This is literally the worst argument I've read on Hacker News, and that is really saying something. They didn't in any way validate the claims of the anti-vaxxers. The medical community has repeatedly given the answers, these people are just too dumb, selfish, or gullible to believe them.

> these people are just too dumb, selfish, or gullible to believe them

This argument has convinced people exactly never.

It's amazing how much name calling is on this thread and how few links to research.

Want people to listen? Show them compassion.

Want people to vaccinate? Give them great information from trusted sources.

Want people to dismiss you? Call them names.

If we want to increase adoption, then please silence yourself on this subject as you're doing more harm than good.

I frankly don't care to try to convince anti-vaxxers. You can't logic someone out of a strongly held belief that they didn't logic themselves into. If someone can seriously look at the breadth and depth of information on the subject -- available with even the most cursory search on the subject -- then they're lost. I think these people are child abusers and should absolutely be shamed.

I think you'd be surprised at how not strong their opinions are when you treat them like humans instead of shaming them like child abusers.

It sounds like there's a lot of hurt and anger around this subject.

Hopefully cooler heads can prevail at some point as I think our health is more important than name calling or putting people we haven't met in big negative buckets.

I was vaccine injured and it destroyed my life. I battled physically crippling pain and brain damage for over a decade.

I arrived at this conclusion after studying biochemistry for over a decade.

You think your "cursory" search is adequate to evaluate this problem? You think you can quickly Google complex problems and completely figure them out? That's weird. You seem to be the illogical superficial one.

I used to be a professional environmental engineer. There are real logical concerns with vaccines. Hardly any one will even listen to my logic, because most people are like you, who think it's logical to ignore logical arguments because you don't like it.

Pathetic. You're full of hate based on a "cursory" Google search.

Crossing into incivility will get you banned here. Please follow the site guidelines when posting to HN.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

You seem to have reading comprehension trouble: it literally validated some of their claims (about censorship rather than response), but not others (about medical facts).

That said, your comment is an excellent demonstrating of my point: it's technically incorrect, and focuses on shaming me for my opinion while lacking a substantive reply.

The idea that demonetization is equivalent to censorship needs to go away.

That idea is the same thing as believing that advertisers are obligated to show ads on your content, which is obviously wrong.

1. Demonetization absolutely is a form of censorship, you are making it more difficult to express yourself and limiting that expression to people who can afford to go to the lengths required, that means that some speech is becoming limited.

2. Google is a private company and has no obligation to support free speech on their platform.

But! Society is shifting to view recorded video as an expression of speech, and view facebook as a forum of ideas. These companies likely should be shifted to fall under carrier laws as they are a method for communication.

> recorded video as an expression of speech

Far as I can see they still have the same ability to speak to the world as they ever did. All that changed is they won't profit from spouting lies.

It's not more difficult to upload a video, it's not more difficult to view it. Their ability to express their view has not changed in the slightest. If they cannot afford an internet connection of any form (that's vanishingly few these days), well they can get a soapbox, go down to the local park, and express their view in the traditional way.

> you are making it more difficult to express yourself

First of all, I think phrasing matters here. "Making it more difficult to express yourself" makes it sound like someone is going out of their way to make it more difficult. What is actually happening is youtube deciding "not to go out of their way to make it easier".

When phrased like you said it, and you claim it is censorship, that makes it seem like youtube is obligated to pay you money for expressing your views. Do you not see how absurd that is?

Setting that aside, it's a lot easier for Sean Hannity to express his viewpoint than it is for me. My speech is much more limited than Sean Hannity's. Am I being censored? Is Fox obligated to give me a prime time TV show to express my opinion?

>is prepared to use force rather than debate the topic.

Herein lies the problem. The antivax movement is powered by the same propagandistic and diversionary tactics that powers all conspiracy. When brought to a wider audience for debate, antivax cultists use these spaces to appeal to members of the audience that can't tell the difference between pseudoscience and not.

Rather then engage in good faith with the ability to change heart, they use the debate stage to peel off supporters.

> The antivax movement is powered by the same propagandistic and diversionary tactics that powers all conspiracy.

Yes -- and their ability to recruit and sustain their movement, like all movements, owes to a serious social problem that has a great deal of associated latent stress that they give an outlet to.

Namely, medical professionals have two serious problems:

1. They don't respect and communicate with their patients, as a matter of course. Just look at the standard discourse around medical treatment -- including the standard "15 minute blowoff" appointment.

2. (This is related, in that 1 likely caused 2, but --) They've utterly failed to explain modern medicine in a way understandable to their patients, forcing people to decide if they trust the same people who, eg, over-prescribed opiates based on shoddy science, leading to a national emergency. For a lot of people the answer is "no"; for some, it's "fuck no -- are you serious?"

The anti-vaxxer movement stems from these two facts of modern medicine, as much as whatever else you're trying to attribute.

The response that it's acceptable to use force against people for refusing to just shut up and trust you silently when you've routinely betrayed their trust without taking full, public accountability is psychotic.

I don't see any factual statements in your argument, just broad generalizations about a specific medical industry on a site used by people across the world, when talking about a problem that spans the world.

At this point you're supporting pseudoscience and ranting about modern medicine in a very conspiratorial way.

I'm not sure what you want for evidence here: those two topics are common themes across a range of medical failures, across a range of areas, when you look at say, reports on why vaccination or mental health education programs fail.

That:

1. People don't trust doctors, partly due to how doctors act.

2. Doctors don't do a good job sharing medical knowledge.

I'm open to bets by anyone who wants to bet that either doctors are widely trusted by their patients or that they do a good job sharing medical knowledge, and am open to hearing ways to scientifically measure either.

But if you're not willing to bet against those two claims, then you probably agree with my conclusion -- that those two real problems are causing upset that's being (irrationally) channeled into things like anti-vaxxer movements.

Edit:

I can't find great quantified surveys, but this is a concern doctors have too --

https://www.physiciansweekly.com/doctors-losing-publics-trus...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterubel/2014/12/19/why-dont-a...

https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/Trust_Be...

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-peter-rost/dont-trust-your...

http://mhealthwatch.com/more-than-half-of-all-americans-dont...

That explains why people wouldn't trust MDs in the US where a medical license practically comes with a half million dollar loan that hangs over the doctor's head for decades and they're doing things that are bad for patients like the opiate crisis. But what about other developed countries? Do they have similar trust issues? Why do these Western Europe countries have antivac problems?