An Open Letter to Bill Maher on Vaccinations
By MICHAEL SHERMER
Added: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 23:00:00 UTC
An Open Letter to Bill Maher on Vaccinations
From a Fellow Skeptic
By Michael Shermer
Editor of Skeptic magazine and âSkepticâ columnist for Scientific American
Dear Bill,
Years ago you invited me to appear as a fellow skeptic several times on your ABC show Politically Incorrect, and I have ever since shared your skepticism on so many matters important to both of us: creationism and intelligent design, religious supernaturalism and New Age paranormal piffle, 9/11 âtruthersâ, Obama âbirthersâ, and all manner of conspiratorial codswallop. On these matters, and many others, you rightly deserved the Richard Dawkins Award from Atheist Alliance International.
However, I believe that when it comes to alternative medicine in general and vaccinations in particular you have fallen prey to the same cognitive biases and conspiratorial thinking that you have so astutely identified in others. In fact, the very principle of how vaccinations work is additional proof (as if we needed more) against the creationists that evolution happened and that natural selection is real: vaccinations work by tricking the bodyâs immune system into thinking that it has already had the disease for which the vaccination was given. Our immune system âadaptsâ to the invading pathogens and âevolvesâ to fight them, such that when it encounters a biologically similar pathogen (which itself may have evolved) it has in its armory the weapons needed to fight it. This is why many of us born in the 1950s and before may already have some immunity against the H1N1 flu because of its genetic similarity to earlier influenza viruses, and why many of those born after really should get vaccinated.
Vaccinations are not 100% effective, nor are they risk free. But the benefits far outweigh the risks, and when communities in the U.S. and the U.K. in recent years have foregone vaccinations in large numbers, herd immunity is lost and communicable diseases have come roaring back. This is yet another example of evolution at work, but in this case it is working against us. (See www.sciencebasedmedicine.org for numerous articles answering every one of the objections to vaccinations.)
Vaccination is one of scienceâs greatest discoveries. It is with considerable irony, then, that as a full-throated opponent of the nonsense that calls itself Intelligent Design, your anti-vaccination stance makes you something of an anti-evolutionist. Since you have been so vocal in your defense of the theory of evolution, I implore you to be consistent in your support of the theory across all domains and to please reconsider your position on vaccinations. It was not unreasonable to be a vaccination skeptic in the 1880s, which the co-discovered of natural selection—Alfred Russel Wallace—was, but weâve learned a lot over the past century. Evolution explains why vaccinations work. Please stop denying evolution in this special case.
As well, Bill, your comments about not wanting to âtrust the governmentâ to inject us with a potentially deadly virus, along with many comments you have made about âbig pharmaâ being in cahoots with the AMA and the CDC to keep us sick in the name of corporate profits is, in every way that matters, indistinguishable from 9/11 conspiracy mongering. Your brilliant line about how we know that the Bush administration did not orchestrate 9/11 (âbecause it workedâ), applies here: the idea that dozens or hundreds pharmaceutical executives, AMA directors, CDC doctors, and corporate CEOs could pull off a conspiracy to keep us all sick in the name of money and power makes about as much sense as believing that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and their bureaucratic apparatchiks planted explosive devices in the World Trade Center and flew remote controlled planes into the buildings.
Finally, Bill, please consider the odd juxtaposition of your enthusiastic support for health care reform and government intervention into this aspect of our medical lives, with your skepticism that these same people—when it comes to vaccinations and disease prevention—suddenly lose their sense of morality along with their medical training. You excoriate the political right for not trusting the government with our health, and then in the next breath you inadvertently join their chorus when you denounce vaccinations, thereby adding fodder for their ideological cannons. Please remember that itâs the same people administrating both health care and vaccination programs.
One of the most remarkable features of science is that it often leads its practitioners to change their minds and to say âI was wrong.â Perhaps we donât do it enough, as our own blinders and egos can get in the way, but it does happen, and it certainly happens a lot more in science than it does in religion or politics. Iâve done it. I used to be a global warming skeptic, but I reconsidered the evidence and announced in Scientific American that I was wrong. Please reconsider both the evidence for vaccinations, as well as the inconsistencies in your position, and think about doing one of the bravest and most honorable things any critical thinker can do, and that is to publicly state, âI changed my mind. I was wrong.â
With respect,
Michael Shermer
Tweet
RELATED CONTENT
Secular Guidelines to Moral Living: A...
Jeff Schweitzer - Huffington Post 35 Comments
So, in honor of Hitchens I propose here guidelines to how we can make those daily decisions, a secular distillation of moral behavior derived from those characteristics that define us as human.
The atheist who tried to steal Christmas
Larry Taunton - USA Today 70 Comments
Christmas is, after all, the season of magic, and lest children confuse sugar plum fairies and flying reindeer with the observable and repeatable, the professor has loaded neither toys nor goodies on his sleigh but a heavy dose of "rational skepticism."
Richard Dawkins - RichardDawkins.net 89 Comments
I suspect that there is life elsewhere in the universe, but it is probably extremely rare and isolated on far-flung islands of life, like a celestial Polynesia.
Evolution, Christmas and the Atonement
Denis Alexander - The Guardian... 59 Comments
We are not descended from Adam and Eve – but still, Jesus was born to save us.
Richard Dawkins - RichardDawkins.net 351 Comments
The new 'evidence' amounts to yet another 'Argument from Personal Incredulity': the Italian scientists cannot understand how it could have been faked.
Americans: Undecided About God?
Eric Weiner - New York Times 59 Comments
Nones don’t get hung up on whether a religion is “true” or not, and instead subscribe to William James’s maxim that “truth is what works.”
MORE BY MICHAEL SHERMER
Michael Shermer - LA Times 81 Comments
Michael Shermer - michaelshermer.com... 5 Comments
Michael Shermer - Scientific American 2 Comments
The pattern behind self-deception
Michael Shermer - TED 26 Comments
How to bend a spoon with just your mind
Michael Shermer 37 Comments



















Comments
Comment RSS Feed
Please sign in or register to comment
View Comments Page