Tag Archives: critical thinking

Weekend sendoff: TMI?

VaccineWhat an interesting week for me. I said that I would talk about Monday’s post from a more personal viewpoint today, and based on the comments on that post (about which more in a bit), I’d like to disclose my personal experience with HPV, cervical cancer, and critical thinking.

I’m one of those women who might well have benefited from the Gardasil vaccine. My HPV infection was not short-lived, and was associated with cervical cancer. After my initial abnormal Pap smear, I underwent numerous colposcopies and biopsies over the course of a year. I finally developed cancerous cells, and had to undergo LEEP to get rid of them. This was not due to a weak immune system. During my bout with active Graves’, I developed a chronically high white blood cell count, which persists to this day; additionally, findings show that people with CFS have upregulated immune systems. In other words, despite my illness, my immune system actually works better than most people’s — but my HPV strain was stronger. I acquired it in a monogamous relationship, after we’d gotten tested for STDs. My partner, who is now my husband, was told by two male doctors that those bumps on his penis weren’t anything to worry about, and by one male urologist that he’d already given me HPV so there was nothing more to do. (A female nurse practitioner, on the other hand, actually bothered to treat him.)

So does my personal experience invalidate my position on HPV vaccination? Yes, it would if I’d reacted to it the way the crazies do, and said “This is my personal experience, therefore I am convinced, and I’ll make up the science if I have to in order to convince everyone else.” During the course of my treatment, Gardasil was being evaluated by the FDA. Naturally I was very interested to hear about this, even though I was not a candidate for it. I read about it and discussed it with doctors whom I respect. I’ve continued to read about it to this day. I might not have had the most skeptical viewpoint at the time, but I do now, and my position still hasn’t changed: If I had a child, I would want to have him or her vaccinated against HPV. I understand the problem better than many because of my experience, but it’s the (valid) science that has made up my mind. If that science were eventually to show different findings, then I would investigate again and possibly re-evaluate my position.

One way it’s easy to tell that someone is trolling rather than actually presenting ideas for discussion is that he will bring up unrelated issues, and then accuse you of evading those issues when you choose not to take the bait. I do not pretend to be any kind of expert in the medical or biological sciences. I will never write a blog post explaining the medicine behind – well, anything, including my own conditions, except as far as my layperson’s understanding goes. My understanding is pretty good, if I may say so, but still, I am not a biological scientist or a science writer.

In my post on Monday, I wrote about the deceit and the delusion that are hallmarks of the conspiracy theorist, and in the comments, I was rewarded with several excellent examples of this. First, an antivax conspiracy theorist linked to various sites that hold no authority whatsoever, one of which provided a perfect primer for how misinformation is invented and disseminated. That person further attempted to press me into a debate on vaccinations. Why on earth would I want to debate someone who has already proven that he will stoop to lying to make his point? Also, the antivax looneybait is tempting, but tired, and has been disproven often and well enough by much more qualified people, that it’s a waste of time for me to regurgitate that proof at the whim of someone whose mind is already made up. My point was and still is the lack of and disrespect for critical thinking that lead to conspiracy theories endangering public health.

Meanwhile, Heidi’s comments became a perfect example of Poe’s Law, which was coined on a Christian discussion forum and goes like this:

Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won’t mistake for the real thing.

Heidi is actually an awesome skeptic gal whose comment nicely illustrated how Poe’s Law can apply to many extremist points of view, not just religious. Smart people commented either here or privately to me elsewhere, conveying their distaste with Heidi and/or her statements. And rightly so! I don’t blame the people who bought it: of course anyone who took that position for real should be vilified. That it was plausible her absolutely ridiculous point of view could be for real confirms that there are, in fact, beliefs out there that are just as fucking crazy, or far more so. And what does it say about a movement that someone who allegedly holds such a repugnant opinion is so easily believed to be an adherent?

One last, “non-partisan” thought on this. My little blog here dreams of aspiring to one day being a blip on the landscape. I love working on it and I truly appreciate every single person reading this right now, even those who disagree with me, but you are a…let’s be kind and call it an “exclusive” bunch. The fact that even I couldn’t write a piddling post of this nature without attracting a (proportional) amount of disagreement is quite the reminder to me of just how widespread and rancorous this debate has become. I don’t think I would have gotten the same kind of comments if I’d gone after Holocaust deniers or even the 9/11 wackadoos.

Well, I’ve had a lot of fun and also learned a lot. I feel like I should send you off with something relevant, so here is a Bad Astronomer post with a short talk by Dr. Joseph Albietz on the subject of vaccination. But it’s Friday, so here’s also something totally irrelevant: a musical clip from the new Sherlock Holmes movie. Or something.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

Compassion only goes so far

TinFoilHatAreaSkeptics, in some circles, have a reputation for being cold and devoid of emotion, with a bleak view of the world as seen only though the sterile lens of science.

Well, bullshit, obviously. You can’t generalize a group like that, and even if you could, it doesn’t take a whole lot of reading in skeptical blogs and literature to see plenty of humor, passion, and wonder going hand-in-hand with inquiry.

But the stereotype is what people like the anti-vaccination proponents would like you to think. Their message goes further when “the opposition” — also known as medical science — is painted as heartless, solely profit-driven, and without a thought for, who else, the children. (This argument of course falls flat when you consider how many children, or entire communities of children, are harmed when parents decide not to vaccinate.)

In an earlier post, I wrote about how even as I was being targeted by a bottom-feeding snake-oil salesman, I could understand what had driven him to that point. As unpopular as it may be for a skeptic, I’ve tried to do the same thing when it comes to antivaxxers. By this don’t misunderstand that I’m talking about supporting their position. Rather, I think it’s worth it to disprove the stereotype and look at the debate from an emotional standpoint.

Reading through the stories of parents whose children became ill or died from either a proven or imagined reaction to a vaccine, I find it hard to be entirely unsympathetic. When this happens to a child, be it an actual side effect or a sad coincidence, I can only imagine how devastating it must be. I understand that the parents must desperately want someone or something to blame.

Combine this impotent anger and grief with the ease of finding antivax networks all over the Internet, though, and some parents get steered off course. They must have understood once that vaccinations benefit both their own child and the entire community, or they wouldn’t have done it in the first place. But when something happens to their child, suddenly all their knowledge about how many lives are saved through vaccination vanishes. Instead, they are provided with validation that they can blame something: the vaccine. This emotional validation is supported by bad, cherry-picked science, and sometimes by the unfortunate cachet of people like antivaxxer Jenny McCarthy. To me this is no different from the chronically ill person who gratefully grasps at the snake oil, because it’s being sold by someone with whom they share a terrible experience and who finally has an answer and a scapegoat for them. It’s not an excuse for poor critical thinking, but it is a reason.

Then there’s the sad case of Natalie Morton, who died on September 28 shortly after being vaccinated against HPV with the drug Cervarix. Antivax networks picked up this story and ran with it, naturally. But then it turned out that she was seriously ill with a tumor at the time she was vaccinated. And here is where my compassion for the antivaxxers vanished. Any critically thinking (or even just “thinking”) person would recognize that Natalie’s death, while tragic, doesn’t make a case for ceasing all vaccinations, due to her condition.

Instead they went all conspiracy theory.

I can’t hold any respect for people who consciously deny or distort reality in order to validate their delusions, and I certainly can’t continue to be sympathetic. I truly understand the way pain can short-circuit logical thinking, but there is no excuse for twisting facts or outright lying in order to further your cause. Your personal pain is no excuse to endanger others’ lives. The ideal of skepticism is that when faced with evidence that disproves our beliefs, we take that evidence into account and may change our beliefs accordingly. What’s happening here is the exact opposite of that.

I plan to continue this theme on a more personal level on Friday, but if I wind up chickening out, don’t judge me too harshly.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon

Chronically skeptic

Recently, I was approached on Twitter with this message: “We have to talk, I’ve been told you can use some of the info that I have. – Don’t worry, it’s free.”

Does that pitch sound familiar to anyone else? In this case, the person was telling the truth about having been referred to me (by a friend who, long story short, was not really to blame), but the lies had already begun with the other claim. He further discredited himself by saying he had been to my blog and my Facebook page. The former is, of course, open to anyone, but the latter is inaccessible to anyone but my friends.

Why would you want to oil a snake?

Why would you want to oil a snake?

When I called him on this bullshit, that was the last I heard of him, except when he registered on this blog. According to his site, he has multiple sclerosis due to Agent Orange exposure in Vietnam, and for $25 — not my idea of “free” — you can buy his book explaining how heavy metal exposure has caused your chronic illness as well.

Now assuming this guy is actually sick, I recognize in him a kind of freakishly outsized version of what many people go through: the feeling that we need to take control of what’s wrong with us by understanding it. And for some, that means coming to subjective conclusions that are not backed up by any reliable scientific literature. Not so forgivable is the attempt to capitalize on these crackpot theories, especially by preying on sick, vulnerable people. Never mind if you are one yourself; we Jews don’t think so kindly of Bernard Madoff. It’s all the worse if you’re “one of us” while using our enemies’ tactics against us. Luckily, this snake-oil salesman was easy to see coming, starting off as he did by lying to me. Many purveyors are far more subtle, however.

What I want is for those of us in chronic pain and fatigue and illness not to be vulnerable. I was very well taught by an online community of Graves’ disease patients how to read my own lab results, learn about medications, dosages, and tests, and get in the habit of questioning my doctor when things don’t add up. My experience in that community and others related to chronic illness, however, is that while self-education on conventional medical matters is encouraged, similarly close inspection of alternative, experimental, and/or complementary therapies is not touted as strongly.

Again, I empathize, to some extent. I went through a period where I believed it couldn’t hurt to throw everything at the problem and see what stuck. Relief from daily pain and illness is so elusive, and for some people the feeling is that it can’t get any worse, so why not? I did eventually swing back to a more critical way of thinking, after continuing to read about skepticism and learning more about the science behind my own illness. Memories of long-past and ultimately useless sessions in acupuncture and hypnosis only sped up the process.

Tim Farley, in the FAQ for his site What’s the Harm?, writes:

What I am against is people engaging in these practices (particularly for philosophical or religious reasons) without carefully considering risks and otherwise doing proper homework. You should always avail yourself of the best information you can before you make any important decision.

This is where I come down on the subject as well. We nerfed people, and especially the newly nerfed, are at best grieving for our old lives, and at worst still in shock at the loss. And like the bereaved who may find themselves the target of unscrupulous funeral practices, we can be open to false promises and might not closely consider costs, financial or otherwise. I am all for it when someone shows a demonstrable improvement due to some therapy or supplement; by no means do I dismiss those treatments solely because they haven’t worked for me. But we need to put our pain aside and think critically about what we are paying for, or putting into our bodies, or letting people do to us, rather than allowing it all for no better reason than it’s just another straw to grasp.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to Reddit Post to StumbleUpon