Shrill ND Storch's "Radio Naturopath" Amusing Meltdown: 'The Facts at NVIC' Say QUESTION Vaccinations

here, I quote from an antivaxx ND who broadcasts from the University of Connecticut's WHUS 91.7 FM:

001. at whus.org, at the University of Connecticut, we're told in "Radio Naturopath Episode 19: Vaccinations: Let’s Get Real!" (2015 archived):

"measles outbreak at Disneyland! It’s got to be those selfish, irresponsible hippies, right? It’s not that simple. Listen to the latest controversy about vaccinations!";

as far as I can tell, THERE IS NO CONTROVERSY, scientifically speaking, regarding vaccination.

002. the audio was posted 2015-02-04 [and it's rather crappy in that it clips a lot], and one of the tags at Soundcloud for the episode is "autism", and ND Storch states:

.

.

"something very big that's going on in the media right now [...] there was this measles outbreak [...] at Disneyland [...] why? [...] what public health would like to blame it on is that a lot of people are deciding not to get vaccinated [...] that vaccinations are not good for people [...] and one of the reasons they choose not to get vaccinated is all the concern about [...] autism [...] and that's a thing that's kind of accepted in the holistic world [...] that one of the vectors [...for getting autism] is from vaccinations [...]";

that has been thoroughly DEBUNKED.

"vaccinations seem to be sacrosanct [...] why are vaccinations sacrosanct?  Why is it not OK to even question them? [...] why are vaccinations so sacred? [...] it's not even OK to question them [...] why can't you question stuff [...] you can't even question them [...] why can't you question something [...] this is a witch hunt [...] one of the reasons you come to Fran the Radio Naturopath is because I question stuff [...] somehow it's not OK to question vaccinations [...] either you accept that they are perfect and that they work every single time and that it's an accepted practice to have vaccinations or you are a wacko [...] it's very clear that the political position to have is that you should get vaccinated [...]";

straw-man argument ALERT!  NOTHING in science is sacrosanct or sacred. There are no holy cows.  Questioning is constant.  And we know that vaccines aren't perfect but we know there are excellent reasons to vaccinate and the risk-benefit ratio is exceptionally obvious.  Those are the ANSWERS to questions about vaccination.  So this EITHER is a bullshit either, and this QUESTIONING is useful but it must then listen to the ANSWERS.  If it's an unwillingness to listen to the answers, well, then that's ignorance and bullheadedness.  And it is not a political position, it is a science position.

"John Stewart and Bill Maher [are provaxx...] and they make fun of people [who are antivaxx...] which is very strange because questioning stuff is what they do [...] Rand Paul said that people should have a choice [...and Paul talked anecdotally of brain damages from vaccines and the ND states] I certainly have met those parents too [...] whose children have become autistic after vaccination [...] numerous [...and she speaks of] Jenny McCarthy [...and] thimerisol [...] if your child happens to be the one who becomes autistic [...]";

well, not the latter.  See "Respectful Insolence" at ScienceBlogs, 2015-01-19, "Bill Maher: Still an Antivaccine Wingnut After All These Years."  And I'd add, there's questioning as scientific skepticism and there is closed mindedness as DENIAL.  And BM is a denialist.  And RP is not right.  Science shows there's no link.  So, if something has reams of support and you still question it I don't think you are an open-minded questioner anymore.

"prescription drugs have all kinds of warnings on it [...] everybody knows that drugs have side effects [...] huge lists of all these frightening side effects [...for vaccines] why can't you question that there might be side effects [...that] some people might be harmed by them [...] when every single drug that you see out there has side effects [...] huge, huge lists of side effects [...like] death [...] now, if you were to go on line and look at the side effects for vaccinations, you would find stuff [...like at Barbara Loe Fisher's web site] nvic.org [...] she gives lots of information about vaccinations [...] inconvenient truths [...] inconvenient scientific truths [...] she leans towards being antivaccination [...] she's saying some of the same things that I have [...] accepting of the idea that vaccinations can be dangerous [...] why would vaccinations be any different [...] it's just another medication and we know that medications can make people sick because there are so many side effects [...] you are always taking a chance when you get a vaccination [...]";

so, I think this is the ND claiming that these side effects happen WITH A DRUG FOR EVERYONE.  And that is stupid.  The side effect is actually for some people, and usually very statistically small in incidence.  So, here's ND antipharm propaganda EXTENDED to vaccines.  I'd say 'misinformation' and myths, regarding nvic.org.  The ND then reads from NVIC aloud.

"[the ND states] I don't accept the norm [...] I don't accept anything at face value.  You go to prove it to me [...] just because something is accepted doesn't mean it is good for you [...] it's like the only position for an intelligent person to have is that vaccinations are good [...it's] fundamentalist religion [...] that doesn't sound like you are looking at the facts [...]";

well, it's healthy to be a skeptic.  But you ALSO have to listen to the answers once you pose your questions.  And because vaccinations are objectively excellent and that's not your position, well, I think you just called your position unintelligent.  And scientific consensus is not religious dogma.

"[her cohost Ron states] the media seems to be pushing really really had that everyone should get vaccinated [...it's] media pressure [...and he says the say MMR is given is] probably not a great idea [...and ND Storch says] it's MMR [...] who gets measles, mumps and rubella in real life all at the same time? [...] naturopaths have been saying that for a million years [spread out the vaccines...] personally, I get tetanus shots [...]";

yes, the experts.  I honestly shopped listening at 00.39.20.

002. a question for 'the questioning Radio Naturopath'. If one is to QUESTION and scratch below the surface, then I'd like to ask this question:

why does your alma mater, NCNM, falsely claim that that which is not science hugely and preponderantly survives scientific scrutiny?  And if you are signed-on to that epistemic agenda, which you have to be to be granted your ND degree via NCNM, WHY SHOULD PEOPLE LISTEN TO YOU?

and should UCONN be spreading antivaccine paranoia?