Those of you who are regulars here know them well, but I want to make sure those of you are new know about Science Mom and Catherina.
Although it would seem that with the frequency with which their names appear on these posts that they work for this site, they actually have no official affiliation with myself or this site. Although much of their scientific information seems to be accurate, I do not trust their opinions, their conclusions, or their advice. So, follow their advice are you own, and your children's, risk.
Many of us don't appreciate the way they redicule and demean anyone who is anti-vaccine. Most of us who are pro-vaccine, such as myself, are happy to offer advice or opinions to those who are not pro-vaccine, but we manage to do so in a respectful way. Because SM and Catherina don't seem able to do this, I suggest you simply ignore their posts and pretend they aren't there.
If you don't agree with them, don't bother trying to tell them so, no matter how solid you think your science is. Their science is better, or so they would think. I wouldn't waste your time arguing with them anymore, unless you enjoy that sort of thing - then, by all means, go for it.
There are rumors that SM and Cath are "secret agents" for vaccine manufacturers, planted here to combat my "anti-vaccine" advice. Although I wouldn't put it past any company to do just that (makes perfect sense - have a couple of "scientific" parents work the blogs and posts instead of doctors or professionals - some parents would listen more to another parent), I have no evidence that such is the case. SM and Catherina claim they spend hours on this site each week for almost two years now out of the goodness of their hearts. I would love to believe that, but I would also expect such good-hearted people to come across good-heartedly in their posts toward people who question vaccines. That clearly is NOT the case, so that makes me question what type of people they really are.
Anyway, just wanted to post this warning to any newcomers. I'm just going to pretend they aren't there and answer everyone's questions as usual. I'm sure ignoring them isn't going to make them go away, but they are SO NOT WORTH MY TIME anymore.
Where to begin? This infantile screed put forth by Dr. Bob smacks of anti-vax rhetoric, replete with accusations of "secret agents for vaccine manufacturers". How does one recognise that our scientific information is accurate but doesn't agree with it? What does that say of his 'scientific information'? Right, it's sorely lacking in every facet of his information and vaccine recommendations. A comprehensive review of this in his Vaccine Book: Making the Right Decision for Your Child a can be found on Science-Based Medicine.
While we are certainly thankful that he made it perfectly clear that we are not affiliated with him or his site, we can't help but laugh at the ad hominem attacks and his call for ignoring us, particularly with the caveat that our science is better. There aren't numerous branches of science; there are numerous disciplines of course, but all reside under the rubric of science and follow the scientific method. There aren't equally valid opinions or points of view; the whole point of science is to test hypotheses in an objective and repeatable manner, to minimise bias and allow us to determine if what we observe is real or not. This really shouldn't be difficult to understand, yet self-proclaimed experts like Dr. Bob continue to insist that there is somehow 'other science'. Yes there is, it's called pseudo-science and is not accepted by the scientific and medical communities for a very good reason. This does not make him or others like him Brave Maverick Doctors or open-minded; quite the contrary in fact given the very limited scope of what their pseudo-science parameters are.
We have nothing personal against Dr. Bob; we don't know him personally and given his chosen profession, we would certainly think that he is probably a nice man. But that is irrelevant really, for we are more interested in the bad science he and others like him espouse and the blatant misinformation they disseminate that put children in danger.
Thanks for doing this, ladies .. keep up the great work! I try to "educate" fellow moms about science and pseudo-science (mainly concerning the "trinity" of vaccines, homeopathy and eastern medicine, eg. acupuncture), but usually they just don't want to know and thus don't really listen! Frustrating!
ReplyDelete"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain..."
ReplyDeleteWhen someone writes of opponents that they "aren't worth the time" (in all caps, no less), savvier readers understand that the writer knows he has lost the debate.
Bravi for forcing Sears to concede, however obliquely and ungracefully.
Hello ladies! I found here through Orac and as a mom and a scientist I just want to say that You are doing a great job! I'll propably save a massive amount of time reading your blog, as I have been "challenged" to look into "both sides" of this vaccine "controversy" and boy have I looked ;-).
ReplyDeleteI'll be back!
You guys need to get a life. Of course you have personal issues with Dr Bob. Don't lie to yourselves.
ReplyDeleteYou all would have much more credibility and integrity if you just did your own thing and got off this personal vendetta you have with Dr Sears. It's so demeaning to you both.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your concern, Anon, that is very sweet.
ReplyDeleteBack to "my life".
It seems perfectly impersonal. He's a doctor with a lot of influence spewing misinformation and half-truths designed to scare people -- or at the very least not allay any of the fears he could. Anyone with a modicum of reading comprehension could see that SM and Cat are all about the facts.
ReplyDeleteHm. I stopped by the Dr. Sears board, this morning (for the first time in a while), and saw the most recent "ignore the mean people" post. Skimmed back through the previous salvos (including the one you're discussing here), and I doubt my blood pressure will ever recover.
ReplyDeleteSo I'm swinging through here to tell you both thanks, and now I'm going to go away again. =)
-C
You all would have much more credibility and integrity if you just did your own thing and got off this personal vendetta you have with Dr Sears. It's so demeaning to you both.
ReplyDeleteIt's Dr. Bob's fault, he shouldn't give us so much material to work with.
You guys need to get a life. Of course you have personal issues with Dr Bob. Don't lie to yourselves.
Somehow I don't think that it is we that have personal issues with him:
DISCLAIMER ABOUT NON-DR. BOB ANSWERS by Dr. Bob - posted on 9/10/2009
Just a friendly reminder to new visitors. Some people on this site like to frequently answer questions, and that is fine. Anyone is welcome to ask them questions. I would just like to make it clear that I have no idea who these people are or what their credentials are, or what qualifies them to answer questions. So, take their advice at your own, and your child's, risk. And if any of their snotty and condescending remarks bother anyone who even thinks about being anti-vaccine, I apologize on their behalf.
This is from his Vaccine Discussion Forum
and I strongly suspect that he is playing the 'meanie' card on behalf of himself for our criticisms of his monumental blunders.
Oy vey. As someone that follows the same blogs that you two do, and even those you despise, it's painfully obvious that your intent is disingenuous.
ReplyDeleteAre you meaning to inform those you feel mislead, or trying to flatter those that likely can't fit through most doorways due to the size of their own heads?
I'm rather disappointed (I dare say I'm not alone). As someone that feels you have plenty to contribute to this discussion (obviously), and that you both have reasonable qualities (and closet S&Ders by the way... that's okay, I won't tell) - this approach is disappointing. I'm sure it doesn't matter to you though as long as you get link love from Orac.
Carry on.
Nice example of passive aggressive anon. And we will carry on, exposing the misinformation disseminated by self-proclaimed experts and breaking down vaccine issues into a more easily-digestible manner. Just like anything else on the internet, take what you want and leave the rest but there is no way we are going to please everyone.
ReplyDeleteI'm about as pro-vaccine as they come and agree with you guys about science v. pseudo-science. But I feel compelled to say that Dr. Sears and co. have valid points too about many issues including vaccinations. In this country there are militant anti-vacc people spewing frightening and incorrect information. There are pro-vaccine people like myself who know for sure that vaccines in most of their forms are good. And there are the masses in the middle who really don't have time to know what to believe. Dr. Sears is good for those people, to read other viewpoints in a calm and trusted environment, then do as they wish. Science Mom and Catherina, your vitriol toward Dr. Sears makes you look like very angry people, which in turn makes me question YOUR viewpoints, YOUR science, rather than the viewpoints put forth on Ask Dr. Sears. You make YOURSELF look like quacks by spending so much time over there and trying to refute every single point anyone makes (whether or not those points have merit).
ReplyDeleteAs a pro-vaccine mom, and a business person, and a (I'd like to think) sane adult, let me give you this advice: back off Dr. Sears and try to drum up readers some other way. You will do more for our cause if you try for less anger and more calm. It really does seem as though you are trying to set yourselves up as 'foes of Dr. Sears' instead of 'pro-vacc'.
I have to agree with J above that the bickering doesn't help the credibility of either party.
ReplyDeleteThat being said, however, I think I would have an easier time swallowing "Dr. Bob"'s advice if he could actually spell or write correct English.
I came here from the Dr. Sears site, and I thought I would come over here to see what your blog is all about. This is the first post I read, and I wanted to tactfully say that your responses on that forum do not cause readers to consider your viewpoints to be very valid when you share them by using what I'd call "fighting words." These would include such words as "infantile," "quack," "crackpot," "preposterous," nonsense," and the list goes on. People tend to read these words as attacks. When you say things to people that come across as sarcastic, like asking people, "So what's your point?" and by saying things such as this: "Welcome back, Bob - was there anything you actually wanted to blog about here? There is no real info in your write up, just your "jesting" (and a lot of "duh, I don't knows)..." - that really makes you come across as being angry and uncharitable, as do your implications that people are irresponsible by posting their own views and experiences ("There are undoubtedly extenuating circumstances here which you would be much more responsible posting"). I realize you have a passion for your viewpoints - why not try to express these views in a more charitable and gentle-spirited manner? It can be difficult when one is passionate about her beliefs, but really, all the readers on the Dr. Sears site are just trying to do what is best for their children and are searching for answers, and some of your word choices tend to put people on the defensive instead of helping them in their decision-making processes. Based on the comments above, it would seem that your word choices are at times off-putting to those on both sides of the debate.
ReplyDeleteI hope these words are received in the respectful spirit in which they were intended.
J, I appreciate your thoughtful comments and I would like to address this specifically:
ReplyDeleteBut I feel compelled to say that Dr. Sears and co. have valid points too about many issues including vaccinations.
snip
And there are the masses in the middle who really don't have time to know what to believe. Dr. Sears is good for those people, to read other viewpoints in a calm and trusted environment, then do as they wish.
Whatever valid points Dr. Sears makes, we agree with and don't comment on them. As for the undecided masses, well, that's where he fails. His fence-sitting does nothing to alleviate the parental worries that accompany vaccination. He perpetuates these myths and offers a paternalistic pat-on-the-head and telling people that everything will be all right if they just buy his book and listen to him. Ignoring the overwhelming evidence to the contrary for many of his recommendations. So tell me, how is this good for anyone?
Science Mom and Catherina, your vitriol toward Dr. Sears makes you look like very angry people, which in turn makes me question YOUR viewpoints, YOUR science, rather than the viewpoints put forth on Ask Dr. Sears. You make YOURSELF look like quacks by spending so much time over there and trying to refute every single point anyone makes (whether or not those points have merit).
Ah, we post about the science that he uses to justify his statements, that's about as impersonal as it gets. And we have discussed the science in all but our last entry and that was Dr. Bob spewing vitriol at us.
It is not OUR science; it's just THE science and you can either critique/comment on our own criticisms of the pseudo-science or complain about our perceived attack on the source. He holds himself out as a 'vaccine researcher' (which is a mystery since I have never read a single study authored by him) so he has to expect to be critically examined, just as we hope our posts are. So like it or not, there are people behind the pseudo-science and they will invariably be discussed.
Erin, Yes, you were very respectful and it's much appreciated. I will direct you to my comments to J to, hopefully, address some of your concerns. Additionally, if you look at our past entries then you will see that we have put a lot of thought and work into breaking down several studies, many at Dr. Bob's readers' requests. One thing that I can't quite understand is how it seems to be perfectly acceptable for him to launch an absurd, completely unfounded ad hominem attack upon us but we are somehow held to a different standard when we respond.
ReplyDeleteAgain, thanks for the comments.
I vaccinate my kids, etc, but I am not so fully trusting of the drug companies to think that there might be another agenda in the manufacturing of vaccines. Big Medicine is like a lot of industries in America (Food, etc) where profit is King. I don't think we could really argue that is untrue, correct? Could we look at studies (like you have done) on both sides of the issue and not just react emotionally to one another? Maybe not all vaccines are so great. Maybe some (I said some :)) are just made in hopes of making a tidy profit. Maybe some (and I believe this) are really life-savers.
ReplyDeleteThank you for investigating certain studies, etc. I think it is important to check out the science behind all of these issues. But let's also take in all with a grain of sand and realize that even data can be kept from the public because the powers that be deem it "necessary". And no, I am not a conspiracy gal! Just a mom & artist who is trying to figure out this stuff.
SO, maybe some even handedness on all sides could help illuminate the truth (with a lowercase t) and we can start concentrating on the kiddos health & happiness.
thanks for reading!
Alison F.
SM: Nice example of passive aggressive anon.
ReplyDeleteInteresting observation.
I want you to carry on and I think you both have an plenty to contribute to this debate. A scathing approach simply doesn't suit you, and your reach would be farther if you reconsidered this mindset.
You might begin by extending an olive branch to those who refuse the same vaccines that you do.
I want you to carry on and I think you both have an plenty to contribute to this debate. A scathing approach simply doesn't suit you, and your reach would be farther if you reconsidered this mindset.
ReplyDeleteSee, now I thought I was mocking and that Dr. Bob was scathing. Oh well.
You might begin by extending an olive branch to those who refuse the same vaccines that you do.
You seem to have a rather unhealthy obsession with what I do or don't do with regards to vaccines. No olive branch is necessary, I don't give people a hard time for not vaccinating. I'm all about the misinformation used for non-evidence-based decisions.
Obsession? A bit of self flattery never hurts I guess. I simply know enough about you from other online places, to know that you and Catherina both have taken a vaccine-critical stance. You wouldn't know that to happen about on here watching *your* unhealthy obsession about Dr. Bob.
ReplyDeleteIf you're trying to correct the misinformation you feel is being used for bad decisions, condescending your audience probably isn't the best approach. I think there are enough comments above to suggest that you might have a biased opinion of your tone. I don't like misinformation either, and there's plenty to be found on every side of this issue.
Obsession? A bit of self flattery never hurts I guess. I simply know enough about you from other online places, to know that you and Catherina both have taken a vaccine-critical stance. You wouldn't know that to happen about on here watching *your* unhealthy obsession about Dr. Bob.
ReplyDeleteYes, it's an obsession or a warped bid for some attention by you as some sort of 'insider' with 'secret' information on us that we have conveniently posted out in the open.
If you're trying to correct the misinformation you feel is being used for bad decisions, condescending your audience probably isn't the best approach. I think there are enough comments above to suggest that you might have a biased opinion of your tone. I don't like misinformation either, and there's plenty to be found on every side of this issue.
Then please show us specific examples of where our information is even remotely biased (please note where you have said that we have been vaccine critical) instead of bleating about how meeeeean we are. Dr. Bob has made himself fair game, you might want to learn to deal with that.
Anger is absolutely a justified response to a celebrity doctor using his influence to spread foolish misinformation and unethical advice about pediatric health care. I'm well aware of the American propensity to think the correct position is take the middle ground between two opposing factions, but science is not a game of relative truth.
ReplyDeleteIf you believe SM and Catherina are unfair to Dr. Bob on any issue of *substance*, feel free to raise it. But how tiresome to pretend that a sharp tongue and a sharp wit invalidates the speaker. These disputes are about science, not personality, and if you're drawn to the latter at the expense of the former, you surely haven't the analytical capacity to judge who is and isn't a quack in the first place.
I'm pretty sure Delenda said it all. SM thank you for trying to bring science back to the general public. As someone who teaches science it kills me to hear people talk about Dr. Sears, including family member who live by his book...ohh it drives me batty! Thanks for being so refreshing.
ReplyDeleteTo be fair to Dr. Bob, here is the disclaimer re: Science Mom/Catherina, in its entirety. Nowhere do I read wherein he states he feels they are 'secret agents.'
ReplyDeleteSubject: Disclaimer and warning about Catherina and Science Mom
Thank you for being a part of our vaccine forum. I appreciate your questions and comments. Please be aware that the only person officially affiliated with the forum is Dr. Bob Sears (usually posts as just "Dr. Bob"). There are two people on this site who have been unofficially involved since the beginning - Science Mom and Catherina. Please be aware of several things:
1. These two have absolutely no official affiliation with this website. I have no idea who they are or what their credentials are.
2. In the vast majority of circumstances, I DISAGREE with the advice they choose to give. So, take their advice with a few grains of salt. Having said that, they do happen to give accurate medical information when it comes to diseases. You can generally trust that info. But when it comes to things like "what should I do about a particular vaccine, vaccines in general, alternative vaccine approaches, and worries about vaccine side effects," they often give advice that I disagree with.
3. I have stopped reading info posted by SM and Cath because it's just too annoying to read. Unless you ask them a direct question yourself, I suggest you do the same (unless you like debates that go around in circles).
4. It is my opinion that SM and Cath are being paid to play an active and daily role by one or more companies that have a financial interest in the success of vaccines. I have no direct evidence of this. But given then way they treat most people who doubt or question vaccines, I just can't believe that they would spend hours each day, almost every day, for THREE YEARS answering questions out of the goodness of their hearts.
5. I trust the judgement of the site administrator (a personal friend of mine) who will be routinely deleting unnecessary and unproductive posts.
6. As a final, and slightly unrelated note, my primary role here is to answer specific questions to help guide you in your understanding and decisions. As a full-time practicing pediatrician, husband, and father of three, I don't have extra time to engage in online discussions or debates. So you will rarely see me jump into such.
Thank you for your participation. I look forward to answering your questions.
Dr. Bob
Anon, your comment got caught in the spam filter and I just saw it. My apologies and I will be vigilant about checking that from now on. Your comment is his "new" disclaimer. One, I suspect, he wrote after he was so roundly mocked by the first. I have a link to it along with the full text. He really did say he suspected we were "secret agents".
ReplyDelete