Anti-vaccers rank YouTube, Facebook, blogs as top three sources of credible information

science, health, satire, vaccines.

NEW YORK, NY – Anti-vaccine advocates have spoken: PubMed, scientific journals, the Cochrane Library, meta analyses, etc. all mean nothing. The real truth about vaccines and medicine can only be found on YouTube, Facebook and anti-vaccine blogs.

“I don’t read anything that isn’t from an anti-vaccine source,” said Marion Eriksson, science illiterate. “Once you venture down the rabbit hole of mainstream medicine reporting and research, it’s very hard to come back out. I even read the other day that “doctors” are against shooting bleach into the rectums of autistic children. How sick is that?”

YouTube-to-offer-monthly-subscription-service-that-removes-adsWhile most researchers and medical professionals trust the peer-review process and judge the quality of research on things like the methods section of a study and even the impact factor of the journal the study is published in, anti-vaccers seemingly ignore all of that.

“It doesn’t matter if you get published in Nature, BMJ, Pediatrics or make a YouTube video. They are all equally valid,” said Brian Hooker, mathematically challenged anti-vaccer. “As long as you write something on a blog or make a home video and upload it to YouTube, you can say you are published.”

Researchers believe this is why anti-vaccers universally struggle when presented with credible evidence on the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

“When an anti-vaccer is shown good evidence on the importance of vaccines, they really have trouble. They cannot understand the epidemiology or biostatistics of the paper, so they fall back on the “who funded the study?” trope” explained Dr. Greg Heines. “Perhaps proper vaccine studies and research should make more YouTube videos.”


Evil doktor, pharma shill, vaccine chemist, Monsanto spokesperson, GMO lobbyist, chemtrail deployer and false flag organizer.