Why do people persist in believing things that just aren't true?(newyorker.com)
newyorker.com
Why do people persist in believing things that just aren't true?
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/mariakonnikova/2014/05/why-do-people-persist-in-believing-things-that-just-arent-true.html
4 comments
Why would it is an article on psychology and framing of a message, not about MMR vaccine.
No one could ever provide evidence that MMR vaccine isn't linked to autism, only show the absence of evidence of a link or refute the arguments of a proponent. Both of which have been done to death with little achieved, thats what the purpose of this article is I guess
No one could ever provide evidence that MMR vaccine isn't linked to autism, only show the absence of evidence of a link or refute the arguments of a proponent. Both of which have been done to death with little achieved, thats what the purpose of this article is I guess
I think the write is making an assumption (warranted, in my opinion) about her reader's knowledge level. She does not defend vaccines for the same reason she does not defend the spherical earth theory.
Yes, "in your opinion." I agree as well, all I have is an opinion. I'd like to hear a scientific opinion.
I thought it was awfully presumptuous to leave out science in such an important issue. I guess we'll have to settle for another opinion piece masked as scientific fact.
I thought it was awfully presumptuous to leave out science in such an important issue. I guess we'll have to settle for another opinion piece masked as scientific fact.
It's not in scope for the piece, as sopooneo points out. And no, you don't have the luxury of insisting authors lay out, in full scientific rigor, basic facts every time they go to make point. Vaccines don't cause autism. There is precisely zero evidence that they do. So, it is not really necessary to make the case for that when you're reporting on a different scientific study which merely takes this basic fact as a given, any more than I would have to justify 500 years of physics before telling you anything about the Huygens probe.
Is one link to a study so much to ask for?
If it's "basic facts" that surround this issue then why the controversy at all? I don't know the facts, as a reader I'm here to learn. It's a weak piece due to its weak argument. I say weak argument because it has no foundation to build off of, at least not provided by the author. All that is provided is a tone that to think otherwise is nonsensical and silly. Bad science throws out "nonsensical" ideas without testing them. If the vaccine is safe you have to give me more than, "if you think otherwise you're dumb."
I share the fear over bad drugs. Alleviate fear with knowledge and facts, not name calling.
If it's "basic facts" that surround this issue then why the controversy at all? I don't know the facts, as a reader I'm here to learn. It's a weak piece due to its weak argument. I say weak argument because it has no foundation to build off of, at least not provided by the author. All that is provided is a tone that to think otherwise is nonsensical and silly. Bad science throws out "nonsensical" ideas without testing them. If the vaccine is safe you have to give me more than, "if you think otherwise you're dumb."
I share the fear over bad drugs. Alleviate fear with knowledge and facts, not name calling.
Yes, it is too much to ask for, for the reasons I laid out. Expecting authors to spoon-feed basic facts to you every time they go to make an unrelated point, is expecting too much.
How about you worry more about scientific consensus and less about 'controversy' that exists only on talk shows and in the drug-addled brain of Jenny McCarthy. If you want to know more about autism and vaccines, you can do the research on your own time. We have this thing called the Internet which should be of some use to you in this.
In the meantime expect to be called out as a concern troll, for that is what you are.
How about you worry more about scientific consensus and less about 'controversy' that exists only on talk shows and in the drug-addled brain of Jenny McCarthy. If you want to know more about autism and vaccines, you can do the research on your own time. We have this thing called the Internet which should be of some use to you in this.
In the meantime expect to be called out as a concern troll, for that is what you are.
You can have your dogma. I'll be a concern troll who doesn't make major life decisions based on trendy opinions. I will do the research. Thank you for the intelligent debate.
Ideology is the enemy of free thinking.
Ideology is the enemy of free thinking.
Distractions in the form of irrelevant minutia from concern trolls about problems that don't exist and questions that have already been asked and answered a thousand times, are the enemy of clear thinking and efficient discussion.
And, it's not dogma. Show me the evidence that vaccines cause autism or are contraindicated for any other reason and I will engage it.
And, it's not dogma. Show me the evidence that vaccines cause autism or are contraindicated for any other reason and I will engage it.
I'm skeptical of all pharmaceuticals and I think history details why we all should. Millions have died from recalled drugs and currently pharmaceuticals are the 4th leading cause of death in America.
According to the CDC, common substances in vaccines include: Aluminum, Formaldehyde, Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and Thimerosal (a mercury-containing preservative). Source: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm
I mean really? I won't put these substances in my body and anyone looking at this objectively can see the obvious problems with this. I don't think the "debate is over," and anyone claiming that it is has an ulterior motive.
Aluminum, Formaldehyde and MSG? I can't believe this.
According to the CDC, common substances in vaccines include: Aluminum, Formaldehyde, Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and Thimerosal (a mercury-containing preservative). Source: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm
I mean really? I won't put these substances in my body and anyone looking at this objectively can see the obvious problems with this. I don't think the "debate is over," and anyone claiming that it is has an ulterior motive.
Aluminum, Formaldehyde and MSG? I can't believe this.
You need to be called out on your, to be blunt, bullshit.
It's not aluminum, it's aluminum _salts_ NOT THE SAME THING. Says so on the page you linked to.
(And what does Wiki P say?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium
"Despite its prevalence in the environment, no known form of life uses aluminium salts metabolically. In keeping with its pervasiveness, aluminium is well tolerated by plants and animals.[6] Owing to their prevalence, potential beneficial (or otherwise) biological roles of aluminium compounds are of continuing interest."
And back to your page
"Most formaldehyde is removed from the vaccine before it is packaged."
And again
Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and 2-phenoxy-ethanol which are used as stabilizers in a few vaccines to help the vaccine remain unchanged when the vaccine is exposed to heat, light, acidity, or humidity.
This is a _good_ thing. This means the vaccine is more effective.
The English language does not contain the words needed to express how annoying people like you are. Go read the stuff you link to. Google for the zero evidence for the link between MMR vaccine and autism. Google it. Go on!
When you think about it, why would the centres for disease control and prevention put alarming stuff on their site? Wouldn't it go against their best interest?
Stop wasting our time.
It's not aluminum, it's aluminum _salts_ NOT THE SAME THING. Says so on the page you linked to.
(And what does Wiki P say?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium
"Despite its prevalence in the environment, no known form of life uses aluminium salts metabolically. In keeping with its pervasiveness, aluminium is well tolerated by plants and animals.[6] Owing to their prevalence, potential beneficial (or otherwise) biological roles of aluminium compounds are of continuing interest."
And back to your page
"Most formaldehyde is removed from the vaccine before it is packaged."
And again
Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and 2-phenoxy-ethanol which are used as stabilizers in a few vaccines to help the vaccine remain unchanged when the vaccine is exposed to heat, light, acidity, or humidity.
This is a _good_ thing. This means the vaccine is more effective.
The English language does not contain the words needed to express how annoying people like you are. Go read the stuff you link to. Google for the zero evidence for the link between MMR vaccine and autism. Google it. Go on!
When you think about it, why would the centres for disease control and prevention put alarming stuff on their site? Wouldn't it go against their best interest?
Stop wasting our time.
If it were anything else, I wouldn't care, and would actually encourage you to forgo whatever medical treatment it is you have this irrational aversion to, with a view to improving the overall genetic health of our species.
However, this is herd immunity we're talking about, and unfortunately you and your unvaccinated progeny make everyone else more likely to get sick. This is why I support forced, universal, vaccinations.
At any rate, did you know they make soda cans out of aluminum, too? And formaldehyde is used in such a wide variety of products that focusing on vaccines in particular make me pretty sure you have an ulterior motive.
However, this is herd immunity we're talking about, and unfortunately you and your unvaccinated progeny make everyone else more likely to get sick. This is why I support forced, universal, vaccinations.
At any rate, did you know they make soda cans out of aluminum, too? And formaldehyde is used in such a wide variety of products that focusing on vaccines in particular make me pretty sure you have an ulterior motive.
Like I said, you can have your dogma. Irrationality is to believe something based on faith alone and to ignore contradictory evidence.
>At any rate, did you know they make soda cans out of aluminum, too? And formaldehyde is used in such a wide variety of products that focusing on vaccines in particular make me pretty sure you have an ulterior motive.
According to the United States Department of Health and Human Services National Toxicology Program, formaldehyde which "is used in such a wide variety of products," is known to be a human carcinogen. That means it causes cancer.
According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry "Oral exposure to aluminum is usually not harmful. Some studies show that people exposed to high levels of aluminum may develop Alzheimer’s disease, but other studies have not found this to be true. We do not know for certain that aluminum causes Alzheimer’s disease." While they don't present a clear opinion one way or the other on aluminum's relationship to neurological disorders, I'll use common sense and not consume foods on a regular basis in which heavy metals may reside.
Sources: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/?objectid=035E57E7-BDD9-2D9B-AFB9D1... http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/phs/phs.asp?id=1076&tid=34
>At any rate, did you know they make soda cans out of aluminum, too? And formaldehyde is used in such a wide variety of products that focusing on vaccines in particular make me pretty sure you have an ulterior motive.
According to the United States Department of Health and Human Services National Toxicology Program, formaldehyde which "is used in such a wide variety of products," is known to be a human carcinogen. That means it causes cancer.
According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry "Oral exposure to aluminum is usually not harmful. Some studies show that people exposed to high levels of aluminum may develop Alzheimer’s disease, but other studies have not found this to be true. We do not know for certain that aluminum causes Alzheimer’s disease." While they don't present a clear opinion one way or the other on aluminum's relationship to neurological disorders, I'll use common sense and not consume foods on a regular basis in which heavy metals may reside.
Sources: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/?objectid=035E57E7-BDD9-2D9B-AFB9D1... http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/phs/phs.asp?id=1076&tid=34
Well, while your ignorance about vaccines in particular harms others around you by lessening herd immunity, we can at least take some solace in the fact that your breathtaking ignorance of medicines and human health issues in general will lead to lower life expectancies for yourself and others like you, which does mitigate the damage somewhat.
Millions die from preventable disease each year. It is this status quo mentality that leads to preventable deaths, the two leaders being Heart Disease and Cancer. I'm not sure who you're trying to convince of your argument by insulting me personally but it is clear you would rather ignore the evidence I've provided than supply a valid counter-argument. Especially when the CDC claims ingredients in vaccines are cancer causing. This is indicative of whose viewpoint is actually based on science (see sources) and whose is faith based.
Insinuating that Aluminum, Formaldehyde, Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and Thimerosal (a mercury-containing preservative) are safe, or actually beneficial, for consumption especially after reviewing the evidence I've given you is folly.
You can keep lying to yourself but to lie to others to promote falsehoods based on such ignorance is even worse. Stop trolling please.
Insinuating that Aluminum, Formaldehyde, Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and Thimerosal (a mercury-containing preservative) are safe, or actually beneficial, for consumption especially after reviewing the evidence I've given you is folly.
You can keep lying to yourself but to lie to others to promote falsehoods based on such ignorance is even worse. Stop trolling please.
These are disturbing findings but not all that unexpected. Anyone who's really probed other people's belief systems will have come to more or less the same conclusions in an anecdotal way. More worryingly these findings relate to why people will kill and die for (in the name of) some beliefs but not others.
What might be an interesting follow on for the HN crowd is how the digital realm or the internet changes any of this.
What think ye?
What might be an interesting follow on for the HN crowd is how the digital realm or the internet changes any of this.
What think ye?
The internet allows people who believe in fringe nonsense to find each other and reinforce each other's beliefs. In the past, this only happened with mainstream nonsense.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. -Upton Sinclair
Why do people persist in believing things that just aren't true?
Like God?
Like God?
The writer is acting like the debate has happened and is over, that the reader already knows this truth. This tone should drive suspicion of the actual goal of the writer. Or am I jumping to uneducated conclusions too?
As a reader I want to be educated but in this piece the writer doesn't tell me why the MMR vaccine is safe. I don't know if the MMR vaccine does cause autism but I'd like to at least hear evidence why it doesn't.