upvote
[flagged]
reply
[flagged]
reply
[flagged]
reply
I mean this is liberal/left heavy, it's to be expected, you can't just rummage in and expect people to be like hm good points you're right! when most of the audience is against you

it's expected

if you could delve into what supports your arguments that'd help more than "trust me instead"

I personally am skeptical of many things, including pharma, but I'm not going to claim that vaccines don't work when historically they have, and I'd have to do a bunch of research to prove an internet argument wrong.

do I think that covid vaccines were/are 100% safe and totally not rushed due to the pandemic? no.

reply
It didn't start out as liberal/left, so a lot of the people that have been here since 2010 want to keep most politics out it entirely. After all the name of the group is "Hackers". Most of the people in compsci/engineering were libertarian prior to 2007 anyway. It's really undergone a shift which is fine, but it actually adds absolutely nothing, from an intellectual point of view imho. It would be nice to at least send a warning note, to any accounts that solely post political stuff here - or give them their own subgroup. For God's sake if you are going to talk about Hepatis-C then talk about here, rather than using it to bring up issues with an administration you don't like.
reply
In 2010, vaccines weren’t really a divisive topic that was politically aligned. That’s come later as the right started to take an interest, and then accelerated via COVID and disagreements about the various approaches implemented to manage the epidemic by the government that caused controversy - masks, lockdowns, and vaccines.

Which is to say, it’s not so much the liberal/left causing a problem here - I think they’re just holding the ground they’ve always had - that vaccines are generally safe and generally a good thing.

reply
[flagged]
reply
Every vaccine licensed for use in the USA has a clinical review memo that list the adverse events that you claim are dismissed. You live in an imaginary fantasy world.
reply
Why dont you ask your doctor these things?
reply
Why ask an educated professional when YouTube will validate whatever opinion you already have?
reply
> HN pretends there's nothing to discuss here.

Have you read the discussions on vaccine stories? See, for example, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26629234 – chosen arbitrarily using the search box at the bottom of the page. I've not read anyone pretending this.

> shut up

People are being dismissive of you, but nobody has told you to shut up in this thread. (The closest thing is flagging the comments which started with broad-spectrum insults, but this only occurred after you wrote this.) Despite its tone, I'm going to have to second GP's assessment that you're responding to imagined slights.

reply
[flagged]
reply
So I'm not an expert, but I did take immunology last semester... You're definitely right that we'd benefit from more study of the long term downstream effects of adjuvants. When you put the immune system on high alert, it sometimes remembers the wrong thing from the experience and continues to target it later.

But you've got to weigh those risks against the risk of dragging our feet on rolling out new vaccines. It's likely that many autoimmune diseases are caused by pathogens which are either undiscovered, or which are known, but whose link to the autoimmune disease is undiscovered. This is because there is evolutionary pressure encouraging pathogens to resemble self-antigens. If a pathogen has markers that cause it to resemble the human liver, the human adaptive immune system won't typically attack it because it wants to avoid attacking its own liver. So the pathogen is safe. This is called molecular mimicry. But the mimicry isn't perfect, so sometimes the immune system does become sensitized to the pathogen, attacks it, clears it, and starts slowly attacking the liver (or whichever tissue bears the same epitope as the mimic). It shows up years later as an autoimmune disease, but the data just isn't there to isolate its cause to that pathogen.

So the best strategy, if we can pull it off, is to vaccinate against the original pathogen (or prevent it via other means... clean food and water, etc), but to target epitopes which do not resemble any human tissues, and with adjuvants that do not sensitize the immune system against any human tissues.

As for how long adjuvants stay in the body, it's definitely worth studying more, but their whole function is to sound the alarm, so I'd expect that they're cleared rather quickly. Anything that fails to do that is by definition not an adjuvant. But assuming that an inappropriate response was triggered in the first place, you'd see the same effects whether or not the adjuvant was still around: If the initial exposure has triggered clonal replication of whichever B and T cells attack the antigen, self or otherwise, they'll stick around in your lymph nodes for years and years, and they'll re-up their numbers with each subsequent exposure.

reply
deleted
reply
and screw worms
reply
America: hold my syringe...
reply
Future to the Back!
reply
I blame Facebook and not MAGA for this. Amplification is insane.
reply
Not only bringing back but also exporting it.

Currently we have a measles outbreak in Brazil brought from the US, so everybody is getting vaccinated (even those who already were, like me) to try to stop the spreading and protect those who can’t get vaccinated.

Really would love for US social and media networks to get their shit together and stop spreading misinformation in the name of profit…

reply
Strangely, anti-vax sentiment is surging in a lot of countries. Canada has higher rates of vaccine rejection than the United States in some categories, as one example.

It’s a strange global phenomenon and I don’t think there is one single root cause. MAGA/MAHA definitely jumped on to the anti-vax train as it became popular, but many forget that Trump presided over the rushing of the COVID vaccine into availability and production. He hasn’t done vaccination any favors in recent years, but I’m skeptical that the widespread rise of vaccine skepticism can be attributable to this administration alone.

I think there’s a bigger story about the cyclical nature of how the dangers of threats that previous generations faced is slowly lost over time, combined with the rise of contrarianism and conspiratorial thinking on social media.

reply
Given the amount of cultural influence the USA has and the universal nature of the internet it seems likely to me that global anti-vax sentiment could have started with the USA.
reply
The pivotal paper that tried to link vaccines to autism came out of the UK and was published in The Lancet.

Assuming that the US was the root of the current surge of anti-vax idealism is not supported by the facts.

reply
I don't think the general public were as influenced by a paper in the Lancet as they were by other members of the public (and media) talking about that study.
reply
The US is a global media and culture juggernaut, so by that token the US can be blamed for most trends. I don't think it's a worthwhile distinction.

Anti-vax culture was prominent in the UK, Australia, Canada, and many other countries at the same time. I'm not seeing any strong reason to blame the US as the root or solo cause.

reply
> The US is a global media and culture juggernaut, so by that token the US can be blamed for most trends.

Hmmm. By that logic, does it mean the US can also take credit for most trends?

reply
That paper was followed by a sustained and purposeful PR campaign, by the author, who had an investment in a new vaccine type that only covered one disease, as he was trying to cast doubt on vaccinating multiple things at the same time as "too stressful on the body" or other bullshit.

This also involved, whether he pushed it or it was organic, the tabloid press of the UK.

Eventually this filtered back to the US, despite already being largely debunked and retracted, but that didn't matter to the early 2000s celebrities looking for whatever confirmation bias sources they could.

The histeria started in the UK, slowly crept over the atlantic to the US, and now has filtered back, all while it was based on absolute fraud and lies, the exact criticism all these morons insist applies to real scientists.

The modern anti-vaccine movement was nearly entirely started by a doctor fraudulently publishing fake science to make money. The supporters of course refuse to see that, because it would burst their bubble, so only their enemies can possibly be guilty of it.

Even the 12 or so parents involved in that fraudulent "study" cried foul, as he literally put words in their mouths and made up testimony from them to support his scheme. Actual autistic children continue to suffer from his bullshit, entirely made up illness.

reply
And that guy ended up losing his medical license permanently over it.
reply
Yeah, I guess:

> Andrew Jeremy Wakefield (born 3 September 1956[a]) is an English fraudster and anti-vaccine activist. Formerly a senior surgeon, he was struck off the British medical register in 2010 for "serious professional misconduct" due to his involvement in the fraudulent 1998 Lancet MMR autism report, (wikpedia)

Sadly debunking fraud doesn't seem to stop the misinfo on social media. "Vaccines cause autism!" gets more clicks than the truth and so you get JFK Jr.

reply
It's Robert F. Kennedy Jr., not John.
reply
I wonder where that guy lives now
reply
The fraudulent Lancet paper gave "credibility" to the grifters and conspiracy theorists world wide.

But the King of Graft installing the halfwit RFK to run HHS is next level and I assume fellow grifters are making serious bank off this shit.

Reminder, the vengeful Orange also installed a climate change denier to run NOAA after he lost the election, who posted bogus claims on the official NOAA website which grifters used to give legitimacy to their bullshit.

reply
Yeah, but the facts don't support the narrative that's being pushed here, which is "America bad".
reply
The UK banned him from practicing because of it, citing "serious professional misconduct". He moved to the US.

America made one of his adherents the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

reply
Oh, banned him? Don't move too quickly, you might get dizzy.

Wakefield arguably assaulted his patients (most of whom were children, IIRC) when conducting his research. What do you do with people who arguably assaulted someone? You get the Crown to make that argument. Why didn't that happen?

Also worth noting: according to the logic upon which the British system of government is based, no lesser a party than God Himself put a major believer in homeopathy on the throne of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

reply
https://x.com/raffysoanti/status/1403093629086965760

I'd love to see Wakefield go to jail for fraud, nor am I a fan of Charles even if he's on my passport. But Charles doesn't set UK health policy, or UK policy at all.

reply
> I'd love to see Wakefield go to jail for fraud, nor am I a fan of Charles even if he's on my passport. But Charles doesn't set UK health policy, or UK policy at all.

You're correct. He lives off the civil list and lets his nonce brother crash at a luxury home. But someone else does set UK health policy, and someone else does prosecute crimes, and since that's the case, then why didn't someone else in the UK with the ability to charge him do so?

If that happens, there is no adherent in charge of the DHHS. There are no kids dying of easily-preventable diseases in the UK, US, or anywhere else. Just a quack sitting in a jail cell.

reply
Again: I'm all for it. I've little ability to impact the British criminal justice system, though, nor much patience for whataboutism.

I'll still take "no longer a doctor" over "gets to set American health policy".

I like pancakes and waffles, in other words.

reply
> I've little ability to impact the British criminal justice system, though

Probably more on a per-capita basis than Americans have impact on what DHHS does, though. Especially if it became something focused on by the British public. Which, strangely, it hasn't. Not since 2010 when he was struck off.

> I'll still take "no longer a doctor" over "gets to set American health policy".

You really should aim higher. The man performed colonoscopies and biopsies on autistic children to support a scientific fraud with the hopes of becoming wealthy off of it. In other words, at the very least, he committed battery on disabled kids. That should earn more than getting struck off after twelve years. It should earn prison. It's purely on the British government that it hasn't. And since doing that would have prevented his scientific fraud from reaching the heights it is at now, modern antivax can be pinned on the UK and the lack of action from His Majesty's government.

reply
In fact, you can bet that other states deliberately stirred the pot
reply
There is some evidence that anti-vac activism was one of the key topics pushed by foreign influence campaigns at several points. I think the simple explanation is that they pushed any topic which could be used for political divisiveness and unrest, but fomenting anti-vac sentiment is especially damaging due to the physical harms it causes.
reply
Looks like Russia did that: https://firstdraftnews.org/articles/anti-pfizer-vaccine-narr...

... and the USA did it too, trying to discredit China’s Sinovac: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-covi...

reply
Looking at global population stats, you can clearly see where germ theory and vaccines entered human civilization.

All this "natural something" and antivax movement certainly is the other direction. Maybe it's subconscious population control, maybe informational warfare... maybe people just got a little detached from reality by not dying all the time, as you suggested.

reply
deleted
reply
Anti-vaxxing goes back literally centuries, but the internet definitely made it a THING.
reply
I just looked it up and anti-vax arguments predate actual vaccines - they were used for variolation which was similar:

>in a 1722 sermon entitled "The Dangerous and Sinful Practice of Inoculation", the English theologian Reverend Edmund Massey argued that diseases are sent by God to punish sin and that any attempt to prevent smallpox via inoculation is a "diabolical operation"

Vaccines date from about 1800.

reply
I would blame the "social" media, on the old internet they had barely any visibility.

Now that we have the blame let's talk about the punishment.

reply
> I would blame the "social" media, on the old internet they had barely any visibility.

They managed to get plenty of visibility long before computers.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-50713991

> There followed a 100-year battle between the authorities and an often sceptical, sometimes aggressive, public. In Britain, a succession of laws made vaccinations free, then compulsory - backed by fines and even imprisonment. While riots flared in some towns, there was also more restrained opposition in the form of anti-vaccination leagues. For an increasingly literate population, pamphlets were produced with titles like "Vaccination: its fallacies and evils", "Vaccination, a Curse" and the suitably Gothic "Horrors of Vaccination".

reply
I do not disagree, but I don't remember antivax to be visible in pre-facebook internet either, so I only blame it for ~current wave
reply
It was there, and growing for decades. Pre Facebook it was a small niche but don't blame Facebook, that is mostly coincidence
reply
Pre-facebook, the barrier of entry was high enough that only fairly educated, students, and the nerds were driving the content.

Once the barrier came down and the floodgates of "average intelligence" were opened, it was over.

reply
deleted
reply
I am very prepared to get downvoted for bringing this up - but I'm not convinced that the "anti-vax movement" most people think of is truly to blame (that is, crazy people who think it gives you autism or whatever).

At least in my area, there are pockets of (relatively) new immigrants that have MMR vaccination rates at around 30% (that's very low, much lower than the anti-vaxxer population could account for imo), and the reasons for that have nothing to do with MAGA/MAHA as far as I can tell.

It's an entirely different problem (that needs solving), and pretending that this is simply the by-product of uneducated crazies on the internet feels like it's over indexing on a loud and flashy but ultimately small part of the problem.

reply
Before MAGA I'd heard of granola moms, the same people who think that amber helps their kid with teething, were very against vaccinating their kids as well. So it's a wide swath of people who are just oblivious to the benefits of vaccination. It's a reason that they have vaccine schedules to begin with.
reply
the data is quite slow to be released so i haven't updated my charts for a bit but britain saw a decent spike in HIV / AIDS because of the migratory flows under boris johnson. In large part because we don't test on the basis that it's considered racist (I went looking for discourse on testing on entry or not - first article that came up was from the graun, first words "Nigel Farage").
reply
Would you say that the government telling those people that they should be afraid of vaccines will help or hurt in this case?
reply
I gotta be honest, I don't really think these immigrant groups see or care what Trump/RFK are saying. If anything they see them as an "enemy" who they should not trust.. This is an incredibly left-leaning city where the majority of public health information (or any other messaging) being disseminated is counter to what the current federal admin is saying (as a rule, it seems).

So to answer your question, I don't personally think it helps or hurts in any significant amount relative to other cultural drivers.

reply
I don't think people base their beliefs purely based on what the administration says

the whole rollout and lockdowns, Fauci, etc. were a perfect storm to cause skepticism towards vaccines

reply
I don't think it was the roll-out or anything along those lines, so much as the lying. Saying people won't get sick or won't catch COVID if they get the vaccines [1] was just false and very myopic. Obviously the intent was to try to get people to take the shots, but they completely destroyed trust in the process. Broader skepticism predictably follows from there.

[1] - https://xcancel.com/ITGuy1959/status/1581034815700488192

reply
They are not the progenitors of the skepticism, but they gave the skeptics significantly more authority than they previously had. Over surveillance networks, vaccine scheduling, public health comms, etc. MAGA sees them as useful idiots for the coalition, rather than threats to the US.
reply
[flagged]
reply
interesting. so if you get a bacterial infection, you plan to succumb to it rather than take antibiotics?
reply
I'm not that extremist. My dentist is cool, my childrens' pediatrician as well. I trust them entirely and I know they would never compromise their credibility or my health for financial gain. I always take medicine they prescribe (mostly generic stuff whose patents expired a century or so ago). They always steer me to healthy habits such as excercise and eating fruits instead of taking supplements etc.

Unfortunately, they are the only ones like that I know. Most other I encountered just peddle products for their financial gain. Snake oil salesmen.

I am aware I live in a dictatorship which drove a lot of smart and good people away from the country, skilled doctors and nurses were among the first to go. Hopefully it'll get better once we overthrow the dictator.

reply
do you live in China?
reply
I'm afraid to say my last few experiences with antibiotics have been dismal. I got given three different types of antibiotics for one infection, none of which cleared it up much at all. Last time I appeared to have successful antibiotic treatment for something was in the 2010s.
reply
When did that particular switch flip?
reply
Here [1] is a montage of some of the public messaging around the COVID vaccines. [1] It was quite simply dishonest. That, paired alongside the effort to force people to take the shots, completely destroyed public trust on a level that will take many decades to repair. Generalized vaccine skepticism follows naturally from that.

I'm certainly a part of that group. For instance I ended up doing extensive research on e.g. MMR before deciding to vaccinate my kids for it. If this were a decade ago, I almost certainly would have done it without a second thought, just as I took all recommended vaccines before traveling without a second thought. So I'm obviously not anti-vaccine in the least, but I no longer trust public messaging on the topic.

It was just another (of the increasingly endless) examples of governments/companies pursuing short-term interests while ignoring long-term consequences. When it comes to what people put in their bodies, trust is more important than literally anything else.

[1] - https://xcancel.com/ITGuy1959/status/1581034815700488192

reply
Why is it bad for a public health communicator to say that vaccines stop spread by lowering the effective reproduction number of a pathogen? Its correct. Your extensive research didn't seem to work.
reply
But this has been building for years ahead of COVID. COVID just gave people something to latch on to. And in spite of COVID vaccine issues, the latest numbers i saw suggest around 80% of people still support standard childhood vaccinations.
reply
The media has been referencing this for years now, but the data don't show that there was any meaningful effect on a national level. Here [1] are CDC data on various childhood vaccines. Childhood DTP/MMR vaccination rates varied very little over the past 15 years and never fell below 94%. They actually hit a record high in 2019 right before COVID - of about 95% each. Now they're both at record lows (around 92%) and continuing to trend lower.

[1] - https://www.cdc.gov/schoolvaxview/data/index.html

reply
You have your chain of logic backwards. You wanted to be skeptical and "concerned" and so forth so you went out and found reasons to justify it.
reply
[dead]
reply
[dead]
reply
[flagged]
reply
Not sure why the parent was downvoted, because I think it nails the current sentiment.

For some people the COVID vaccine(s) were rushed to market, with limited clinical trials, intended to vaccinate the entire adult population, with limited data as to their immediate effectiveness and with no data about long term effects. You can debate whether the above points are valid or not, but for some people they certainly raised a safety flag.

I completely agree that the vaccine scepticism around the COVID vaccines is now carrying over into other, well tested, well understood and very, very beneficial vaccines.

reply
My belief is that for most of those people, no amount of evidence would have ever been enough.

The entire "I looked at the data and found it insufficient" thing is by and large cover for people that lack the tools to evaluate the data. They play that card so they can pretend that they're actually intelligent skeptical adults and not easily manipulated idiots or malicious grifters.

They're the equivalent of a random person that hasn't done algebra in 20 years emailing a physicist at CERN about how they've discovered a perpetual motion machine.

reply
"It was developed in the last 6 months" and "It was developed 50 years ago and millions of people around the world have used it with no ill effects" doesn't really require a degree in biochemistry to evaluate the possible risks.
reply
Yeah. People are lumping all vaccines together in an attempt to boost the credibility of the COVID vaccine. Unfortunately what it is actually doing is ruining the credibility of all the other vaccines that have been around for years and are well understood.
reply
Were all the other vaccines "well understood" when they were initially rolled out en masse? Not a rhetorical question, I genuinely don't know the history.

I don't really understand what people's expectations were for a new vaccine intended to combat an ongoing global pandemic.

reply
Several labs that manufactured the original polio vaccine shipped the live virus - ie, we just injected kids with polio. Low double digits of people (kids?) died, a few hundred were paralyzed, etc. Later vaccines also had the same problem, but at very low rates (1 in millions maybe).
reply
Yes, but it still ended the polio epidemic resulting in a drastic drop in polio-related deaths.

You don't get vaccines in use for 50 years without vaccines in use for 1 year, and you don't get that without using them for 6 months, and you can say the same about COVID-19 vaccination. Arguing otherwise is just failing to understand linear time.

You should say that COVID-19 vaccination had net very good outcomes too, unless you're a wilfully ignorant conspiracy theorist.

The safety factors of a vaccine become better understood over time and use, and you can say the same etc.

The bar isn't "perfect vaccine", the bar is "significantly better than no vaccine". And this depends on the urgency of the situation.

The only "debacle" is a political/sentiment one. MRNA vaccines are a significant new medical tool, not just for COVID-19.

reply
I don't think they were developed in less than 6 months, and probably had more testing (and have had far more since).
reply
[flagged]
reply
[flagged]
reply
You should elaborate on your secret knowledge of COVIDs origin. I was not aware this was completely settled knowledge.
reply
Its a "consensus"
reply
Is it? There are a lot of edgy contrarians that are very overconfident - doesnt seem like a global consensus to me
reply
They are very overconfident, to the point of losing their own money. There was the case of the rootclaim debate where Peter Miller successfully convinced two paid unbiased experts that COVID was not created in a lab and won $100,000

https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/practically-a-book-review-r...

reply
> Lineage A was first found in a Wuhan neighborhood right next to the wet market (closer to the wet market than 97% of Wuhan’s population). Again, it would be a bizarre coincidence if a lab leak pandemic was first detected at a wet market. But it would be an even more bizarre coincidence if a lab leak pandemic separated into two strains, and both were first detected at a wet market!

To the extent that there can ever be a "smoking gun" in this debate, this is it for me. Given the mutation rate of covid, the lab leak requires that two lineages transferred to the same area a week apart by mere accident.

reply
Yeah that and the "You would never choose <certain mutation> if you were designing COVID in a lab" were the kill-shots in the lab leak theory for me. I was pretty open-minded to the idea until a few hours into the debate. Bear in mind though, I don't think it actually matters too much anymore
reply
> We included data from 21 studies (5 randomized trials and 16 observational studies) reporting on 149 685 women. The pooled rate of miscarriage among women who received a COVID-19 vaccine was 9% (n = 14 749/123 185, 95% CI 0.05–0.14). Compared to those who received a placebo or no vaccination, women who received a COVID-19 vaccine did not have a higher risk of miscarriage (risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% CI 0.89–1.28, I2 35.8%) and had comparable rates for ongoing pregnancy or live birth (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.97–1.03, I2 10.72%).

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10152171/

reply
I guess his text was incorrect
reply
He stated that the FDA had found "no red flags" regarding pregnant women

A "Red Flag" (or Safety Signal) is an actual, observed increase in adverse events in real-world data.

What he was discussing in the text was a theoretical risk.

A "Theoretical Risk" is a hypothetical concern based on known biological mechanisms (e.g., "high fevers can cause miscarriages, so a vaccine-induced fever might do the same").

reply
Just for context all the major studies I’m aware of show heightened risk of miscarriage from Covid vaccines.

…unlike the risk from catching Covid itself

reply
Do you think that Fox News was right when they said COVID shots cause an 87% miscarriage rate? Or is it a completely misleading and ludicrous claim?
reply
Apologies, I re- read my comment. It’s missing a rather important “no”

Should have said “no heightened risk”. Looks like it’s impossible to edit or delete now.

reply
[flagged]
reply
"great again" comes after them.
reply
[flagged]
reply
[flagged]
reply
[flagged]
reply
[flagged]
reply
deleted
reply
People were refusing the measles vaccine back in 2000
reply
I'm not a trump fan, but the antivax train has nothing to do with him. (Evidence: Canada is doing even worse then us when it comes to measles). If we want to fix this problem (we do), the first step is to recognize the actual problem, not to play the blame game on whichever politician you currently don't like!
reply
You don't think RFK has anything to do with it?
reply
The reason there are measles cases is because a decent percentage of people aren't getting vaccinated anymore. If all of the cases were 2 year olds or younger (when RFK was put in charge) then possibly. But not only are they older (https://www.cdc.gov/measles/data-research/index.html), this is also happening in Canada. I don't see how it could possibly be RFK's fault.
reply
True, but RFK (and other politicians and celebrities) have been active in pushing some form of anti-vax ideology for a decade plus, in some cases back to the 1970s.

It's been a growing movement, not something that kicked off when RFK assumed the HHS role.

reply
I agree. But to be clear the original comment / context is about MAGA / Trump. I think responding 'No, you're wrong! RFK is the reason' to a thread about Trump and then retreating to RFK's activities over the last 20 years is arguing in bad faith.

The entire reason I made my original comment is because it's important to recognize that this is not a Trump thing, and getting rid of Trump / MAGA will not suddenly convince people that vaccines are good.

reply
It's not _solely_ a Trump thing, but he gave RFK an enormous platform and has himself been espousing demonstrably untrue things about vaccines and vaccination schedules. This very week, in fact. [1]

If you don't see this as an enormous amplification, I don't think you're operating in good faith.

1. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/10/well/trump-vaccines-fact-...

reply
Pre-Trump, anti-vaxxers were notorious left-wing granola types. Lots of anti-vaxxers were white liberals living in Marin and NorCal and sending their children to private schools like Waldorf.

Only after Trump did people start lumping them in with right wing.

reply
Trump gave them official government support and promoted them.
reply
Well that’s just not true, anti vax has always been a theme of the far right, infowars and i’m sure others have a long history of it.

The left wing libs types are far more recent, and i would lump them more in with the wellness brigade.

reply
You are completely wrong. It's always been a far left concept until COVID.

This is from Mother Jones, a very liberal web site.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/06/the-anti-vax-mo...

reply
Here’s an earlier article from another leftist site https://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/apr/25/mmr-scare-an...
reply
> Pre-Trump, anti-vaxxers were notorious left-wing granola types

so, exactly RFK's type :)

reply
While It’s fair to point out that RFK is hopping on a train that’s already got momentum, your first comment reads as if it’s not caused by falling vaccination rates (your second comment clarified further).

Also why not blame politicians doing the wrong thing?

reply
deleted
reply
Perhaps I should've been clearer. And yes they aren't helping.

And yes, we should blame them for the things they do. T But the comment I was responding to was acting as if MAGA was the reason for measles outbreaks, which is false. I'm an incredibly strong believer in the truth. An example of why I think this is an important separation: imagine you tried to fix the measles outbreak and miraculously got every single American to hate Trump and got Trump out of office. The problem would still not be fixed! People would still be dying of measles! The effort would have been almost completely wasted!

reply
A major campaign by RFK's replacement could absolutely make a significant difference stopping the spread of measles. That's the whole point of the (proven extremely effective!) vaccine.
reply
Do you believe this? I think it might help a little, but so we're on the same page RFK has only been in charge for 2 years. Why wasn't the previous secretary of health doing this? The measles outbreaks may be relatively new but we've had the vaccination data to see it coming for over a decade.

My personal belief is that there a lot of people who believe stupid things out there (and it's all only amplified by the news and social media), and for anti vaxxers especially I don't think an authority figure saying 'You have to get the measles vaccine!' is going to help much, unfortunate as it is. :(

reply
Inaction (and really, let's be clear - making it worse) is RFK's choice.

We managed to cut the smoking rate pretty dramatically, including in about half over the last decade. Public policy is not ineffective, we just need competent people to wield it.

reply
I think we live in a different age man. Media nowadays is completely different. Example: I have literally never had cable tv in my house. I've probably watched cable TV around 10 times total, all in a hotel room growing up. My media is all online, uncontrolled and (relatively) decentralized. Contrast that with 60 years ago and hopefully you see the difference.

Also smoking smells and has other negative externalities, which doesn't hurt.

reply
I don't think it would be logistically that hard to criminalize the parents or take away their kids in those cases. It would have a lot of other downsides but it would probably reduce the rate pretty directly.
reply
Ok if you want to do this then sure there is an easy solution. I think there are other problems with this though (for example no way this is flying even with the majority of people who are not anti-vax).
reply
I'll bet it would be enough just to make sure that the vaccine waiver signature box is positioned directly below some glossy full color pictures of emaciated, rash covered dead children.
reply
Excepting the turbo fascism, that is. People must be able feel agency while parenting or they can’t parent well.
reply
[dead]
reply
COVID and anti-vaxxing explosion happened 6 years ago.
reply
Look at the source I linked! Only 20% of cases are under 5!
reply
Unlike a lot of pathogenic diseases, measles requires an extraordinarily high amount of herd immunity (upwards of 95%), so this isn't a particularly telling data point on its own.
reply
RFK Jr has been pushing anti-vaccine bullshit for decades. He was already taking defensive stances on his activism (Oh, I'm not anti-vaccine, I'm just providing nonsense arguments and clout for anti-vaccine stances) back in 2015.

Kennedy was already pushing bullshit during the UK Measles vaccine fraud/scare, back in 2005. He was doing this along with a few other celebrities.

reply
I've responded to a few people on this but the comment I was responding to was literally about the last 6 years! The context of this entire thread is about MAGA / Trump! I agree that RFK is hurting and has been for a long time, but that is not what this argument is about!
reply
In fact, he is blamed for spreading vaccination hesitancy in Samoa and the deaths of multiple children there as the result even before COVID: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/newly-obtained-emails-un...
reply
RFK has publicly come out and encouraged parents to get vaccinated for measles. I don't know why you are spreading disinformation.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/article/rfk-jr-says-pare...

reply
Oh great he's doing it now after causing fear and doubt about them for decades, getting many people killed, in Samoa for example.
reply
Most of his criticisms have been about the timing of certain vaccines administrations.

He's not anti vax. If nobody can challenge science, then it's not science.

Vaccines continues to help us, but that doesn't mean they are perfect and don't cause side effects on certain individuals. Hopefuly the future brings us highly personalized medicine instead of a 1 size fits all.

reply
> If nobody can challenge science, then it's not science.

If someone has spent some time actually learning science then of course they can challenge science.

If they are a lazy halfwit parroting crap they listened to on the latest podcast (because reading is hard!)... no. Not so much.

reply
Claiming RFK is not anti-vax, is like claiming Dario is not anti-open-weights.

(Well, it's way worse that that, but I didn't want to invoke Godwin's law.)

He is not "challenging science" with measured arguments and carefully controlled peer-reviewed research to back his claims. He's deliberately trying to silence science because of a completely unsupported brain fart.

And no, it's not about "timing". It's about spreading baseless FUD to discourage any form of vaccination, because he believes (with no actual evidence, and despite vast amounts of research to the contrary) that vaccination causes autism.

reply
I mean would you let your non coding coke head brainwormed manager challenge your coding choices? He is not a doctor or scientist, why would we listen to him. And any experts relying on using are horse dewormer grifters or worse.
reply
You think the Trump influence magically stops at the border? There are _plenty_ of Canadians who think Trump has all the answers and can't be wrong.
reply
He knows he can't push his base too hard on certain things. He probably knows this about vaccines, he lauds Operation Warp Speed but as a win of his not a vaccine that could have saved millions more with his cooperation. He chooses his power over what's best for all of us. He's the leader of the antivax train by choice.
reply
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/10/trump-vaccin...

"The order recommends that all shots be given at separate medical visits, a frequent point Trump has made despite the safety, ease and lower costs of giving vaccines together."

'“Together, there could be a possibility they’re quite lethal,” Trump said of the MMR vaccine at the signing of the order on Monday.'

'Asked if he had evidence that the combined MMR vaccine was “lethal”, Trump said: “No. What I’ve heard is that there are some people who say it is that way.”'

Antivax fundamentally has its contemporary roots in Andrew Wakefield's fraudulent anti-MMR campaign.

So directing by executive order and by his own admission without evidence that the MMR vaccine be split up into separate shots is, very clearly, an antivax action. This is the first victory that Wakefield (a man who had a patent on a single measles vaccine!) wanted, and RFK Jr was pursuing.

But this is Trump saying this and signing it. So as of yesterday, it now has everything to do with Trump, sorry. He has handed the anti-MMR movement its ultimate victory and in so doing validated the entire antivax worldview.

reply
See my other responses. Obviously this is bad. But the current measles outbreak is a symptom of a problem that's been happening over the last 1 or 2 decades. It literally CANNOT be caused by this, neither in the US or Canada.

It's still not too late for anyone who is unvaccinated to get the vaccine! Hopefully the next administration undoes this change, but the really important part is managing to shrink the anti-vax movement (which, if you look at the data in my other comments, you can see has been a problem since before Trump).

reply
What exactly do you consider "before trump"?

Also, trump, as a representative, represents a large group of people. It's colloquial to refer to political parties by their leaders.

reply
FWIW I think Trump #1 (45) wasn't an anti-vax presidency; it might have been suspicious of healthcare professionals (for the good reason that so many people know opioid epidemic victims) and he was always a bit equivocal around hydroxychloroquine and bleach and "powerful light inside the body" but Trump didn't start to lean antivax until not long after Biden took over.

(And let's be clear: Operation Warp Speed was an enormous success even if Trump is an ignoramus)

Some of that might have been expediency — Biden was catching shit from the antivax and healthcare-skeptical movement and moving in on that would be easy — but Trump has always been vulnerable to being influenced by people and RFK Jr appears to be generally so much more persuasive than bears thinking about, so he was a factor later on.

Trump #2 (47) is fully an anti-vax presidency; even Hegseth backed away from flu vaccine mandates, only to have an outbreak in an Army (IIRC?) facility.

reply
"Evidence" requires citations.
reply
US: https://www.cdc.gov/measles/data-research/index.html

Canada: https://health-infobase.canada.ca/measles-rubella/archive/20...

They have 10% our population and had twice the cases last year (admittedly, we're starting to catch up). But the truth is that there are huge lag times when it comes to measles / antivax. This is a symptom of a problem that started 10-20 years ago.

reply
[flagged]
reply
You are willfully deluding yourself if you believe that. He put an anti-vax idiot as head of HHS. How is that "nothing"?
reply
He was appointed and holds those views because these ideas are now popular... not the other way around.
reply
RFK and his anti-vax ideas are popular only within a small fringe of the American population. Enough to drop herd immunity to the point where we now have to worry about measles again, but it's far from the majority.
reply
I'm aware. The issue is that group, albeit small, is larger than it was.
reply
See my other responses. Do you really think RFK could possibly have had an effect on vaccinations over the last 2 decades in the US OR Canada?

Since you seem very emotionally opposed to Trump and his administration: I also don't like Trump or RFK! However, to solve a problem, you have to find the root cause of the problem, and pointing at the most recent politician you hate will never help anyone.

reply
We can't solve the root cause until we fight our way through trump and his party.
reply
YES.

Do you really think RFK appeared out of the ether? What do you think he's spent the last 2 decades doing?

reply
It has a lot to do with him. He doesn't actually have an opinion on any policy issue. For various political reasons, Trump decided to let RFK dictate public health policy according to his extremely delusional ideas. Yes, there was an antivax movement in this country for many years, just as there has been misogyny, racism, and transphobia. Trump has normalized and supercharged all of these moronic and dangerous ideas.

I have not been following measles in Canada, so I can't address that.

reply
See my other comments; it is not possible for RFK to have had any effect on this outbreak. If everyone getting measles was 2 or under, it could be possible; they aren't.

The reason I bring up Canada is as counterevidence; if it was Trump or RFK'S fault, Canada should be doing just fine. They had twice the cases last year in 1/10 the population. The truth is this is a problem with people believing stupid things, and it's going to take a lot more than Trump going out of office to fix.

reply
RFK has been the person behind the antivax movement for a long time.
reply
> it's going to take a lot more than Trump going out of office to fix

Probably true, but it's nevertheless a necessary condition.

reply
1) Vaccines are not 100% effective. 2) Herd immunity is a thing.
reply
Trump is trying to hang Fauci. That goes in the completely opposite direction of promoting the trust of medical institutions in general society, and it's trust that will get people back to vaccinating themselves and their children.
reply
Fauci case is weird. Fauci did pretty much what every other country was doing. If he did anything wrong it was doing too little too late.
reply
[flagged]
reply
He is amplifying the issue, but you're right, Trump is a symptom of the underlying problem. The problem is that internet gave these idiots a platform to mislead people.

Back in the early 90s this wasn't much of a problem. Childhood vaccine requirements weren't some hot-button topic then. Most people would just get them when faced with the requirement. Most opposition was isolated to people who were otherwise contrarians already.

The difference now is that the internet is full of these isolated contrarians who are now influencing gullible people who don't know who to trust.

reply
Are you blaming communication technology?
reply
Neither phones, nor email, not even usenet had this impact. Social media did.

The problem is not with the technology but those that control it. (Some would probably say, the fact that any one actor controls it in the first place.)

Our only means of communication in modern society are a few advertising platforms in hands of even fewer owners, and the engineers hired to run it are busy engagementmaxxing.

reply
I'm blaming the current social media landscape, which amplifies ideas based on the engagement they create, which has an unintended consequence of amplifying exciting controversial falsehoods over long-held boring truths. We have given the largest megaphones to the biggest village idiots.
reply
Do you think it's also helpful that they see these things being pushed "for profit)
reply
Completely agree! I will add though: this is a symptom of a problem that started 10-20 years ago. There's a lot of lag time between parents not giving their babies vaccines and outbreaks actually happening. You can see ages here.(https://www.cdc.gov/measles/data-research/index.html) 5 and under are only 20% of cases.
reply
> this is a symptom of a problem that started 10-20 years ago.

... and that's right when social media gained majority adoption among US adults.

reply
More like 25+ years ago. In the early 2000s you saw a lot of celebrities pushing vaccine fear because they read some book version of "doctors don't want you to know this one wierd fact" that made the best-seller list or another. I remember people arguing about it in college classes, and I graduated in 2003.
reply
Putting an anti-vax conspiracy theorist in charge of health is not the way to do it.
reply
"has nothing to do with it" is not the same as "is not the cause of". Trump and antivax definitely are related as both are symptoms of the same public strategy that spreads misinformation, polarizes discourse and weaponizes stupidity.
reply
>> Canada is doing even worse then us when it comes to measles

Not in Canada but unfortunately US nonsense spreads globally pretty quickly these days. The amount of Trump support in the UK is both bizarre and surprising. When someone with the worlds largest megaphone lies about vaccines, unfortunately people everywhere listen.

reply
Right, because tapping one of the world's biggest vaccine truthers to run the Department of HHS and then proceed to link autism with vaccines and change the recommended MMR vaccine scheduling for children has absolutely no impact on anyone.

I can't help but feel this is ragebait or a bot.

reply
He was literally spreading FUD about vaccines today. And the measles stuff has got so bad RFK had to mildy backtrack on his previous antivax statements in recent interviews.

From today:

Both Trump and Kennedy made repeated mentions of autism throughout the order signing, emphasizing a scientifically unproven link between vaccines and the condition. Dozens of studies show no link between the two.

“Today we’re proud to officially announce the United States of America’s gold standard childhood vaccination recommendations. That has to do with many subjects including autism in particular,” Trump said at the beginning of the order signing.

“I’ve seen proof of it, where they have a vaccination where it looks like the size of a bottle of soda, poured into a little child’s body and bad things happen in too many cases,” Trump later said on breaking up each shot into an individual medical visit, before adding: “This is an explosion, it’s an epidemic,” in an apparent reference to autism.

reply
>I'm not a trump fan, but the antivax train has nothing to do with him.

Well not nothing. But it predates him and he adopted the movement early in his political career. When I was in high school (2004-8) antivax sentiment was generally associated with liberal Democrats in places like Marin County. This was a favorite retort of conservatives when confronted with their own backwardness on scientific understanding of evolution and climate change. In 2015 Trump began courting the anti-vaccine crowd and the political valence of that flavor of woo-woo nonsense flipped seemingly overnight. It was surreal to see it happen in real time. By 2020 he had lost control of the monster he helped create and the crowd booed him when he said they should get the Covid vaccine.

reply