Merritt Clifton is editor & founder of ANIMALS 24-7.
Barbara Kay is a public affairs columnist for The National Post, of Toronto, Canada.
by Barbara Kay & Merritt Clifton
Reasonable people tend to overestimate the role that reason plays in history and in their own culture, and also tend to overestimate the power reason has to combat the theories, belief systems and emotions that drive people to action––or inaction ––much of the time.
Unreasonable theories, belief systems and emotions are all very well if they harm only the people who cling to them, not other people or animals. When they produce collateral damage and become a public-safety issue, though, the mysterious glamour of certain kinds of false-news appeal is such that sometimes even the best efforts of reasonable people to contain their influence can fail to make a dent.
The pit bull advocacy movement, the apotheosis of an irrational belief system fuelled by emotion, is a perfect example of the syndrome, and always present in our thoughts when we assess similarly irrational delusions gaining ground in other domains. And so pit bulls naturally sprang to mind when it became clear that the anti-vaccination movement, persisting for several centuries now, had again moved from the fringes to the mainstream.
Voices from some of the same corners
Indeed, voices from some of the same corners have been involved in both opposition to vaccination and pit bull advocacy since 1754, when British farmer and scientist Sir William St. Quintin introduced widespread use of vaccination by inventing the first vaccine against rinderpest. Dutch farmer/scientists emulated St. Quintin within a year, but failed to prevent major rinderpest outbreak in 1768-1786, in part because the crudely produced early vaccines were often as likely to transmit diseases as to stop them.
“The Cow Pock,” 18th century cartoon by James Gilray
This fueled the first anti-vaccination movement, a coalition of fearful skeptics and opponents of vaccination on religious grounds, whose arguments were much the same as we hear today.
The alternative to vaccination was to cull sick cattle, who were frequently donated for use in public bull-baiting entertainments; their remains fed the dogs who killed them. As vaccination threatened the livelihoods of the “dog men,” who often had become local entertainment celebrities, “dog men” aligned themselves with the anti-vaxxers. The crowds gathered to watch bull-baiting were easily incited at times to threaten to lynch vaccination proponents, or at least to run them out of town on a rail.
Opposition to rinderpest vaccination easily carried over into opposition to smallpox vaccination, developed by Edward Jenner in 1796. Opposition to Jenner’s work in turn mutated into opposition to rabies vaccination, developed chiefly by Louis Pasteur (1822-1895).
Henry Bergh
Henry Bergh
Because vaccines were usually discovered through animal experiments, and because the early vaccines themselves were cultivated in living animals, opposition to vaccination meanwhile became intertwined almost immediately with the anti-vivisection movement, which had slowly gained momentum for about a century before vaccination began.
Opposition to vaccination and the antecedents to pit bull advocacy not only evolved parallel to each other, but as allied causes in the mid-19th century, through the work Henry Bergh.
Founding the American SPCA in New York City in 1866, Bergh famously led crackdowns on animal fighting of every sort, including dogfighting. Rabies in that particular time and place was closely associated with the Spitz, a breed popular among German-American immigrants. Recognizing that rabies could infect any dog, Bergh introduced the tradition of ASPCA opposition to breed-specific legislation on behalf of the Spitz, apparently never considering that this policy could eventually become a shield for dogfighters and fighting breeds. But Bergh actually only half understood rabies transmission. In his zeal to defend dogs from persecution, Bergh tended to reject findings derived from animal experiments, and thus opposed vaccinating dogs against rabies so influentially that major humane societies worldwide did not begin to accept vaccination until more than 30 years after his death in 1888.
1922 Oakland Tribune article described NCDL vaccination campaign.
National Canine Defence League
Founded in 1893 as both an anti-vivisection society and an anti-vaccination society, the London-based National Canine Defence League eventually reversed positions on vaccination and eradicated rabies from Britain by vaccinating 35,000 dogs in the vicinity of outbreaks during 1919-1921. But the NCDL, retitling itself Dogs Trust in 2003, continues to echo Bergh in opposition to breed-specific legislation, and in 1997 was instrumental in passing disabling amendments to the Dangerous Dogs Act of 1991 to allow the possession, breeding, and sale of Staffordshire pit bulls. These amendments opened the way to 18 years of rising dog attack fatalities, disfigurements, and dogfighting cases throughout the United Kingdom.
Even after mainstream humane opposition to vaccination subsided, anti-vaccinationists, anti-vivisectionists, and creationists opposed to the notion that humans might share any evolutionary history with animals maintained a vigorous alliance––but at the political and cultural far right fringe of society, rubbing elbows with opponents of fluoridating and chlorinating tap water.
Only the rise of the left-influenced animal rights movement in the late 20th century returned anti-vivisectionism from the far right fringes into mainstream view. Creationism simultaneously made a comeback through the rise of televised evangelism and the efforts of U.S. politicians including Presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan to win votes from the culturally conservative American South.
Louis Pasteur
A single fraudulent study
The anti-vaccination movement took more than 20 years longer to re-emerge from the shadows, but has gained momentum since 1998 through fear-mongering over an alleged link between vaccinations and autism, a condition then widely believed to be an emerging mental illness afflicting children, but now medically recognized as a “spectrum disorder” with widely varying symptoms, effects, and causes.
The fear-mongering remains to this day mostly based upon a single fraudulent study published in The Lancet, the journal of the British Medical Association. The Lancet partially retracted the study in 2004, and wholly retracted it in 2010, but the damage was done. Uneasiness over vaccination again, as in the past, became itself the infectious disease.
Roald Dahl, his wife Patricia Neal, and their four children circa 1962.
Measles
Measles is the current battleground. Measles is a childhood disease that vaccinations had eradicated in the U.S. by 2000. Now, thanks to the anti-vaxxers, it is making a comeback. In most measles cases, no lasting harm is done. But it is highly infectious. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Measles is so contagious that if one person has it, 90% of the people close to that person who are not immune will also become infected.”
And it can be lethal. The seven-year old daughter of writer Roald Dahl (Charlie and the Chocolate factory et al) died within 12 hours of contracting measles encephalitis in 1962. In a pamphlet Dahl wrote, begging his fellow British citizens to ensure their children were vaccinated, he wrote: “In America,” he wrote, “where measles immunization is compulsory, measles like smallpox, has been virtually wiped out.”
Disneyland outbreak
Now those words vibrate with irony. Measles is back because of a growing number of unvaccinated children, whose parents, convinced that Big Pharma is covering up negative data in the interest of profits (not that Big Pharma is always pure or innocent of corrupt practices, only that measles vaccinations have been commonly used worldwide for more than half a century and by now we would know if there was inherent risk in them) or because of other such unsupported theories, have demanded their children’s exemption from vaccination on grounds of faith. Beginning with an outbreak at Disneyland in Anaheim, California, the toll as of January 1, 2015 was 102 cases of measles reported in 14 states, more than in all of 2012.
The issue is often framed by anti-vaxxers as one of individual liberty, but such arguments are untenable with infectious diseases. Concern for public safety often trumps individual liberties where there is risk to the general population. In the case of diseases such as measles, mumps and rubella, “herd immunity” – i.e. at least a 75% effective vaccination rate––is necessary to prevent their spread. The target to achieve 75% effective vaccination has to be 95%-plus, because not every person or animal responds to vaccination in the same manner (people and animals with impaired immune systems may not develop antibodies).
Public indignation
Ordinary people get that. It appears likely that a growing chorus of public indignation, driven by realistic self-interest (on a far grander scale than breed specific legislation proponents can ever hope to match in the canine world) will prevail, and bring the measles debate to a speedy conclusion, with reason prevailing over conspiracy theories.
In these debates, it does not help that the very people one might assume would be in the vanguard of the reason camp, align themselves with the irrational. U.S. Senator from Kentucky Rand Paul (a physician!) and New Jersey governor Chris Christie did not cover themselves in glory when, on libertarian grounds, they lent public sympathy to parents who refused to vaccinate their children (even though both made clear their own children were vaccinated). Arizona cardiologist Jack Wolfson stands foursquare with the anti-vaxxers: “We do not need to inject chemicals into ourselves and into our children in order to boost our immune system,” he has stated.
In Canada, Melody Torcolacci, an adjunct instructor in the Kinesiology and health Studies department at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, has been teaching anti-vaccination material. Current and former students have produced lecture slides with YouTube links to anti-vaccine propaganda. The debate in this case is between public safety education and academia’s commitment to free speech. The public is not on the side of Ms Torcolacci: 58% of Ontarians believe parents should not have a say in whether their children are vaccinated or not (although 20% of Ontarians believe some vaccines can cause autism). The law in Ontario says children must be vaccinated against measles to attend school, but waivers are granted for conscience-rooted beliefs.
(ASPCA photo)
Pushback against pit bull advocacy
In spite of the disproportionate wordage we have assigned to the anti-vax movement, pushback against pit bull advocacy movement was our motivation in writing this column. Recently interviewed by Skype on a Canadian public affairs program was Brendan Nyhan, an assistant professor of government at Dartmouth College, who spends a great deal of his time these days combatting vaccine myths. And what he had to say brought the pit bull advocacy movement instantly to mind.
It is very difficult to challenge myths when people are invested in them, Nyhan said. Don’t we know it! When you challenge those people, they tend to “double down and become more insistent” on their truth, because their very identities are bound up in their myths.
Nyhan spoke about educational programs his team had initiated, designed to appeal to reason, providing facts and statistics and proving that the myths that anti-vaxxers believed were simply not intellectually tenable. The program, Nyhan confessed ruefully, had been a dismal failure. Indeed, he found that those who were not willing to vaccinate their children became even more determined when presented with facts and scientific evidence.
Does this sound familiar?
Hardening false beliefs
Furthermore––and this really does seem counter-intuitive––the seemingly positive recruitment of President Obama himself publicly stating “The science is indisputable” actually seems to have been counterproductive. Nyhan himself had not been sanguine about involving the President, as he believes this has the potential to create a polarizing effect of Democrats vs Republicans. Vaccination is a public good cutting across all political and sociological lines, and consensus can only be arrived at if there is no political partisanship involved, real or perceived. But Nyhan’s opinion lines up with other studies showing that public education campaigns tend to harden false beliefs.
(ASPCA photo)
The animator asked what the solution was to persuading those with their heels dug in. Nyhan responded that the only ray of hope for reaching people was through family physicians and pediatricians. People trust doctors more than any other professionals, and certainly far more than they trust politicians. Nyhan implied that instead of trying to reach people directly, education should focus on lines of communication between doctors and their patients.
Anti-vaccination conspiracy theorists always base their beliefs on partial truths of minor epidemiological significance. Some vaccines––bad batches, and vaccines producing unpredicted allergies––have caused adverse reactions, even death in isolated cases. And dogs of breeds other than pit bulls sometimes maul or kill people. But in either case, the risk involved does not meet the bar for exemption from, respectively, mass prescription and mass proscription
There is a lesson to be drawn from the anti-vax front for those of us engaged in what often seems like a hopeless battle for hearts and minds on the pit bull front. Certainly we should keep trying to get celebrities who champion pit bulls to change their tune; to convince Arianna Huffington to allow equal time for opposing views on pit bulls; and to keep pushing the Centers for Disease Control to reprise its wonted role in objective data collection.
Veterinarians of conscience
But perhaps we should consider as well a concerted campaign to woo veterinarians of conscience to form a discrete body, separate from their caninely-correct association spokespeople, whose purpose is to reach out to their peers with a view to educating their clients on pit bull truths, veterinarian by veterinarian.
(ASPCA photo)
I realize that pediatricians and veterinarians are in radically different situations. Medical associations are not anti-vaccination, so pediatricians do not have to feel like outliers when they counsel rational behavior, whereas veterinarians who challenge pit bull advocacy mantras are beating against their own profession’s cultural current. But out of some 175,000 U.S. veterinarians (105,000 in public or corporate practice, 65,000 in private clinical practice), there must be a handful who are prepared to take a public stand. Some already do make statements as individuals. But they would have more clout if they were organized into a political action group. Perhaps some sort of collaboration with surgeons could be a possibility.
Beth & Merritt Clifton.
(Geoff Geiger photo)
Two truths unite the camps promoting vaccination and effective breed-specific legislation.
The first is that, as Mark Twain said, a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes.
The second is that when it comes to conspiracy theories, authority regarding the truth is in the eye of the beholder.
Our shoes are on, and we have been running as fast as we can without attracting the support our cause deserves, so perhaps we should be thinking more about how to recruit to our team faster runners, with a proven track record of appeal to the grandstands.
Please donate to support our work:
www.animals24-7.org/donate/
Related Posts
Pit bulls, Trooper & “The personal is political”
10-year totals: pit bulls kill 81% of pets & livestock animals killed by dogs
Animal advocacy “Robin Hood” Gil Michaels dies at 80
Are kosher & halal slaughter bans anti-Semitic & Islamophobic?
How the Pit Bull Federation of South Africa views Galunker
About robotic sex dolls & gadgets to help people talk to their dogs
Great article. The anti vaccination people never seem to acknowledge that millions and millions of lives were saved in the past by vaccination. Now we are seeing the resurgence of diseases that had been virtually eradicated when I was young.
Nice job of drawing parallels between anti-vaxxers and pro-pitters.
It comes at a time when I needed and antidote to this article, http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2015/02/02/marys-monday-metazoan-chris-clarke-has-a-new-dog/, which appeared on an pro-science, pro-vaccine, pro-rationalist, pro-humanist site. The readers tend to be rationalists and many are in the sciences, yet the cooing comments about the selection of a PIT BULL as a pet by a fellow scientist, are simply nauseating.
How can a rationalist and an EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGIST, be so blind and deaf to the LOGICAL IMPLICATIONS of artificial selection over generations for the traits of UNPROVOKED AGGRESSION and DESTRUCTIVE POWER?
Incredible incredible. How is it possible that so many are fooled by such flawed information? Sad that innocent people who know the truth are endangered by those who refute facts.
No! No! No! No!
Oh how sad this article is. I am very PRO BSL and more. And…. I’m what you would consider ANTI vaccine. What I actually would support would be going back to the old schedule decades ago when autism was almost unheard of.
Please never again equate being PRO PIT with being ANTI VAX. Please.
This is what I ask…. go to Dr. Mercola’s site and search using the word – vaccine – and then pick something to read.
Here’s the deal… you got it part right. There is a false campaign. What you got wrong is…. that it’s the “anti” vaxers that are on the wrong side. Do you not realize what is at stake? First and foremost, the lives and health of children. But don’t you understand the MONEY TRAIL that leads to PRO excess vaccination?
Our son caught the measles FROM the mmr. When he survived the severe lung infection (which by the way he survived because a neurodev. friend of mine told me that measles depletes the body of vitamin A and what to give to counteract that and our son started improving instead of crashing) despite the fact that the pediatrician treated our son as disposable, he then slid into autistic symptoms culminating in head banging. And don’t think we’re alone. Autism rates run high now. Nearly all of the parents I’ve been in contact with who have a child on the ASD scale have told me it followed vaccines.
You did something really wrong in writing this article in my opinion. You have it turned around. Please at least educate your self on what’s really going on at Dr. Mercola’s site before you write anything about this again.
Being anti- pits are great family pets is a NATURAL common sense position based on facts. This is the same for being anti-the current schedule of vaccines. Please please check out Dr. Mercola’s info.. Thank you. Ali Haefke
Wikipedia politely defines Joseph M. Mercola as “an alternative medicine proponent, osteopathic physician, and web entrepreneur, who markets a variety of controversial dietary supplements and medical devices through his website, mercola.com.” Note that Mercola is not qualified as an immunologist, nor in any speciality normally responding to contagious disease. Neither is Mercola qualified in any branch of psychology and childhood development. Against Mercola’s perspectives, which support his economic interests just as much as mainstream health research supports the highly competitive commercial pharmaceutical industry, are arrayed the overwhelming weight of nearly 300 years of epidemiological science.
“Autism,” meanwhile, is a term which has historically been applied to an ever-changing collection of problematic symptoms and conditions. Contrary to common belief, “autism” has never been medically recognized as either a disease or a diagnosis. Rather, it is a description of indicators which may point toward one or more diseases or other medical conditions, and may have a variety of different causes and treatments.
The overwhelming consensus of medical science is that vaccines are critical in preventing the spread of measles and other horrible diseases.
The consensus opinion of scientists is not guaranteed to always be right. Science can and does change with new discoveries.
But the consensus of scientists is probably at least a thousand times MORE likely to be right, than is the consensus of people whose paranoia unfortunately causes them to imagine that the vast majority of scientists are engaged in a mass conspiracy to deceive them.
Where does this terrible irrationality come from, that causes some people to hold misguided beliefs even MORE when they are provided evidence against them? That is a question of human psychology that merits serious research.
When people are inclined to mistrust scientific experts and to cling stubbornly to ludicrous ideas that have no scientific validity, I would guess that maybe they’re doing that out of some deep, unexamined ego insecurities. Deep down, they want to believe that they are somehow wiser about things than the experts are. Most people significantly overestimate their own intelligence — and the less intelligent they are, the more they overestimate their own IQ. It seems to me that this distrust of science goes along with that.
Autism is in the American Psychiatric Association’s “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.”
I’m not against vaccination; only thimerosal, the mercury-based preservative. It cannot be a good idea to inject a heavy metal into the body, especially in children. This has nothing to do with Andrew Wakefield’s fraudulent article in “The Lancet”; he proposed an entirely different mechanism, and the MMR did not contain thimerosal.
I have Asperger’s Syndrome. I once looked up the Material Safety Data Sheet for thimerosal. The list of side effects was my case history, from violent stomach cramps, through alternate constipation and explosive diarrhea, to sleepwalking. The MSDS said thimerosal must be handled in special sealed glove boxes. Spills must be cleaned up by specially trained crews wearing hazmat suits.
This stuff is injectable, in babies yet? I’m with the Russian doctor who wrote, “The use of thiimerosal in medical biological preparations, especially those intended for children, is inadmissible.”
Practically every American and European who served in World War II received vaccinations including thimerosal, as did almost everyone else who was vaccinated for almost anything during the next half century. This was literally billions of people, the vast majority of them vaccinated in infancy, without consequence other than immunity from a great many diseases which formerly killed millions and disabled millions more. As vaccines were improved, and came to be made by methods which reduced the need for preservatives, thimerosal fell out of use. As the Centers for Disease Control web site explains, “Since 2001, with the exception of some influenza (flu) vaccines, thimerosal is not used as a preservative in routinely recommended childhood vaccines.”
Almost anything can be harmful in large enough doses — including water. Conversely, almost anything can be safe, in sufficiently low doses.
The hallmark of crackpot science is ignoring the question of dosages, and asserting that ANY amount of some substance is terribly dangerous. That’s just nonsense.
Science is a QUANTITATIVE empirical methodology. The first question is always “How can we MEASURE that?” Without quantitative, numerical data as empirical evidence to confirm it, any theory is useless.
Real science is based on math and numbers. Crackpot science tries to dismiss any questions of how quantifiable the effects they’re asserting are. The way they do that is by spreading paranoia insisting that “ANY” amount of X is terribly dangerous. That is just NOT the way that Nature works. Numbers matter.
Thimerosal, where it was present, has been removed from virtually all vaccines in the last 15 years. In many vaccines it was never used at all. Yet autism has not gone away.
http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/SafetyAvailability/VaccineSafety/UCM096228
Thankfully, there are organizations who are dedicated to using science based medicine to find causes of autism. In the meantime, here’s an interesting article drawing a parallel between maladjusted foal syndrome and autism – http://ucdavis.edu/ucdavis-today/2015/february/03-foals.html#.VNPLeSGwvXs.facebook
The Autism Science Foundation, Simons Foundation, and NLM Foundation are all reputable groups that provide funding and/or research into the autism spectrum disorder, These groups are not to be confused with questionable sources such as Mercola, Natural News, Age of Autism, and others.
Excellent article.
Bonny T Lee RN
and what about smallpox if the anti vaxxers have their way? Smallpox was said by the World Health Organization be be eradicated with the last known case in 1977. It is far more lethal than measles/rubella with a 30-35% death rate. Like PB attacks, it leaves the survivors scarred.
I had one case as an infant and thought I had immunity but when, as a teen, I babysat for a family where the baby had it and was recovering. I decided to be the ‘good babysitter’ and wash their dishes…. including the baby’s dish. I got a 2nd much more serious case. As nearing adulthood, it was NOT an easy experience. My doctor made a rare housecall so I wouldn’t bring it in to the office. And are the anti vaxxers against that as well?
Cognitive dissonance plays a role in this deeply embedded belief in faulty information. As if more proof was needed: http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/cms/
Yes, there are STILL people who insist the world is FLAT. Think about that for a moment.
I knew a pair of brothers, one was born before the polio vaccine and had paralytic polio, was disabled for the rest of his life; and he also suffered from after effects from the disease decades later. The younger brother was born after the vaccine and of course was vaccinated and was healthy.
On another note, there is an anti vax children’s book called Melanie’s Marvelous Measles which should sit nicely with Galunker on everybody’s bookshelf.
And yes that was sarcasm.
‘Melanie’s Marvelous Measles” has a companion book – “Paul’s Precious Polio.” With a forward by the Marquis de Sade.
Well, I’m an anti-vaxxer and anti-pitbulls too! Most anti-vaxxers I know personally are conservative libertarians, myself included.
Remember, those of you who want to force us to get vaccines: the same government that can do that can force you to do other things too, like get sterilized, have abortions…..think about it.
The government can also force you to live in a society with roads, postal service, police and fire departments, building codes, and security against invasion. Inasmuch as infectious disease kills more people than war, crime, and accidents combined, governments have a legitimate role in promoting public health and safety through vaccination.
Please, keep away from the rest of us.
Regarding Mercola, the D.O., the man has made all sorts of fraudulent claims about supplements he sells, and was warned about the following:
Vibrant Health Research Chlorella XP, claimed to “help to virtually eliminate your risk of developing cancer in the future.”
Fresh Shores Extra Virgin Coconut Oil, claimed to reduce the risk of heart disease, cancer, and degenerative diseases.
Momentum Health Products Vitamin K2, possibly useful in treating certain kinds of cancer and Alzheimer’s disease.
Momentum Health Products Cardio Essentials Nattokinase NSK-SD, claimed to be “a much safer and effective option than aspirin and other pharmaceutical agents to treating heart disease.”
This is absolute rubbish; coconut oil for cancer, something can eliminate the risk of developing cancer in the future. Mercola is a charlatan and one that takes money from people and sells useless supplements through his website for money.
I have as little patience for people that push junk supplements for money as those that perpetuate the myths of nanny dogs.
In addition to that, Natural News is claiming that over 600 aerosolized “vaccines” are ready to be deployed to kill off the population of the US! You can’t make this up!
Heather, I enjoyed your comments. I do not want to minimize the effects of these diseases on people, especially to those who live in the lesser developed world and truly suffer, but I have an ever diminishing amount of patience for people in the economically advanced nations that ignore or deny science. Several years ago I held a door and gave directions to some soldiers on furlough (they were in their dress uniforms). After they left a preppy looking guy stormed up to me and accused me of supporting the military industrial complex and then felt the need to “educate” me on FEMA death camps. It sounds like this guy is the target audience for “natural news”. I respect personal choices and liberty but one does not have the right to harm the health of the public — just as there are limits on free speech, the infamous example of yelling fire in a crowded theater and inciting panic when there is no fire, there are considerations on the health of the public for highly contagious diseases — how many of these anti vax people would want people exposed to Ebola coming into their living room? If dangerous dogs were only killing their adult owners, well that would be one thing, but it is the damage to children, neighbors, even strangers and their pets that is not acceptable. People have forgotten that with society comes a social contract, an important one not to do harm to others. There will always be a criminal element in every society, but for the most part the bad dog owners and anti vax people are not in this category; they are either naive, overly idealistic, do not understand science, or are just very dogmatic.
It is very difficult to challenge myths when people are invested in them, Nyhan said. Don’t we know it! When you challenge those people, they tend to “double down and become more insistent” on their truth, because their very identities are bound up in their myths.
Great article. What the anti-vaxers and pit bull advocates have in common is a callous disregard for the health and safety of OTHER PEOPLE. I started getting a yearly flu vaccine many years ago, not because I thought I couldn’t survive a bout of the flu, but because I spent a lot of time in a LTC facility visiting my elderly mother, and was concerned about possibly exposing this frail and vulnerable population to an illness that could prove fatal to them. I felt it was my moral and ethical responsibility to get vaccinated, and this is why I recently got a pertussis vaccine; not because I fear getting pertussis, but because I could possible expose younger relatives unknowingly, with grave consequences for their health.
Both veterinarians and pediatricians can play a role in educating parents about safety issues surrounding the decision to not vaccinate, or to expose children to dangerous dog breeds. But to really change behavior requires pressure from within a parent’s social circles. Both the anti-vaxers and pit bull apologists get a lot of validation from other, like minded parents. They succumb to group think, and get support for their irrational decision. To change their mind would mean exclusion from this group.
What the rational majority can do is stop indulging those whose dangerous beliefs risk the health and safety of children by refusing to tolerate them. Hosting a birthday party for your child? Stipulate that all children attending must be vaccinated. Child wants to go to a friend’s home for a playdate? Refuse to allow them to go if the hosting family owns a pit bull.. When enough parents realize that their children will become social pariahs because of their choice to not vaccinate or own an aggressive dog breed, they will be more inclined to change their behavior. Social disapproval is a powerful force to change behavior, but it must come from peers, not from talking heads in the media.
I do that now, no vaccination their kids can not be around my kid.
And pit bulls not a chance.
“What the anti-vaxers and pit bull advocates have in common is a callous disregard for the health and safety of OTHER PEOPLE.”
I think that sums it up exactly. Both groups are extremely sure of and even aggressive about their “right” to an abnormal (vaccinating your child and buying a non-pit bull are both norms) behavior which carries risks our society deems unacceptable (kids dying from measles or from dog attacks), and seem utterly baffled when others object.
Merritt seems to have hit a nerve!
i have always seen a link myself between the chemtrail/911/anti Water fluoridation conspiracy theory people and the denial by pit nutters of what pits are.
If it wasn’t for vaccinations then millions would be dead and crippled.
I want to thank you for this timely article. Coincidentally, just the other day I thought to myself that fighting breed enthusiasts and anti-vaxxers have quite a bit in common, especially after reading quotes from this guy: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jack-wolfson-vaccines-doctor-measles . The only other community with which I find parallels in some aspects of the pit bull movement–specifically the animal rights/welfare advocates who get swept up in it–are those who attempt to turn cats into vegans. In both cases, you are attempting to force an animal into being what you want her to be, with no heed to the fact of what she actually is.
The big difference here is that most aspects of the mainstream media, particularly those with a liberal outlook, are roundly criticizing the anti-vaxxers. However, these same outlets have also been roundly won over by the pit bull enthusiasts, and you will see only cute and cuddly stories about the dogs on these sites. Pit bull fans are “in” with the media to a degree that anti-vaxxers can only dream of.
Something to remember—as go children, so go dogs. In the US, any trend you see in parenting, if it can at all be applied to pets, it will be. Expect to see a resurgence in easily-prevented canine diseases as dog caretakers refuse to vaccinate their pets. It would not be surprising if many of these people are also pit bull fans.
This can apply to pit bulls and vaccines. It is called “cognitive dissonance”.
Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief.” – Frantz Fanon
I had a friend whose daughter was autistic and was taken away from her and put in the state retarded school, whatever the term was then, where she eventually died in her 40s, probably from the way the school handled something.
The authorities blamed the daughter’s situation all on the mother, of course, which is why they took the girl away. Then the mother’s youngest child was bright and artistic and had Asperger’s. Morbidly obese, he died from a heart attack in his 40s. When my friend heard the vaccination theory, she was sure that was what happened to her son and daughter.
I pointed out that my uncle had Asperger’s. She said he would have had shots. He was born in 1893, so he could have been vaccinated for smallpox, although there’s no guarantee. He wouldn’t have had any other immunizations.
It was only after my granddaughter-in-law said that was what my own youngest son had, that I ever heard of it. I pieced together what few things my dad had said about his brother and realized that was what he had. But my youngest son was different from day one, way before he had any shots.
I didn’t bother arguing about it with my friend. I think that it had always been difficult for her to deal with having been blamed for her daughter’s problems by the authorities and her husband.
It wouldn’t have occurred to me about the links between dangerous dogs and these unreasoning people on TV about how much worse it is for kids to have measles shots than measles. I wonder what they would say if they lost a kid to measles.
Autism, especially in the most severe forms, is a devastating disease, I have friends that have a severely autistic non verbal child — who is now an adult and can never live alone or work. The other adult children are fine and all have advanced professional degrees. At least now no one blames the mother or father. These children grew up in the same environment — same house, ate the same food, got the same vaccines. I do not know that the answer is, but there must be some genetic component. It is normal to look for answers and blame, but sometimes there are no answers. Why did my sister in law die of cancer (a type rarely seen in young women) at 50 when she was the most health conscientious of all the siblings, in terms of exercise, eating healthy foods and such? Again up to college they all lived in the same house, ate the same food, and she worked in an office, no obvious risk factors. It is hard that there are no answers but one has to accept that scientific research is time consuming and methodical.