Disbelief regarding vaccines (was: US launches strikes against Venezuela...)

[UAH]

Because politics, that's why. I find it difficult to believe that anybody in D.C. actually cared about the crack epidemic in L.A. or the meth epidemic in rural America. The people dying from this likely weren't voting anyway.

The tribal tendencies that evolution has dropped into our laps dictate that we MUST have an enemy. The unifying principle of every society is war. War for resources. War for pride. War against drugs. There's a reason why we use this descriptor (war) for handling things we don't like and we very well can't declare war on a bunch of pitiable users.

I listened to a summary of the Manhatten Institute Study from December 2025 this morning. It is very instructive to view particularly the percentage of new entrants believe in the numerous conspiracy theories put forth. https://manhattan.institute/article...publican-coalition-and-the-minorities-of-maga

Quite a lot of information to digest.

On specific theories:

• The 2020 election: Just over half of the Current GOP (51%) believes that the 2020 U.S. presidential election was fraudulent, while 41% say that view is probably or definitely false. Among New Entrant Republicans, support for this belief rises to 60%.
• Vaccines and autism: One in three in the Current GOP (33%) believe that childhood vaccines cause autism. This view is more common among college graduates (42%) than non-graduates (29%), and among New Entrant Republicans (47%).
• 9/11 conspiracies: Four in ten in the Current GOP (41%) believe that the 9/11 attacks were likely orchestrated or permitted by U.S. government actors. Belief is highest among men (48%), college graduates (51%), Republicans under 50 (53%, compared with 34% of those over 50), and New Entrant Republicans (53%). Among black GOP voters the figure is 58%, and among Hispanic GOP voters, 56%.
• Holocaust denial or minimization:Nearly four in ten in the Current GOP (37%) believe the Holocaust was greatly exaggerated or did not happen as historians describe. Younger men are especially likely to hold this view (54% of men under 50 vs. 39% of women under 50). Among men over 50, 41% agree, compared with 18% of women over 50. Racial divides are particularly striking:
  • 77% of Hispanic GOP voters
  • 30% of white GOP voters
  • 66% of black GOP voters
• Moon landing: A similarly sized chunk of the Current GOP (36%) believes that the Apollo 11 moon landing was faked by NASA. Again, younger men are more likely to hold this view (51% of men under 50 vs. 38% of women under 50). There are stark racial divides: while only 31% of white GOP voters believe the conspiracy, this rises to 59% among Hispanic Republicans and 63% among black Republicans.

 

[jthomas666]

Do they have the stats for Democrats?

 

[selmaborntidefan]

Do they have the stats for Democrats?

That's a good question, in part because 9/11 inside job and Holocaust denial (in particular) are hardly sole properties of the right. The others not so much.

One of my surprises through the years was learning the rampant anti-Semitism among African-Americans in the US, even Christians with a purported Jewish Savior. (I was never surprised with white crackers being this way because it made sense. They hate anyone who isn't a WASP male. Although there, too, "you have a Jewish Savior but you hate Jews" has never made a damn bit of sense to me).

 

[UAH]

Do they have the stats for Democrats?

There is some Democratic information contained in the report but The Manhatten Institute is a strongly leaning Republican Organization.

 

[CrimsonJazz]

I listened to a summary of the Manhatten Institute Study from December 2025 this morning. It is very instructive to view particularly the percentage of new entrants believe in the numerous conspiracy theories put forth. https://manhattan.institute/article...publican-coalition-and-the-minorities-of-maga

Quite a lot of information to digest.

On specific theories:

• The 2020 election: Just over half of the Current GOP (51%) believes that the 2020 U.S. presidential election was fraudulent, while 41% say that view is probably or definitely false. Among New Entrant Republicans, support for this belief rises to 60%.
• Vaccines and autism: One in three in the Current GOP (33%) believe that childhood vaccines cause autism. This view is more common among college graduates (42%) than non-graduates (29%), and among New Entrant Republicans (47%).
• 9/11 conspiracies: Four in ten in the Current GOP (41%) believe that the 9/11 attacks were likely orchestrated or permitted by U.S. government actors. Belief is highest among men (48%), college graduates (51%), Republicans under 50 (53%, compared with 34% of those over 50), and New Entrant Republicans (53%). Among black GOP voters the figure is 58%, and among Hispanic GOP voters, 56%.
• Holocaust denial or minimization:Nearly four in ten in the Current GOP (37%) believe the Holocaust was greatly exaggerated or did not happen as historians describe. Younger men are especially likely to hold this view (54% of men under 50 vs. 39% of women under 50). Among men over 50, 41% agree, compared with 18% of women over 50. Racial divides are particularly striking:
  • 77% of Hispanic GOP voters
  • 30% of white GOP voters
  • 66% of black GOP voters
• Moon landing: A similarly sized chunk of the Current GOP (36%) believes that the Apollo 11 moon landing was faked by NASA. Again, younger men are more likely to hold this view (51% of men under 50 vs. 38% of women under 50). There are stark racial divides: while only 31% of white GOP voters believe the conspiracy, this rises to 59% among Hispanic Republicans and 63% among black Republicans.

This is interesting data, but I must admit, I'm confused about what this has to do with the post you quoted and responded to.

 

[CrimsonNagus]

Why is it that college-educated people believe this nonsense more? That is probably the most surprising part of UAH's post. I could almost understand the undereducated falling for this stuff, but it is almost like a college education destroys one's common sense.

 

[arthurdawg]

Why is it that college-educated people believe this nonsense more? That is probably the most surprising part of UAH's post. I could almost understand the undereducated falling for this stuff, but it is almost like a college education destroys one's common sense.

The internet... They do their "own research" and convince themselves. I just had a conversation about COVID with a nurse manager for a large group we work with... She has some completely nutty ideas that contravene extensive published data.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

The internet... They do their "own research" and convince themselves. I just had a conversation about COVID with a nurse manager for a large group we work with... She has some completely nutty ideas that contravene extensive published data.

They've had four pediatric deaths in Massachusetts from influenza, and the bumbletwits in comment sections of Facebook are all, "The article doesn't say if they were vaccinated."

Are they any less dead?

You see, if they weren't vaccinated, it's because of illegal aliens, but if they WERE vaccinated, it's because of "the jab."


As a musician myself, I use this one: ever notice how many people think they're supposed to be superstar singers....but if you asked them to give a voice lesson to someone else, pretty much none of them considers that worth their time or something they can do?

These people "doing research" couldn't teach an elementary science class, but they think they've mastered the intricacies of infectious disease and immunology.

It would be fine if their medical Darwinism ONLY HURT THE ONES WHO ARE STUPID. But they either kill their kids or somebody else's.

 

[jthomas666]

Why is it that college-educated people believe this nonsense more? That is probably the most surprising part of UAH's post. I could almost understand the undereducated falling for this stuff, but it is almost like a college education Fox News destroys one's common sense.

fify

 

[arthurdawg]

They've had four pediatric deaths in Massachusetts from influenza, and the bumbletwits in comment sections of Facebook are all, "The article doesn't say if they were vaccinated."

Are they any less dead?

You see, if they weren't vaccinated, it's because of illegal aliens, but if they WERE vaccinated, it's because of "the jab."


As a musician myself, I use this one: ever notice how many people think they're supposed to be superstar singers....but if you asked them to give a voice lesson to someone else, pretty much none of them considers that worth their time or something they can do?

These people "doing research" couldn't teach an elementary science class, but they think they've mastered the intricacies of infectious disease and immunology.

It would be fine if their medical Darwinism ONLY HURT THE ONES WHO ARE STUPID. But they either kill their kids or somebody else's.

I mean, I don't consider myself an expert on vaccines. I did spend my senior year in college taking an intensive year long immunology course where we made our own monoclonal antibodies and helped oversee a series of melanoma vaccination trials as a fellow. And I work with immunologically based drugs pretty much every day and have read a fair amount about the field.

But as I told one guy who proceeded to lecture me about vaccines after hearing that, I do agree that a business degree and internet memes place one far above my skill level!

 

[mdb-tpet]

I mean, I don't consider myself an expert on vaccines. I did spend my senior year in college taking an intensive year long immunology course where we made our own monoclonal antibodies and helped oversee a series of melanoma vaccination trials as a fellow. And I work with immunologically based drugs pretty much every day and have read a fair amount about the field.

But as I told one guy who proceeded to lecture me about vaccines after hearing that, I do agree that a business degree and internet memes place one far above my skill level!

As a lay person, I simply choose to believe the tens of thousands of medical and research experts that have spent decades creating a herd vaccine model that has eliminated almost all major communicable diseases so much that we have people questioning the need for these vaccines. It's not a coincidence that the names of all of the diseases (Polio, Mumps, Measles, Diphtheria, Pertussis, Tetanus, etc.) we vaccinate for are rarely seen in large numbers or outbreaks, save for the now returning measles and the flu (which is clearly difficult to stop). But misinformation groups have seized on the rarity of these diseases now and used our limited knowledge to great effect to damage the reputation of these life-saving and health improving medicines.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I mean, I don't consider myself an expert on vaccines. I did spend my senior year in college taking an intensive year long immunology course where we made our own monoclonal antibodies and helped oversee a series of melanoma vaccination trials as a fellow. And I work with immunologically based drugs pretty much every day and have read a fair amount about the field.

But as I told one guy who proceeded to lecture me about vaccines after hearing that, I do agree that a business degree and internet memes place one far above my skill level!

I had the privilege of studying New Testament Greek under perhaps the best American scholar (in Greek) of our modern generation, Dan Wallace at Dallas Seminary. He was my thesis advisor as well, and this is a guy who WROTE THE TEXTBOOK. And if you've read his textbook - about 800 pages of text - you find that although Wallace himself is an evangelical, in many cases he sides against traditional evangelical interpretations of the GREEK of texts (the old "in the Greek it really means this thing that no Bible translation ever said"). He made all of us students do the same thing - indeed, he constantly challenged us to write our class papers taking the OPPOSITE viewpoint of the one we held in order to become better acquainted with opposing viewpoints.

After I'd taken three semesters of Greek, I ran into him one day and my grades were pretty good though not what I was used to making in most other subjects. He asked me what I thought so far, and I said, "I know just enough to be dangerous." I found it thoroughly frustrating. He didn't even break his often scholarly look but said, "The fact you know that is what's important."


When I was in PA school, I had more background in Immunology than any other student in our class. When we took our solitary Immunology exam, I scored a 72 (one of the lowest in the class) and the girl behind me who knew NOTHING about the subject and blindly guessed - and assumed she'd failed - got the highest grade in the class with a 98. My actual knowledge of the subject was light years ahead of her, something even she would admit.


But again...I knew enough about how immunology really works (and folks, I'm NO expert at all on it) to double and triple question and overthink the problem, and she knew so little she just went with what sounded right.

I have people who cannot even define what the differences are between humoral and cell-mediated immunity who think they've "done research" because they saw a You Tube video or cribbed arguments from an equally ignorant clown and combined them.





Think about this: I can take one tube of your blood (a CBC), run it through an instrument to get results and look at a slide under a microscope and HAVE A PRETTY GOOD but NOT INFALLIBLE idea of what is wrong with anyone who is sick. And yet I'm supposed to take seriously people who if I sat them in front of a microscope and showed them a slide do not even know the names of the cells much less anything else.

 

[selmaborntidefan]

I mean, I don't consider myself an expert on vaccines.

I'm a baseball fan.

For the life of me, one question that has puzzled me for 40 years is, "Why did Tommy Lasorda have his closer pitch to the one guy on the St Louis Cardinals (Jack Clark) capable of flipping the game with one swing of the bat - with the season on the line in 1985?"

I've seen managers make bad decisions or even good ones that didn't work out, but that particular one (and I was for the Cardinals and loathe the Dodgers) has always been one that I never could grasp. First base was open (runners on 2nd and 3rd, two outs), and the on-deck hitter (Andy Van Slyke) was hitting .100 (1 for 10) for the series. The only down side is that Van Slyke batted lefty and Niedenfuer was a righty.

Except:
- Andy Van Slyke in his career (to that point) was 3-for-5 against the Dodger pitcher (Tom Niedenfuer) with a home run, 3 RBIs, and a walk.
- Jack Clark in his career (to that point) was 4-for-17 with 4 strikeouts and one RBI
- in the 7th inning, Lasorda had intentionally walked Tom Herr to allow Niedenfuer to face Clark - and he struck out the big slugger with the go-ahead run on base and only one out
- had Van Slyke batted, Lasorda would have brought in Jerry Reuss and Herzog would have countered with Mike Jorgensen. In his career, Jorgensen was 3-for-11 against Reuss, and he was 37 years old, too.

In other words, Lasorda opted to have his pitcher face the guy with the lowest batting average of the 3 possibilities after all the moves occurred, the pitcher who had just struck out said slugger his last time up.

Niedenfuer released the ball at the wrong point and instead of moving outside, it went right over the middle of the plate and Clark hit a pennant-winning home run into the next county. Everyone butchered Tommy, although as he said, "Second guessers needed two guesses to get it right; I only get one guess."


Tommy Lasorda won 1599 big league games as a manager (.526) and two World Series. His team finished in first place six times in 12 years and one game out two other times. He had memory from games and information tucked away in computers as they existed in 1985.


Me?
I was just a 16-year-old sitting in my living room who didn't understand the infield fly rule.

But sure, Tommy should have listened to me!!!