JayB Posted January 7, 2009 Share Posted January 7, 2009 At least that's what this woman: Christine Maggiore, believed, and she dedicated her life to promoting that message. She passed on the virus to her daughter (the little girl in the photo), who died of pneumocystis carinii pneumonia at the age of three. Now it's killed her too, but not before she could dedicate her remaining time to convincing other women to forgo the standard precautions used to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV, striving to cultivate paranoid anti-science mythologies about HIV in Africa and elsewhere, etc. More on Christine and Her Crusade. This is bad craziness. Her irrational delusions about HIV differ from the lunacy the motivates the anti-vaccine crusaders by degree, but not in kind, and share quite a bit of philosophical and ideological common ground. I suspect that we'll be hearing more from these folks, rather than less, in the future. *Maybe the Foo Fighters, who evidently endorsed Maggiore's organization "Alive and Well," and her beliefs, will set them to music. "T-Cell counts maybe droppin', but big Pharma's pill's I'll never be Poppin...." http://www.foofighters.com/community_cause.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 and we're supposed to give a shit why, exactly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olyclimber Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 think of lil Suri!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) OMG. Disbelief in HIV>AIDS = fear of vaccines = purchasing the Foo Fighters box set = Scientology = jumping on Oprah's couch = liberalism. THIS IS BIG. Thanks, JayB. We're on it. Please, tell me the Goo Goo Dolls aren't mixed up in all of this. Edited January 8, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
111 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 parents like that need to be tried for child endangerment. I am sure that many will disagree, but this is a clear case of a parent refusing treatment that could have saved the kid. At least the mom got what was coming to her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I suspect that we'll be hearing more from these folks, rather than less, in the future. More accurately, I'm sure we'll be hearing more from you regarding these folks in the future, whether we want to or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 and we're supposed to give a shit why, exactly? Because you represent a better future, for all of us. I care because the crackpot ideas promulgated by this movement were an integral part of Thabo Mbeki's decision to reject simple anti-HIV interventions that would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, for one thing. The related pseudoscientific hysteria that's driving the anti-vaccine movement serves as a barrier to the complete eradication of preventable diseases that have plagued humanity since time immemorial, and jeopardize the mass-vaccination efforts that lend protection to the people in society who are most vulnerable to the said diseases - the very young, the very old, the immunocompromised, etc. The sublime idiocy that undergirds the creationist movement represents a threat to sound scientific education - which is partly responsible for the genesis of these movements - but it's not a direct threat to anyone's health. Most people who are concerned about one are concerned about the other, but there are always exceptions. You, the embodiment of the better future that we should all strive for, should save your energy for things...like crusading against fluoridation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 I suspect that we'll be hearing more from these folks, rather than less, in the future. More accurately, I'm sure we'll be hearing more from you regarding these folks in the future, whether we want to or not. You realize, of course, that right now, somewhere...someone may be watering their plants with fluorinated tap-water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Up next, Robby Takak on the Defense Department's microwave weather control device.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 How close is the obsession vaccine to clinical trials? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Don't tell Kelly Preston Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken4ord Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 and we're supposed to give a shit why, exactly? Because you represent a better future, for all of us. I care because the crackpot ideas promulgated by this movement were an integral part of Thabo Mbeki's decision to reject simple anti-HIV interventions that would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, for one thing. The related pseudoscientific hysteria that's driving the anti-vaccine movement serves as a barrier to the complete eradication of preventable diseases that have plagued humanity since time immemorial, and jeopardize the mass-vaccination efforts that lend protection to the people in society who are most vulnerable to the said diseases - the very young, the very old, the immunocompromised, etc. The sublime idiocy that undergirds the creationist movement represents a threat to sound scientific education - which is partly responsible for the genesis of these movements - but it's not a direct threat to anyone's health. Most people who are concerned about one are concerned about the other, but there are always exceptions. You, the embodiment of the better future that we should all strive for, should save your energy for things...like crusading against fluoridation. Mbeki was a lost cause anyways, that idoit thought, that after sleeping with a prostitute that was known to be HIV positive, that he couldn't contract the virus. This was because he washed himself after having sex with her. What dumbass, you could probably get this guy to believe anything. I agree JayB, these unfounded stupid beliefs make it difficult discover a vaccine and other preventative methods. Creationism will hinder research in other areas of health related matters for terminal illness's. So tvash, yeah people should be concerned. Maybe you don't know anyboby who has died from Aids and have an extreme belief that those who have contracted it are gay buttfuckers who deserve to die, but I am sure that you have known somebody who has died from cancer or some other type of life threatening illness. Now wouldn't you want that person to have all options available to either be cured, protected or live longer life? Wouldn't you want efforts to continue to investigate better means of taking care of these peoples health? Or do you not give rat's ass about anyone, but yourself? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 parents like that need to be tried for child endangerment. nah, i'd never wanna endanger my own right to off my kid for pissing me off - gotta salute the originality of this particuliar approach - oh well, a few fewer meat puppets in the fucking world... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STP Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I care because the crackpot ideas promulgated by this movement were an integral part of Thabo Mbeki's decision to reject simple anti-HIV interventions that would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, for one thing. The related pseudoscientific hysteria that's driving the anti-vaccine movement serves as a barrier to the complete eradication of preventable diseases that have plagued humanity since time immemorial, and jeopardize the mass-vaccination efforts that lend protection to the people in society who are most vulnerable to the said diseases - the very young, the very old, the immunocompromised, etc. The sublime idiocy that undergirds the creationist movement represents a threat to sound scientific education - which is partly responsible for the genesis of these movements - but it's not a direct threat to anyone's health. I agree with you on one level. It just stands to reason what is right, what is wrong, what is good, what is evil. You might disagree with that stark categorization but it seems to come across based on the comparative number of deaths (or premature deaths, anyway). Dostoevsky said, “Nothing is easier than to denounce the evildoer; nothing is more difficult than to understand him.” So it’s about good and evil but also about what it means to be sane. I suggest it’s something more than tacit rejection of science. Let’s call it the lesser evil syndrome. Some people in the anti-vaccine movement appear to be motivated by the belief that components of modern life cause the body to be more susceptible to illness. So maybe it’s not so much the rejection of science but instead of the orthodoxy, of authority, of the establishment… Perhaps they believe that theirs is the lesser evil. It’s a different calculus for them. Do you believe that what plagues Africa cannot be cured by medicine alone? That was part of Mbeki’s message concerning poverty. So yes, HIV can lead to AIDS but what ails them is greater than viral infection. And again, maybe that's the woman’s message. Although her thinking may have been flawed perhaps it was an attempt to remedy what she perceived as the modern illness, one larger than infection, maybe in an odd way to address the question of sanity. Was the character in “Into the Wild” insane because he hastened his own death? Maybe he stood the definition on its head so that what appears to us as insanity actually is sanity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) Call me crazy, but connecting this one woman's kooky theories in the enlightened U.S. with Mbeki's in unenlightened Africa is a bit too much of a stretch for me. Lumping it in with the anti-vaccine movement that we all know is destined to destroy the planet as we know even smacks even more of a raver's self indulgence. Better check all the outlets in the house to make sure they're right at 120 v while you're at it. BTW, JayB, you could have just linked to the previous 40 page thread you almost single handedly authored on this very same subject a few months ago. What, did you get a calendar reminder on your Blackberry to bring it up yet again or something? I'll bet with a few phone calls you could get into Lyndon LaRouche's next pamphlet. Who knows? In the near future you might find yourself leading a small army of like minded foot soldiers marching towards a more vaccinated future, armed with your very same sense of outrage. Edited January 8, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 Call me crazy, but connecting this one woman's kooky theories in the enlightened U.S. with Mbeki's in unenlightened Africa is a bit too much of a stretch for me.... Of course it is... "Since 1992, Maggiore founded two HIV/AIDS skeptic groups, including the Alive and Well AIDS Alternatives group in Los Angeles. Later, she traveled to Africa and is said to have personally influenced former South African President Thabo Mbeki's decision to block funding for HIV-positive pregnant women in South Africa." Link Love the random non-sequiter + "Ummmm....vaccination?" chaser/combo on the end of that one though. Very humorous to contrast the blase'-I'm-so-over-caring-about-that with the multi-post torrent of spite and venom that poured forth when Blake had the temerity to question the utility of a certain poster's favorite down jacket not so long ago. Good stuff! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 (edited) Madeja look Got my down sweater on right now. I wear it all winter. Love that thing. Edited January 8, 2009 by tvashtarkatena Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I'm with you on the crusade JayB, but Ken's point that Thabo was lost is more than well made. This is the man who still STILL won't condemn Mugabe in Zimbabwe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 I care because the crackpot ideas promulgated by this movement were an integral part of Thabo Mbeki's decision to reject simple anti-HIV interventions that would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, for one thing. The related pseudoscientific hysteria that's driving the anti-vaccine movement serves as a barrier to the complete eradication of preventable diseases that have plagued humanity since time immemorial, and jeopardize the mass-vaccination efforts that lend protection to the people in society who are most vulnerable to the said diseases - the very young, the very old, the immunocompromised, etc. The sublime idiocy that undergirds the creationist movement represents a threat to sound scientific education - which is partly responsible for the genesis of these movements - but it's not a direct threat to anyone's health. I agree with you on one level. It just stands to reason what is right, what is wrong, what is good, what is evil. You might disagree with that stark categorization but it seems to come across based on the comparative number of deaths (or premature deaths, anyway). Dostoevsky said, “Nothing is easier than to denounce the evildoer; nothing is more difficult than to understand him.” So it’s about good and evil but also about what it means to be sane. I suggest it’s something more than tacit rejection of science. Let’s call it the lesser evil syndrome. Some people in the anti-vaccine movement appear to be motivated by the belief that components of modern life cause the body to be more susceptible to illness. So maybe it’s not so much the rejection of science but instead of the orthodoxy, of authority, of the establishment… Perhaps they believe that theirs is the lesser evil. It’s a different calculus for them. Do you believe that what plagues Africa cannot be cured by medicine alone? That was part of Mbeki’s message concerning poverty. So yes, HIV can lead to AIDS but what ails them is greater than viral infection. And again, maybe that's the woman’s message. Although her thinking may have been flawed perhaps it was an attempt to remedy what she perceived as the modern illness, one larger than infection, maybe in an odd way to address the question of sanity. Was the character in “Into the Wild” insane because he hastened his own death? Maybe he stood the definition on its head so that what appears to us as insanity actually is sanity. I personally think it's sufficient to describe Maggiore and the set of beliefs that she dedicated her life to advancing as tragically incorrect, profoundly misguided, immensely destructive, etc. Whether they're consistent with canonical definitions of evil might make for an interesting discussion, but I don't think it's a question that needs to be definitively resolved before one can single her and her ilk out for intense criticism and condemnation. I am not sure that I completely understand what you are saying in the parts of your post that touch on the question of "what is sanity," but I do think that it's important to recognize the difference between facts and value judgments when deciding whether a particular belief is defensible or not. "The color orange is superior to the color blue" is a value judgment that can't be settled by recourse to any evidence whatsoever. The answer is entirely dependent on the premises that one uses to define and assess superiority, etc. "The Earth revolves around the Sun" is a statement of fact that can be definitively proven or disproven by recourse to evidence. McCandless is analogous to someone who thought that orange was superior to blue, and Maggiore and her fellow travelers fall into the category of persons who believe a falsehood no less egregious than believing that the Earth does not, in fact, revolve around the Sun. Even if Maggiore did adhere to the beliefs that you attribute to her, the question then becomes - did she have a defensible basis for believing them? Ditto for the folks in the anti-vaccine movement. The answer is a categorical no in both cases, and as such there is no rational argument that can redeem them. I do think it's useful to try to understand why people subscribe to profoundly irrational beliefs that are completely at odds with indisputable facts, if for no other reason than to more effectively limit their impact - but you've got to draw the line between defensible and indefensible beliefs before doing so. People like McCandless, who have done nothing more than make some uncommon different value judgments don't need to have their sanity questioned or defended. People like Maggiore don't deserve either. P.S. - Always enjoy your posts. Oops - I also meant to answer your question about whether medicine is sufficient to fix what ails Africa. The answer there is a categorical no, of course. If you limit the question to AIDS, the answer is still no - but scientific medicine clearly does have the potential to dramatically reduce the suffering and devastation that the disease inflicts upon people who contract it, reduce the probability of transmission from mother to child, etc. Moreover, since doing all of the above will help combat any number of the continent's other ailments that are compounded by AIDS, the policy arguments put forth by Mbeki, Maggiore et al are no more defensible than their statements that HIV infection does not cause AIDS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STP Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I suspect that we'll be hearing more from these folks, rather than less, in the future. sort of an aside...just a little time for this one post. Don't have time to expand on it. This counterculture doesn't seem to be influenced by fringe beliefs alone. Mainstream personalities like Senator Orrin Hatch inadvertently helped the movement for alternative medicine by persuading the FDA not to regulate herbals. Also, the populist movement for medical marijuana (low cost alternative to high cost prescription medication) provides input. The confluence of these developments together with the rising cost of health care AND the medium provided by the Internet suggest that what you predict is true. Concerning the latter: The Constant Gardener [video:youtube]RkieOtnzgA0 Wim Wender's Until the End of the World [video:youtube]G3kFngoVO4s Does life imitate art? Dreams may no longer be secret with Japan computer screen SELF AWARENESS: THE LAST FRONTIER Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 and we're supposed to give a shit why, exactly? Because you represent a better future, for all of us. I care because the crackpot ideas promulgated by this movement were an integral part of Thabo Mbeki's decision to reject simple anti-HIV interventions that would have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, for one thing. The related pseudoscientific hysteria that's driving the anti-vaccine movement serves as a barrier to the complete eradication of preventable diseases that have plagued humanity since time immemorial, and jeopardize the mass-vaccination efforts that lend protection to the people in society who are most vulnerable to the said diseases - the very young, the very old, the immunocompromised, etc. The sublime idiocy that undergirds the creationist movement represents a threat to sound scientific education - which is partly responsible for the genesis of these movements - but it's not a direct threat to anyone's health. Most people who are concerned about one are concerned about the other, but there are always exceptions. You, the embodiment of the better future that we should all strive for, should save your energy for things...like crusading against fluoridation. Mbeki was a lost cause anyways, that idoit thought, that after sleeping with a prostitute that was known to be HIV positive, that he couldn't contract the virus. This was because he washed himself after having sex with her. That wasn't Mbeki. It was Jacob Zuma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choada_Boy Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Do you know who the best judge of whether or not HIV causes AIDS? A mommy! Seriously, fine, believe what you want and kill your own kids in the process. Go for it. But the dumb FUCKS who think vaccines cause autism, for the sake of the rest of us, need to be dragged out back and shot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 It would seem that the 'HIV doesn't cause AIDS' gene is being efficiently removed from the gene pool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STP Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 I don't feel I'm adequate to do justice in responding fully or expanding on your posts but I gotta say that the strength of your logical consistency is almost frightening. But here's where the problem lies. It would be simpler if we were logic machines. If solutions were based solely and objectively on facts then more problems would be resolved. Perhaps value judgments are more important than facts alone in evaluating a problem, at least with social problems. Even though value judgments can be examined in isolation, to make more sense it seems they have to viewed in their totality (or in some framework) since value judgments figure into a person's worldview. Thus, my current obsession with sanity. It is subjective in a sense despite the DSM IV. And more importantly, as pathology can the individual be held ultimately responsible? So there's that--sanity from society's POV and then there's sanity from the individual POV. There's also some philosophical crossover with the Death with Dignity issue. Does a higher standard of living or life longevity mean a higher sanity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tvashtarkatena Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Some time ago I read a book about the use of L Dopa to successfully treat catatonia induced by encephalitis (Sachs?). What struck me was the lack of correlation between physiological damage and quality of recovery and function, which seemed to depend more on 19th century terms like 'strength of will' and the 'force of character'. The author wrote extensively and sympathetically about the unique nature of each individual's condition, and how much it informs the experience of those who do not share the same perspective. Thankfully, we are primarily value based creatures with unique, unpredictable natures, rather than members of a sophisticated insect colony. Or perhaps we are the latter and fail to realize or refuse to accept it, and are therefore all delusional? We could never be entirely logical animals, because our existence is neither likely nor logical. It is meaningless until we give it meaning, and even then that meaning is entirely subjective and dependent on observers who never entirely agree; a situation which, by its very nature, is absurd. Thankfully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.