upvote
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