Depleted Cranium Bad Science And Scary Science Wed, 29 Jul 2015 12:18:33 +0000 en-US hourly 1 An Attempt to Quantify The Number of Deaths Attributable to the Anti-Vaccine Movement Sat, 20 Jun 2015 22:29:07 +0000 For some time a single question has been vexing me:  Just how many people are dead because of the anti-vaccine movement?   We know that people have died because of it.  That’s for sure.  There are diseases that were all but wiped out from the industrial world that have come roaring back, and which have claimed lives.

Today many people refuse to vaccinate themselves or their children and lives are being lost.  We will certainly never know how many, but perhaps we can get a reasonable estimate.

There is a website that does attempt to provide some statistics. provides information on the number of vaccine preventible deaths in the United States since 2007.  However, there are some problems with this methodology.  For one thing, it only takes into account the United States.  It’s understandable to stick to one country, because it’s much harder to get the statistics from many countries, but it’s certainly very narrow.  It also only goes back to 2007, while the anti-vaccine movement goes back further than that.  Finally, it’s not entirely fair to consider all the deaths from vaccine preventible diseases are because of the anti-vaccine movement.  Vaccines are not 100% effective and sometimes people don’t bother to get them, but not because of the movement.

wakefield44It should be noted that the anti-vaccine movement is not entirely new.  It has existed for almost as long as vaccines.  But it was once very fringe and relatively ineffective.  Up to the 1990′s, most parents vaccinated without question.  The modern movement was almost entirely invented by Andrew Wakefield.  His fraudulent 1998 paper on vaccines and autism touched off a media storm that grew into the full-blown anti-vaccine movement.  In the years that followed, the movement expanded to claim vaccines caused everything from asthma to SIDS.

Today many parents have concerns over vaccines and many people still think they cause autism or other health issues.  This was almost non-existent until 1998.


My methodology to determine the number:

Measels2In order to get a reasonable estimate of how many lives have been snuffed out by the anti-vaccine movement, I have begun to look at the data on vaccine-preventible infectious diseases in modern, industrial countries.  The anti-vaccine movement may have started in the UK, but it’s now pervasive in the US, Canada, Australia and across Europe.  The numbers don’t lie.  Both infection rates and deaths have begun to climb after years of decline.

I settled on the year 2000 as the start of where I would begin to measure the effects of the anti-vaccine movement.  This is partially arbitrary, but I chose as a time when the movement really started to gain traction and to provide a couple of years of time to elapse from the initial fraudulent study.  It is also about the time that we can first begin to see the rise in death rates from vaccine preventible diseases.

Take, for example, whooping cough.  It kills mainly infants and had been a major concern until the late 20th century.  However, a highly effective vaccine had resulted in a rapid decline.  By the early 1990′s, the United States was experiencing an average of just about four or five whooping cough deaths per year.  It’s entirely reasonable to presume that the trend would have continued, or, at the very least, the numbers would have stabilized with only five or less deaths happening per year, if things had continued.

But that’s not what happened.  Starting in the early 2000′s, the rate of whooping cough started to climb.  In 2014, there were 16 whooping cough deaths in the United States.  That was not even a bad year, relatively speaking.  26 died in 2010 and 31 in 2005. Such numbers would have seemed unbelievable in the early 1990′s, when the disease seemed under control.

All told, if five had died per year (a reasonable assumption for the average, if the trend had held), then 75 lives would have been lost between 2000 and 2014.  But the actual number was 240 lives lost.  Thus, we can see an excess of 165 deaths since the year 2000.   Perhaps these are not all because of the anti-vaccine movement, but again, this is only the best estimate.  It’s not possible to ever know the exact number for sure.

I then went on to try to compile similar numbers for all other vaccine preventible diseases in the United States, and, after that, for the other countries that have been impacted by the anti-vaccine movement.

It turns out this is really hard to do.


The most obvious issue is just the sheer number of statistics that have to be tracked down.  Finding the number of deaths from whooping cough, rubella, measles, hib and every other vaccine-preventible disease is difficult for one country.  It’s a huge amount of work for the numerous countries and years in question.

Some diseases do not show a spike as early as others.  This may be because there are still many who have been vaccinated years ago.  In any case, there is always some delay in seeing the reemergence of a disease in a population that stops vaccinating, but how long that takes depends on the nature of the disease and how long the vaccine lasts.

A bigger problem is estimating the number of deaths that would occur if the anti-vaccine movement didn’t exist.  For some diseases, like whooping cough, it’s not too hard.  Whooping cough was in a steady state of decline and had leveled off at just a handful of deaths per year, at least in the US, although some other countries had not controlled it as effectively.  Other diseases are more difficult.  For example, there have been many meningococcal outbreaks over the years, and these have largely been the result of inadequate vaccination.  It seems that the numbers were never very good, but efforts were being made to improve the vaccine rates.  Would these efforts have been more successful without the antivaccine movement?  It’s hard to say.

One of the biggest wildcards is the flu.  Influenza varies greatly year to year, so there’s no easily observable trend.  It also requires an annual vaccine, and, despite efforts to deploy the vaccine as widely as possible, many don’t get it.  It’s not necessarily the anti-vaccine movement, but simply that many don’t bother to get the vaccine each year.  Would these efforts be more successful without the antivaccine movement?  Again, it’s hard to say.

The best that can be done in many of these circumstances is to try to track down projections made by organizations like the WHO and the CDC, for their efforts to reduce these diseases and then compare them to what actually happened after the anti-vaccine movement started.

Other wildcards and numbers that are difficult to pin down:

I started with just the industrial countries that had high vaccine rates to begin with, but the anti-vaccine movement has also had impacts on less developed nations.  Efforts to deploy vaccines in third world countries have been hampered by the rumors started by the anti-vaccine advocates in wealthy nations.  That said, even without the anti-vaccine movement, some of these sentiments may still have existed, just because of fear of foreigners and modern medicine.

So how much progress by efforts to extend vaccines into poor areas has been lost to the anti-vaccine movement?  Again, it’s very hard to say.

sinclairBeyond that, there are other deaths that are certainly associated with the anti-vaccine movement, but are even more difficult to pin down.  There are the direct deaths, caused by vaccine preventible diseases and then there are indirect deaths.  These are those who died because of the resources sapped by vaccine-preventible diseases.  Around the world, nearly ever healthcare system is feeling the crunch of more demand for care, and vaccine-preventible diseases only make this worse.  Every time a measles patient has to be hospitalized, that is one more hospital bed occupied, which can’t be used by someone else.  It increases pressure for fast discharges.  It means doctors spend more time treating diseases that could have been prevented and have less time to attend to others.  This surely costs lives.

There are economists out there who make a living of predicting things like the number of deaths that occur for every dollar or added expense to a healthcare system or how much the average lifespan is reduced when a hospital bed becomes unavailable.  These calculations, however, are highly hypothetical and difficult to prove empirically.

There are also those who may die of other infections because their systems have been weakened by vaccine preventible diseases.  Contrary to what some claim, diseases do not strengthen the immune system, but they can weaken it.  It has been shown, for example, that the measles vaccine prevents deaths from diseases other than measles because having measles increases the likelihood of dying from another disease.

So how many is it?

You may notice that there are few hard numbers in this post.  Unfortunately, as of now, this project of mine is continuing and proving to be more difficult than I had expected.  At present, I’ve already tallied a clear increase in deaths from several diseases, in the US alone, which accounts for hundreds of lives lost.

The best I can give right now is a very rough estimate, based on my data thus far.

Conservatively, thousands.  At the very minimum, at least 2,000-4,000 lives have been lost because of the anti-vaccine movement.  But I must stress that is conservative.  It seems that it is likely to be more than 6,000 lives lost. I do not think it is likely that direct deaths will surpass 20,000, but it’s possible that it could be higher, with the indirect deaths and those in third world countries, especially where healthcare systems are overtaxed considered.

Yes, I know, those are some very vague numbers.  But given the complexity of this project, it’s the best estimate I can now give.   There is absolutely no doubt that it is in the thousands.  Thousands of innocent lives, many of children, snuffed out.  It’s really mind-boggling.  Thousands of families that will never be the same.  Thousands of graduations, marriages, careers and retirements that will never happen because a life was unnecessarily snuffed out.

By these numbers doctors like Andrew Wakefield (and his cohorts, Sherri Tenpenny, Jack Wolfson, Susan Humphries and Bob Sears) as well as the other activists have a huge amount of blood on their hands.  Having started the movement, Andrew Wakefield is one of history’s most prolific killing doctor.  He he is responsible for far more deaths than Dr. HH Holmes or Dr. Harold Shipman.  However, at least thus far, he is probably responsible for less deaths than Dr. Josef Mengele.



]]> 15
Satellites Do not Exist – Literally the Dumbest Video I Have Ever Seen Sun, 31 May 2015 23:32:03 +0000 This video is breathtaking….


Yeah.  Really.  People believe that.  It takes the whole moon landing hoax to the next level.
Okay, I want to restrain myself,  because I could go off on this all night and I think most readers will understand these things anyway….

Not only can you detect the radio waves from satellites, but you can actually see them.  You can see them with the naked eye and you can make out details of large ones with a telescope.

In space there is almost no atmosphere, so the temperature of the few molecules bouncing around does not matter.  Space has no ambient temperature.  The temperature of an object depends on the rate it radiates heat, whether it is absorbing heat from the sun and whether it produces its own heat.  Indeed, a thermometer, with no internal heating, placed in space, will get very cold because it radiates heat faster than it is absorbed. However, equipment that generates heat can get very hot because there is no convection cooling.  In fact, thermal management of spacecraft is a very complex engineering challenge.

A rocket engine does not need air to push against. It does not need anything to push against. Its own exhaust is what it is pushing against. Really, you could set off a rocket in a vacuum chamber if you do not believe me. Air is not needed for thrust or control.

Solar cells are not used on spacecraft because of environmental concerns. The sun is very intense in space and provides a lot of power. Solar cells last much longer than fuel cells or batteries and you can’t use a combustion motor in space without bringing along oxygen. Although nuclear power sources have also been used, for most applications in the vicinity of earth, solar cells are the most economical and easiest way to provide necessary power to a spacecraft.

We have tons of photographs of earth from satellites. How many do you want? Most are from low earth orbit and therefore, only a portion of the earth is seen. You need to go much further away to see the whole thing, but there are plenty of those too, taken from deeper space missions. The “Blue Marble” taken during Apollo 17 is iconic as it was one of the earliest full disk pictures of the earth (though not actually the first) and got a lot of attention. There are many others, but it is one of the best know.

The guy talking about radio propagation has it all wrong.  Sky wave propagation only applies to HF signals, and even then it’s fickle and depends on the ionospheric conditions. These signals lack the high bandwidth needed for things like television.  Satellites use microwave frequencies, which are also very directional and usually require a high gain antenna, like a dish.  This is why you get different signals when pointed at different satellites and none when pointed at empty parts of the sky.
Also, satellites really haven’t gotten “larger” or “smaller.” The sizes are highly varied.  Indeed, the first satellites were small, because of limited rocket technology.  By the late 1960′s, satellites the size of a bus could be launched and were used for things like surveillance.  Some payloads, like Skylab, were enormous.  Today some satellites are very big, but the miniaturization of electronics has also allowed some very small satellites to be useful.

Finally, it is possible to find pictures of satellites that are real photographs. However, the issue is that in order to photograph a satellite in detail, you need another satellite flying near it with a camera, and we don’t usually have that. Illustrations are thus easier to make. Also, if you want to show several satellites in relation to the earth, you have to use an illustration, because it’s obviously not going to be to scale. You want a photograph of the entire GPS constellation flying around earth? Not possible. The satellites are too small in relation to the earth.

It’s amazing how little these people understand of basic concepts and how poor they are at researching and educating themselves.  Yet they will declare with authority that everyone else is one of the “Sheeple.”

Yeah.  I have a basic understanding of physics and radio communications.  I must be bought and paid for by the government

]]> 15
EM Drive Tested By NASA: Lets Not Get Too Excited Just Yet Wed, 06 May 2015 17:35:51 +0000 A big news story has been making the rounds about a new and potentially game changing space propulsion technology, which was recently tested by NASA scientists in a vacuum chamber at the Manned Space Flight Center in Houston Texas.  The system, called the EM Drive, is based on microwaves bouncing around a specially shaped cavity.  These aledgedly create thrust, thus making it possible for the EM drive to be used as a propulsion system, if attached to a spacecraft.

What  makes the EM drive so much different than any previous propulsion technology is that it does so without expelling any propellant.  All existing rocket engines use some kind of material, known as reaction mass, in order to produce thrust.  Even highly efficient ion engines require a gas of some sort to be used as the reactionary mass.  The need for propellant is a major limiting factor in spaceflight.  It means that propellant must be launched with the spacecraft, often constituting a large percentage of the spacecraft’s mass.  It also limits the duration of the spaceflight.  Eventually the propellant runs out.  However, the EM drive uses only energy, which can be provided almost without limits by solar panels or a nuclear power source, which could provide energy for decades.emdrive

The only problem with this is that the whole concept seems to violate the law of conservation of momentum.  Our current understanding of physics would seem to indicate that this is impossible.  You can’t add momentum to something without pushing off of something else.  Every action has an equal and opposite reaction, and that’s why rockets need to shoot propellant in one direction to go in the other.

Via IO9:

New Test Suggests NASA’s “Impossible” EM Drive Will Work In Space
[T]he EM Drive’s thrust was due to the Quantum Vacuum (the quantum state with the lowest possible energy) behaving like propellant ions behave in a MagnetoHydroDynamics drive (a method electrifying propellant and then directing it with magnetic fields to push a spacecraft in the opposite direction) for spacecraft propulsion.
Last year, NASA’s advanced propulsion research wing made headlines by announcing the successful test of a physics-defying electromagnetic drive, or EM drive. Now, this futuristic engine, which could in theory propel objects to near-relativistic speeds, has been shown to work inside a space-like vacuum.

NASA Eagleworks made the announcement quite unassumingly via There’s also a major discussion going on about the engine and the physics that drives it at the site’s forum.

The EM drive is controversial in that it appears to violate conventional physics and the law of conservation of momentum; the engine, invented by British scientist Roger Sawyer, converts electric power to thrust without the need for any propellant by bouncing microwaves within a closed container. So, with no expulsion of propellant, there’s nothing to balance the change in the spacecraft’s momentum during acceleration. Hence the skepticism. But as stated by NASA Eagleworks scientist Harold White:

The trouble with this theory, however, is that it might not work in a closed vacuum. After last year’s tests of the engine, which weren’t performed in a vacuum, skeptics argued that the measured thrust was attributable to environmental conditions external to the drive, such as natural thermal convection currents arising from microwave heating.

The recent experiment, however, addressed this concern head-on, while also demonstrating the engine’s potential to work in space. (Image: NASA Eagleworks.)

For those who champion the EM drive, the new experiment is certainly a big step toward proving it can actually work. However, it’s only one step, and there are many that will need to be taken.

The fact that it seems to violate a basic law of physics does not mean that it is necessarily impossible. In science, nothing, not even the most well established theories are ever considered absolutely impossible to be wrong.  We do know that Newtonian physics has its limits and that relativity and quantum mechanics allow things to happen that regular Newtonian physics would not predict.  We also don’t necessarily have a full understanding of all that can happen as a result of quantum forces.

None the less, a claim this extraordinary requires extraordinary proof.  No experiment, no matter how apparently well designed and documented, offers enough evidence to come to the conclusion that something as amazing as the EM drive actually works.  What will be needed is for the experimental results to be replicated, by different teams, under different conditions and different scales and for the experimental setups to all be thoroughly examined to rule out any systematic errors or confounding factors.

But there is something more fundamentally wrong with this:

In the world of serious science, it’s never good enough to just provide a claim that an experiment confirms a hypothesis.  It’s never enough to just provide one basic measure of data.  The experiment and the results need to be thoroughly and properly documented and the data provided in full for examination and to allow the basic methodology to be examined.  This should be done in a peer reviewed journal.

Of course, peer review is not infallible.  There can still be errors, and it definitely can’t catch all the problems a study may have.  Regardless of how good the peer review is, something this earth shattering will still need confirmation.  But peer review is, none the less, the minimum standard to take scientific data seriously.  If it’s not peer reviewed, it’s about as reliable as something that your cousin’s friend’s neighbor says they remember overhearing at a cocktail party.  In other words, not very.

Not only was this data not formally reported in a peer reviewed study, it was reported in about the most informal and unverifiable way imaginable.  The data, not only being incomplete, but being posted on an internet form.  If there is a worse source of scientific data than a press release, this is it.

Personally, I would love to find out that the EM drive does work as claimed.  It would mean a new era in space exploration and would be one of the most revolutionary developments in space exploration since the first successful satellite launches.  However, wanting it to be true does not make it true.   If we can get a formal, peer reviewed paper on it, we can at least begin to consider the possibilities.  At minimum, it would give some solid data.  Until then, this really is little more than some unsubstantiated claims and speculation.

]]> 32
Natural Cancer Cure Guru Lied About Having Cancer Wed, 22 Apr 2015 22:50:46 +0000 Not long ago, Jessica Ainscough died from lack of treatment for her cancer.  For the past few years, she had been promoting various ‘alternative’ cancer treatments, which, she claimed, would cure the cancer she had as well as others.   It didn’t, and, predictably, she died.  However, it’s hard not to have some sympathy for her.  After all, she clearly believed the garbage she was spouting, because she had enough faith in it to let it kill her.

What would be truly revolting would be if someone had gone around making similar claims and raking in money for it, but lied about having cancer the whole time.

Well, that just happened.


Belle Gibson: ‘No, None of it is true’

DISGRACED wellness blogger Belle Gibson has admitted she deceived her followers, friends and family about having cancer and curing her illness with healthy eating and natural therapies.

The 23-year-old was accused of fabricating her terminal brain cancer and making a profit from her story via her wellness app, The Whole Pantry.

Last month it was revealed Gibson failed to donate $300,000 from the sales of her app to charity as promised and her friends had started to question the legitimacy of her diagnosis. Earlier this month, Victoria Police said they would not pursue criminal charges against Gibson.

Speaking out about the controversy in an exclusive interview with The Australian Women’s Weekly, Gibson was asked outright if she has, or has ever had cancer.

“No. None of it’s true,” she confessed.

“I am still jumping between what I think I know and what is reality. I have lived it and I’m not really there yet,” she said.

The Weekly speculates that Gibson suffers from a psychological condition called factitious disorder or Munchausen syndrome (see below for an explainer) — where sufferers feign disease or illness to gain attention.

Gibson fails to explain in detail how and why she lied about her condition.

“I think my life has just got so many complexities around it and within it, that it’s just easier to assume [I’m lying],” she said.

“If I don’t have an answer, then I will sort of theorise it myself and come up with one. I think that’s an easy thing to often revert to if you don’t know what the answer is.”

Gibson believes her “troubled” childhood may have led her to lie about her condition.

The young mother — she has a 4-year-old son called Olivier — claims she was forced to take care of herself from the age of five.

“When I started school, my mum went, ‘My daughter is grown up now’. All of a sudden I was walking to school on my own, making school lunches and cleaning the house every day.

“It was my responsibility to do grocery shopping, do the washing, arrange medical appointments and pick up my brother. I didn’t have any toys.” Gibson is now estranged from her mother and would not provide The Weekly with her first name or contact details.

Gibson is still with her partner Clive Rothwell, who declined to be interviewed by The Weekly. She says Rothwell is “supportive, but obviously very devastated” by her betrayal.

“He’s been very stern, along the lines of, ‘I just want you to acknowledge where you’ve f***ed up and try not to smooth over that,” she said.

The recent controversy has put Gibson in a difficult financial position. Penguin Australia has stopped supplying her book and Apple have dropped her app.

She has returned her rental car and will soon move out of her beachside home. Accountants have been instructed to give any leftover funds to the charities Gibson pledged money to.

Gibson says the public backlash against her has been “horrible”.

“In the last two years I have worked every single day living and raising up an online community of people who supported each other … I understand the confusion and the suspicion, but I also know that people need to draw a line in the sand where they still treat someone with some level of respect or humility — and I have not been receiving that.”

TROUBLED CHILDHOOD? A lot of people have troubled childhoods. A lot of people have horrible lives. Hell, many people ACTUALLY DO HAVE CANCER and they do not go around scamming other people and telling such viscous and harmful lies.

And she has the nerve to now complain that the backlash should be horrible? I have no words.

I would normally never think it right to wish cancer on someone, but damn it, this horrid person actually kind of deserves it, for having pretended to have had it and cured herself for years. She lived in a beach side home and raked in hundreds of thousands of dollars based on this scam.

This is, quite possibly, the single most evil story I have read about quackery and alternative medicine, and that’s saying a lot.

I don’t know anything about Australian laws, but it seems to me like there has to be something she can be charged with? Fraud, perhaps? Possibly even manslaughter, if it can be proven that her actions lead to a death, which they very well may have.  Surely there is a prosecutor in Australia who can hit her with something and make it stick.

More information here, from an article written by a cancer survivor, who is suitably outraged by this.

]]> 15
Yet another study proves vaccines do not cause autism Wed, 22 Apr 2015 02:25:08 +0000 Vaccines don’t cause autism.  We know that.  We’ve known it for a while.  There has never been a shred of evidence that they do.  There have been studies done that conclusively show they do not.

Now a new study has come out showing that there is zero increase in the risk of autism in children who are given the MMR vaccine, even in those who are already at high risk for autism.  This refutes the claim made by some that vaccines contribute to autism or are a factor that exacerbates it.

Via CBS News:

Will latest study on vaccines and autism change minds?

Yet another study finds no evidence that the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine raises the risk of autism — even among children who are at increased genetic risk.

Experts said the findings, reported in the April 21 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, should be reassuring to parents, particularly those who already have a child with autism.

The theory that MMR vaccination raises the risk of autism has its roots in a small study done in 1998 — one that was later found to be fraudulent. Since then, numerous international studies have found no evidence that vaccines help trigger autism.

Still, some parents remain worried. And those who already have a child with autism seem even more concerned.

“Research has shown that parents of kids with autism spectrum disorders are more likely to delay vaccinating their younger children,” said Dr. Bryan King, an autism researcher at the University of Washington, in Seattle.

“Basically, they wait until the developmental dust has settled, and it looks like their child will be unaffected (by autism),” said King, who wrote an editorial published with the study.

But delaying recommended vaccinations puts children at risk of potentially serious infections, said Dr. Anjali Jain, the study leader and a researcher at the Lewin Group, a healthcare consulting firm in Falls Church, Va.

It’s known that genes make certain children more vulnerable to autism — that’s why kids with an affected older sibling are at higher-than-average risk. But environmental factors also have to play a role, experts believe.

One theory, King said, is that it takes a “triple hit” — genes, plus an environmental trigger that strikes during a particular time window in brain development.

But based on years of research, the MMR vaccine is not that trigger, according to health experts. “Every study that’s looked at this, through every strategy they’ve used, has found no signal,” King said.

The increase in autism is most likely the result of increased screening and a broadening of the diagnostic criteria for the condition.

This study may put some pressure on certain groups, such as Generation Rescue or Autism Speaks, who are trying to put a legitimate face on the lies they tell, even despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary. Sadly, it is unlikely to do much for the average anti-vaxxer. Such individuals are not interested in science and not persuaded by data. If they were, this would have been over a long time ago.

It may also help in convincing those who are sitting on the fence or who are generally ignorant of the issue and are facing the decision of whether or not to vaccinate their first child. In such circumstances, every chance to get such information in the general media should be seen as a victory.

The topic of why otherwise intelligent people subscribe to discredited ideas like vaccines causing autism is another discussion onto itself. It involves a complex mix of cognitive dissonance, being heavily invested in something, persecution complexes, and a near-religious conviction in the idea. Thus, this will not change any minds that have already been made up.

]]> 8
How The Anti-Vaccine Movement Is Funded Sat, 18 Apr 2015 17:37:22 +0000 Of all the modern anti-science movements out there, few are more dangerous or harmful than the anti-vaccine movement. Yes, it has killed people. It will continue to kill people. It has also resulted in huge amounts of money and resources being devoted to combating public health problems that should have (and in some cases were) eliminated years ago.

One thing that is very noteworthy about the movement is just how well funded it seems to be.  Obviously some of the funding comes from the fact that it often is a business and money is invested directly to make a return.  Many of the dishonest doctors who have spoken out against vaccines do so to make money directly.  In such cases, it is a self-funded enterprise, promoted like any other venture and funded by the sales of books, lecture tickets and various “detoxification” products and a like.

The alternative medicine world is very lucrative and has a great deal of interest in the anti-vaccine movement.  Many of the promoters are either directly or indirectly profiting from it.  Some may simply be pushing the message of homeopathy or other areas of quackery and the message against vaccines is simply part and parcel of the medical philosophy they choose to sell.

There are also true “grass roots” activists out there (read idiots).  They work on their own time and may even contribute their own money to efforts to stop the progress of vaccines in combating infectious disease.  However, these efforts are usually very amateurish in their style.

A few organizations stand out, however, as having a very professional and credible image which has clearly come from a well-funded effort targeted directly at discrediting vaccines.  Chief among them is the National Vaccine Information Center.  It is a non-profit that has paid for billboards and media campaigns against vaccines and runs one of the most visited websites on the topic.  What makes it stand out is how professional and well managed the effort seems to be.  The website is well designed and looks credible.  The information provided is also deceptively well worded.  They stay away from the more outlandish claims of things like chemtrails and Illuminati plots, but drive home a seemingly plausible story of deaths and injuries from vaccines.

Like many such efforts, they are hiding behind the false notion of “personal choice” in a matter which really only has one rational choice.  There is no valid scientific reason to oppose vaccines (unless you just hate humans and love pathogens.)   But the slick campaign and message makes it clear that there are deep pockets behind the effort.

Similar efforts have funded everything from advertisements in magazines to “independent” documentary movies on the topic.

It turns out that there are, in fact, some very wealthy individuals who are behind this. Their motive seems to be a genuine belief that vaccines cause harm. Clearly, you can be rich and still very stupid.

This video from CNN just scratches the surface of the issue:


(click here if your browser does not support embedded video)Unfortunately, it will be hard to take down these well-funded foundations. If these were rich individuals who were making money in a certain business sector, the
logical thing to do would be to destroy their companies through boycotts. Yet these foundations seem to be mostly founded by individuals with a lot of acquired wealth, which is not going anywhere. The Dwoskins do make money from a current property management group, but it would be hard to boycott such a company, since they have a limited number of clients, many of whom are locked into leases. Barry Segal is retired and just has a lot of money burning a hole in his pocket so little can be done there.

None the less, it is important not to become completely discouraged. This is not a grass-roots movement. It’s both a business sector and a campaign by some very twisted rich people. That should be all the more reason to get the message out and fight back.  Just getting out that message alone can do much to undermine the image the movement has worked to craft.

]]> 13
A wonderful and inspirational Facebook page Wed, 01 Apr 2015 18:54:34 +0000 A happy April first to all!

As I promised, I have not abandoned this blog.  After a hiatus, I will be back in the near future with many more posts.

In the mean time, I suggest this Facebook Page, where you can gain your share of daily wisdom and inspiration on things like natural health and organics!

]]> 6
No, the site is not dead. Yes, there will be new content Mon, 09 Mar 2015 19:30:15 +0000 Just a quick announcement:  Many have pointed out that new content for this site has been a bit lacking recently.  I totally understand this and the concern that the twilight of Depleted Cranium might be looming.   However, I have every intent of keeping up the blog.

Right now, I have a number of personal and professional obligations converging.  As a result, I will be on more or less of a hiatus from new posts until April.

I realize that blogs thrive on new content and taking some time off will likely mean diminished traffic and page ranks.  Unfortunately, I just have too much going on.
Steve Packard

]]> 8
The Best Late Night Bit Ever (on Vaccines) Sat, 28 Feb 2015 18:23:10 +0000 Rarely do I create a post just to show off a video, much less a comedy video from a late night television show.  However, this bit from Jimmy Kimmel Live is great.  It’s about vaccines and it’s funny and on point.

I think my favorite thing about this is that the message to vaccinate kids and opposition to the anti-vaccine movement is making such a strong showing in the mainstream media.  While late night talk shows aren’t exactly the best place to get information, they are a good reflection on cultural trends.  Putting out the pro-vaccine message on science blogs and even in the news media is great and should be encouraged.  However, it is a huge step when it starts to enter more of our culture and media.

Ridicule is also a important weapon in opposing anti-science rhetoric and quackery.  There is nothing wrong with calling an idea stupid when it is, in fact, stupid, and sometimes putting it in its place with appropriate ridicule is the best way of driving the point home.  There’s also good reason why humor is used in so many advertisements.  Humor gets people’s attention and helps make the message memorable.

Here’s the clip from Jimmy Kimmel Live.  It’s fantastic.

(Click here if your browser does not support embedded video)

]]> 13
As Predicted, Jessica Ainscough Has Died Of Her Untreated Cancer Fri, 27 Feb 2015 18:03:38 +0000 Jessicadead


I take no pleasure in saying this.  However, it has come to my attention that Jessica Ainscough, the woman who I predicted would die of untreated cancer has passed away.

She was 30 years.  She spent seven of those years with a slowly progressing cancer that would ultimately kill her.

It was 2012 when I predicted this outcome, noting that the slow moving cancer would likely take a few more years to kill her.  It took about three.   To be perfectly honest, that’s roughly what I had expected, based on what doctors had told me and some research on the progression of the condition.

It is surely a sad day for her friends and family.  It’s terrible to lose a life at such an age, especially when it could have been prevented.  However, I believe this needs to be publicized and used as an example of how deadly cancer quackery can be.  She spent much of her life encouraging others to go down the path of fake treatments and quackery.  The ultimate result should be proof to any others who face the difficult decision of how to treat their cancer.

More info can be found here.

]]> 111