On February 18, New York University hosted at Tishman Hall a book launch for Vaccine Epidemic: How Corporate Greed, Biased Science, and Coercive Government Threaten Our Human Rights, Our Health, and Our Children, co-edited by Louise Habakus and Professor Mary Holland. The book was published by Skyhorse Publishing, which also published Andrew Wakefield’s book Callous Disregard: Autism and Vaccines: The Truth Behind a Tragedy last year as well as Kim Stagliano’s recent book All I Can Handle: I’m No Mother Teresa: A Life Raising Three Daughters with Autism.
This event took the form of three separate panel discussions with various vaccine critics, including Andrew Wakefield and Sherri Tenpenny, among others. Also in attendance were, we were told, authors David Kirby and Kim Stagliano. Each were given loud standing ovations when identified.
I attended the event and decided to present an exclusive look at what transpired in four parts, one for the introduction by the book’s co-authors and one for each of the three panel discussions, which Mary Holland said mirrored the structure of the book.
Right off the bat, it’s necessary to point out the misleading title of the event: Is It Ethical to Kill a Child to Save Other Children? No reputable health organization in the world would suggest vaccination was akin to child sacrifice, as the organizers of this event have clearly done. The title of this event is deliberately misleading, implying successful mass inoculation requires the death of some children, like a sacrifice to the gods, when vaccination depends on no such thing and no such correlation exists. It’s the equivalent of saying the continued use of automobiles requires human sacrifices because sometimes people in cars happen to die in accidents. The only reason this would be an unfair analogy is because cars kill far more people–and far more children–than vaccines ever will. And yet anyone who’d seriously question the ethics of society’s continued use of automobiles would be thought a madman.
Mary Holland began the evening stating the book, and presumably the talks to come, represent a “clearly articulated case about why there is and why there must be individual choice [regarding whether to vaccinate].” She also invokes the “human right to informed consent for all medical interventions, including vaccination.” Here, it’s worth noting that no one in the medical community or among the critics of the movement assembled in this auditorium would disagree with this statement, despite the clear implication that this distinguishes their movement from mainstream medicine.
This was followed by a few words from co-author Louise Habaku. Habaku began by issuing an empty invite to any dissenters to engage with them in a room not likely to contain any dissenters because “we want dialogue.” She then stated that any such exchange would be respectful and said, “we reject name-calling on both sides. This is not constructive and does not serve to advance mutual understanding.” She followed up by acknowledging that people on both sides want the same thing: “We want leaders whose decisions are grounded in ethics and science. We want a healthy society. We want healthy children.” Habaku then invoked anonymous peer-reviewed science that questions the safety of vaccination, insisting the often repeated claim that the movement they represent is only interested in vaccine safety. This was followed by a declaration of the importance of anecdotes.
Habaku continued with an ad populum argument, talking about the alleged commercial success of their book in just one week and declaring with no sense of irony, “People are buying Vaccine Epidemic.” What I gleaned from the energy of the room was that they were buying it in more than one sense.
Only about one minute after denouncing the use of name-calling and agreeing that “both sides” want the same things, Habaku defined this alleged controversy as a story about betrayal and greed. Less than ten minutes after that, the first analogizing of their critics to Nazis would come. Later that evening, they’ll have also called their critics in mainstream medicine eugenicists. But I’ll get to that in another installment.
In Part 2, I’ll cover the first panel discussion featuring Vera Sharav, Michael Belkin, and Bob Krakow with Mary Holland as moderator.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by The Vaccine Times, Leart. Leart said: Part 1 of Michael's coverage of the "Vaccine Epidemic" anti-vax book launch event. http://bit.ly/fVnhAJ #stopAVN #VaccineTimes [...]
[...] Last night, my friend Michael Feldman, Executive Director of the NYC Branch of the Center For Inquiry, relayed a link to me via Dr. David Gorski on Facebook. This link. It seems that the co-editors of the recently released anti-vax polemic “Vaccine Epidemic” tried to organize a last minute rally today in NYC to protest the Supreme Court decision…and Bill Gates for completely unrelated reasons. This follows a book launch party they held at NYU, which I attended and have begun a 4-part series reporting about over at the Vaccine Times. [...]
Michael Belkin performed a song called Vaccine Gestapo in Chicago’s Grant Park last year because, you know, he’s not anti-vaccine or anything.
Here’s the video. Louise Kuo Habakus was rocking out, stage right, because she thought it was important to tone down the debate and refrain from name calling.
Well then, I am sure he’s not anti-nazi, he must be pro-safe nazi.
Obviously none of you have children & have no idea what you’re talking about. Keep turning a blinde eye to what’s really going on…..I see you’re all making a wonderful difference in our world. Bravo.
I don’t think either of us has expressed our parental status one way or the other, nor do I particularly care to lower the level of discourse by addressing that speculation as it is entirely irrelevant. What you describe is called personal bias; it’s not an effective method for discerning truth. Facts and empirical evidence are, which is why I try to limit myself to what can be empirically demonstrated.
Dear Vaccine Times,
My father was a physician. My mother was a nurse. I grew up believing in the value of vaccines. Then my son developed problems after some vaccines. Like far too many parents, I started doubting after the damage was done. What I found really bothered me a great deal.
I WOULD LIKE TO WRITE AN ARTICLE ABOUT MICHAEL BELKIN. I also have some simple pertinent questions that NOT ONE PHYSICIAN HAS ANSWERED YET.
1. How do we determine that “immunity” has been created?
2. Where are the studies that objectively show that diseases are being prevented?
3. What is so bad about getting measles or chickenpox as a child? I had them and did not die.
4. Why are so many “treatments” of as yet unproven value being FORCED on children, adolescents and grownups?
5. Where is the group appointed to actually analyze and evaluate the data from VAERS for policymakers?
I am a writer. I want to do a story on this topic and I really liked what Michael Belkin said in his testimony. Can somebody tell me how to reach him? I can email my phone number or call.
“Then my son developed problems after some vaccines.”
the operative word here being “after,” not “because of.” Did you know that one percent of people die shortly after consuming products with water in them?
When researching your article on Michael Belkin, feel free to read my article discussing him and why his bogus claims here:
http://www.vaccinetimes.com/vaccine-epidemic-book-launch-party-invades-my-alma-mater-part-2/
Just kidding. As evident from your assertions that your five questions have never been answered, you don’t clearly don’t research subjects before writing about them.
1. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/706711 (total research time – 5 seconds)
2. Pubmed (total research time – 0 seconds)
Total amount of time needed to go to Pubmed and type “vaccine efficacy” in the search bar to find 16,252 such studies – (5 seconds)
3. Nothing if your goal is to kill as many children as possible. But if you actually value human life and want children to be safe, you might want to keep children from such deadly diseases. Now I’ve already written extensively about the risks of these deadly diseases as well as why the “I had them and did not die” argument no less idiotic than insisting there’s nothing wrong with drunk driving since you’ve driven drunk and managed to net get into an accident. So I suggest you read all 4 parts in this series. (total research time – 5 seconds)
4. If you are referring to vaccines, they are no less proven than gravity. Also, assuming you are so ignorant as to be referring to vaccines, the answer to you question is so that they don’t die from an easily preventable diseases. That being said, your question is no less idiotic than asking why we’re FORCED to not drink and drive. (total research time – 5 seconds)
5. http://vaers.hhs.gov/about/index – (total research time need to go to the VAERS website and find the answer yourself – 5 seconds)
Given that the total research time required to find the answers to every single one of your 5 questions that you claim “NOT ONE PHYSICIAN HAS ANSWERED YET” was under one minute, you’ll excuse me if I take you less seriously than Charlie Sheen and spend the next half hour laughing at your willful ignorance.