that you have to sign up for, and doesn’t start for another week? By a guy who has absolutely no medical/science education?

          Sorry, but that is not valid. Please provide the PUbMed indexed studies by reputable researchers to support your claim.

          • Betsy Smith

            Try GreenMedinfo.com.
            Try doctors and scientists who do not have a vested interest in the current growth of vaccination schedules.
            Didn’t you think it odd when Bill Gates listed vaccinations and one of the means of reducing global population?

          • Chris

            Again, not PubMed articles by reputable qualified researchers. Sayer Ji does not any real science education.

            And no, it is not odd that vaccination is a good way to reduce global population growth (subtle difference). When a family can be sure that their children will actually grow up and die from a disease, they tend to have fewer children. Which is why the largest families are in places like Pakistan and Afghanistan. They have six to ten kids hoping that at least two become adults.

            Our American/Canadian parents often had more than four siblings (my mother-in-law was from a family of seven kids). When I was growing up as part of the baby boomer generation there were several families with four to five kids. Now the families in my neighborhood just have one or two kids, occasionally three.

            Again, if you can be sure your children will be healthy, not die from pertussis, measles, meningitis, or gunfire: then you only have as many as you really want.

          • Betsy Smith

            Though wrong, your answer was thoughtful, so I didn’t recognize you.

          • Chris

            Since you like to learn from videos, you need to check out these: https://www.gapminder.org/

            They are entertaining and educational.

          • poppy72

            I concur, my mother was one of nine children, I myself have two healthy children.

          • Chris

            My grandmother was from a family of five children, unfortunately two of them died before they were ten years old. My stepmother was from a family of seven children, and one died before she was born.

            People like Ms. Smith just does not understand the issues behind family size, population, health and poverty. This is all very well explained at https://www.gapminder.org/ .

          • Damo

            Another Gates Truther!! Why do you think Bill Gates wants to poison people?

          • Chris

            She is gullible and believes everything she read teh internets. Which is exactly what the above article is based on!

          • Damo

            I know, but I am being genuine–I totally don’t understand why these people think that Gates is trying to kill people or profit from doing charity. It just doesn’t make sense that those are his motives–especially as he has become the richest man in the world already by not doing that.

          • Chris

            Sorry, I tend to be more facetious on this site, mostly because it is a satire site.

            There are lots different reasons, and sometimes you cannot reason with those who have trouble figuring out their own opinions. There have been entire books written about this, which include psychological issues like Dunning-Kruger syndrome, motivated reasoning and the backfire effect.

            There is a podcast that actually looks at some of these things, including how you own mind can fool you:
            https://youarenotsosmart.com/

            Ms. Smith is just caught in the trap of motivated reasoning and the backfire effect. Even though she said my explanation of why people have fewer children when they are guaranteed to live, she still said I was wrong. The reason is that she doesn’t recognize me, which is the backfire effect.

          • Betsy Smith

            I can only speculate that his main priority is preserving the earth’s resources.

          • Chris

            Actually it is mostly improving the quality of life in many areas. This is why his foundation is working on improving sanitation (like a good toilet system, https://www.gatesnotes.com/Sanitation ), better food, disease prevention through mosquito control, education, etc:
            http://www.gatesfoundation.org/

            It is not just preventing diseases with vaccines.

            By the way, you should not just “speculate”, you can start by reading better sources of information. You can start with the links I provided. Or just go to a library, and then check out books on history and medicine.

          • Damo

            No, I mean why do you think this, not why does he do it. What is your evidence?

        • poppy72

          Youtube videos count for nothing, sorry you have nothing.

  • Betsy Smith

    Where trolls come to feed.

    • Chris

      Like you? I see you made claims and expected us to just believe them without any kind of evidence. Do you you that often, because that is classic troll behavior. If you do, then this is your theme song:

      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
      Rawhide!
      Trollin’ Trollin’ Trollin’
      Though the threads are swollen
      Keep them comments trollin’,
      Rawhide!

      Cherry pick!
      (Head em’ up!)
      Move goalposts!
      (Move ’em on!)
      More insults!
      (Head em’ up!)
      Rawhide!
      Cut ’em out
      (Paste ’em in!)
      Paste’em in
      (Cut em’ out!)
      Cut ’em out
      Paste ’em in,
      Rawhide!
      Keep trollin’, trollin’, trollin’
      Though they’re disaprovin’
      Keep them comments trollin”,
      Rawhide!
      Don’t try to understand ’em
      Just rope, laugh, and ignore ’em
      Soon we’ll be discussin’ bright without ’em

      • Betsy Smith

        Okay, that was pretty cute.

  • Betsy Smith

    How many vaccines does it take to turn a normal human being into an internet troll?
    answer…………………?
    It’s a trick question.
    Normal human beings do not become internet trolls.