You'll hear me use the phrase a lot. There ARE antivaxxers. They are the leaders of the antivaccine movement, the bloggers, the conspiracy theorists. These are not the "vaccine-averse," "vaccine curious," or "vaccine concerned." They are antivaxxers. 1/
These days, antivaxxers are the source of much of the misinformation, pseudoscience, quackery, and disinformation that creates the "vaccine-averse" and "vaccine concerned." They are the propagandists. They are the grifters. Many are even true believers. 2/
Trying to persuade an antivaxxer to vaccinate (or even to stop spreading antivax misinformation) is almost impossible. Being antivaccine is part of their identity as much as religion, political beliefs, and other ideologies. Motivated reasoning and confirmation bias rule them. 3/
Perhaps some pro-vaccine letters and emails are in order to these same people refuting Thomas's bad science with respect to vaccines, in particular his most recent awful study with @lifebiomedguru that doesn't show what they claim it shows. 2/ respectfulinsolence.com/2020/11/25/cov…
One common characteristic of science denialists/cranks/conspiracy theorists like antivaxxers and #COVID19 deniers is black-and-white, all-or-nothing thinking when it comes to medical tests or interventions. I'll tell you what I mean, using antivaxxers as a first example. 1/
I've seen it time and time again. Antivaxxers have an attitude that if a vaccine is not 100% safe and 100% effective, it's worthless, rather like that Mike Myers sketch. 2/
So, basically, to antivaxxers, if a vaccine isn't perfectly effective and safe, it's crap, not worth using and to be despised. The concept of balancing large benefits vs. tiny risks never even occurs to them. 3/
Yep. This is exactly what I’ve been saying since the pandemic began. Anyone who’s followed the antivaccine movement can immediately spot the similarities between #COVID19 denial and antivax disinformation.
The only change I’d make is one of emphasis. The antivaccine movement is based at its heart on a conspiracy theory that vaccines are harmful/don’t work but “they” (CDC, medical profession, big pharma, etc.) are “suppressing” that forbidden knowledge.
#COVID19 denial is based on a similar conspiracy theory that COVID is engineered/not that deadly/plot to impose vaccination, but that “they” (CDC, deep state, public health infrastructure, etc.) are “suppressing” that knowledge.
This is why science deniers deny. They want to give the impression that there is an actual legitimate “debate” over scientific conclusions supported by mountains of evidence; e.g., climate change, vaccines, the ineffectiveness of alternative medicine, evolution, etc. 1/
In other areas of science not as well settled (e.g., #COVID19), they seek to undermine current scientific consensus by vastly exaggerating the evidence behind minority and fringe positions and mischaracterizing and minimizing evidence in support of current consensus. 2/
They then add to this technique conspiracy theories to “explain” why the fringe science is dismissed and not taken seriously by relevant experts and fake experts (plus the odd real expert turned fringe) to give the appearance of authority to fringe viewpoints. 3/
Because they're mostly not scientists, and few of the actual scientists are epidemiologists, and because they are spewing disinformation. #barringtondeclaration is propaganda, not science. 1/
#COVID19 deniers and conspiracy theorists are taking a page from a old crank playbook. Does anyone remember "Scientific Dissent from Darwinism" and "Physicians and Surgeons Who Dissent from Darwinism"? These were similar "declarations" against evolution and for creationism. 2/
Or what about the open letter by the "Group for the Scientific Reappraisal of the HIV-AIDS Hypothesis" calling for a "thorough reappraisal of the existing evidence for and against this hypothesis [HIV-AIDS] be conducted by a suitable independent group"? 3/ sidasante.com/contacts/group…