Hannity guest Deirdre Imus says it's "misinformation" that H1N1 vaccine is safe, wants Obama's daughters vaccinated on TV
October 21, 2009 10:29 pm ET
From the October 21 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Heaven help us all......LOL!
But just for the record she does have a background in children's health issues. I wonder who is more informed about this issue, you or her? What are your qualifications?
With respect, that is demonstrably and very simply untrue. E.g. take the Leonnig article as an example I quickly found on the front page. And as for you being "disturbed", no offence but you need to lighten up.
My emphasis was on the wigged-out (no false hairpiece discrimination here), wide-eyed, look-of-a-zealot( in the same vein as Orly Taitz)and the reference to the blond do was innocuous at worst, and could hardly be construed as malicious. Hell, I live with two of those bottle blonds..;p)
But seriously, to see some here equate my post with comments about Obama's skin color??
Man that's taking things to absurd levels of...well, absurdity.
Now can you & your brethern please not breathe on me if you are going to be too chicken-sh** to have the vaccine?
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/10/13/bill-maher-vs-the-flu-vaccine/
Maher is wrong, and so is Mrs Imus when she suggests that children die from the flu vaccine.
This point can't be overemphasized.
And on that note, I'm going to go out on a limb and speculate that while Hannity and company are screaming about the dangers of vaccines, they would object strenuously to further government regulations and restrictions on cigarettes, yes?
And what's really offensive is why the commentators on the right are objecting to the vaccine.
It's because they want to scare their viewers/listeners about government recommendations in order to further their efforts to sow uncertainty about healthcare reform and the government (public) option. It's not based on science or medicine. It's based upon wholly dishonest and disreputable political motives.
It's obscene what they're doing.
I think any kind of partisan garbage about how the government is unsure about the vaccine is just stupid. Conservative or liberals who try to influence individuals in a field that they know nothing about is just wrong. This is a decision that should be made upon the advice of a doctor.
As for Imus's comments, I would take autism over the death of a child any day. Anyways, there is questionable evidence regarding the claims that vaccines cause these injuries. When weighing risks, I am much more likely to take a very small risk (vaccine) to reduce the greater risk of death if I do not taking the vaccine. Furthermore, considering that I have had several vaccines, I feel rather safe with vaccinations especially with the research to back it up.
Stop being vague about statistics.
Consider this from a recent interview with Ben Goldacre, a physician and columnist for The Guardian:
I would NEVER take the shot.
Dying from the flu? When 60 million Americans get it, 30,000 die. That's more like 1 in 2000.
So, she has an illness that's fully recoverable in most cases, and she won't get the flu and die, and she won't infect anyone else.
Or she could take a chance and die from the flu or cause someone else she infected to die.
I hope your daughter fully recovers.
Your anecdotal story is not a reason for you, or anyone else, to not get the shot.
It's too bad that you don't understand that. It's too bad for our nation that more people don't understand this. Anecdotal stories aren't what you need to listen to. You don't need to listen to the story about how many people die after they have lasik eye surgery - you listen to how many people had successful surgery and you weigh the risks against the rewards.
The rewards from getting the flu vaccine are much greater than the minor risks from it.
Some years ago I was in Hart Plaza in Detroit, listening to my voicemail while waiting for someone. A woman came up and asked to borrow my phone because she needed to call the FBI. So of course I had to wonder if she was in real need or if she was completely nuts. She was wearing a sweatsuit, which startled me. Now at this point, you might wonder what relevance that has. Am I judging her on her fashion sense, or lack thereof? No, I was alarmed because it was the hottest day of the year.
I think there's some parallel here. Looking at someone and thinking that there's something a little off about them is not the same thing as commenting on Anne Coulter's "adam's apple" or whatever else.
Also, I notice the right-wing is now knee-deep in conspiracy theories. I wonder where they now stand on the government bringing crack cocaine into poor communities in the 1980's?
Racism is racism regardless of who is guilty of the behavior. We can't have two sets of rules , can we?
Different circumstances create different dynamics. By your logic, someone being convicted of premeditated murder and another person being exonerated for shooting an armed intruder in his house would be playing by two sets of rules.
Again, that thread is open. Respond to the post I linked you to if you feel up to it.
Time for you to present some facts, show me just one instance where I even commented on this issue, let alone defended the practice. Your claim is a flat out lie.
I don't think you care at all if her looks were attacked, given the way you addressed the issue. I believe you solely addressed it to use it as a personal attack against us.
If you really objected, the way to have said something would have been "making personal attacks is wrong. I would hope that those here who have complained about personal attacks before would be consistent here and object now too." Instead, you assume that we won't. You pretend to assume that a poster whose name I have never seen before somehow represents the rest of us regulars.
And she has NO professional background in discussing influenza vaccines. She is an activist who gets all ga-ga about 'green' cleaning products, and she and her husband have gotten all up in arms about the debunked link between autism and mercury in vaccines. Despite the multiple studies that have refuted any link between mercury in infant vaccines and autism, she was still insisting as late as this summer that the mercury in the flu vaccine was potentially bad. That's insanity.
She is actually a terribly biased, misinforming and uninformed person to be discussing whether or not parents should protect their own children and other Americans by vaccinating their kids.
Who's more informed about this topic, her or me? Me, definitely.
And you should learn to read, I said I wonder if anyone will speak up about it, I did not go after you or anyone else. How many people spoke up? One. There were more however who displayed the same behavior. I also did not imply that anyone would sustain his behavior. Did I ?
You are the jerk, to borrow your term. You just have no tolerance for anyone who disagrees with you.
And I mentioned that she does have a background in children's health issues and that is true. Have you done as much as she and her husband? I certainly don't know and didn't quection it. But now you claim to be an expert. I wonder, perhaps you will enlighten me.
Quite a statement from somebody who lives by those very rules...
And he acted like his comment was simply him 'wondering'. Of course we know it wasn't. He has no concern about smearing someone else with a personal attack. He only used that comment to attack us.
I guess you read her mind too and know she doesn't know anything.
And I've heard you're a repub troll and wonder if you serve any purpose other than coming here to stir up trouble?
fairliberal then said: "But just for the record she does have a background in children's health issues. I wonder who is more informed about this issue, you or her? What are your qualifications?"
To be honest with you, a "background in children's health issues" doesn't really cut it for me in terms of recognized qualifications. Exactly what are her credentials? Is she a scientist, a doctor, any sort of qualified medical specialist or practitioner?
I do see that you are just another name caller however, you'll fit right in.
Because, as I said, "fake"liberal has no interest in real debate. She also has no interest in what is best for Americans or for America. She has one interest - Fox News - and she will defend that interest with everything she has.
At least you are consistent.
One doesn't have to believe Al Gore to be aware of global warming over the last century, but you cannot dismiss the reality of global climate change by dismissing Al Gore. I have no problem with criticism of Al Gore, but I do take issue with people who try to deny climate change by attacking Gore. This would be like denying that HIV/AIDS exists because Bono tries to raise awareness about the disease.
By the same token, Dierdre Imus is not a substitute for reliable data about vaccine safety. She is, however, responsible for the statements she makes. For example: when she says that the vaccine is not safe and then demands that it be administered to Obama's children, I conclude that she either does not mean what she says, or does not have the safety of children in mind while making these claims.
I applaud her for interest and work in children's environmental health. But in this case specifically, she's not representing herself or the facts well. There are certainly dangers associated with vaccines as there are with every substance, but she could have done a world of good by discussing scientifically established contraindications for flu vaccinations rather than flat out declaring that the vaccine simply is "not safe".
And yet it still never stops reichwingers, does it? I just find it amazing how indignant y'all get when someone finally does unto you what y'all do to everyone else every day.
"O'Reilly: "If there wasn't Botox involved, with all due respect, there might have even been more expression" on Pelosi's face."
If I were you, I would get over to O'Reilly's web page and take him to task.
Second, she apparently has no idea about children's health issues, because the vaccine is safe for use. This is just another right wing loony fake scandal.
There are certainly legitimate contraindications for flu vaccines, but I've seen no scientific research that supports Imus' remarks. She conveniently neglects to mention, for example, that the H1N1 flu vaccine is prepared in the exact same way and in the exact same facilities as seasonal flu vaccines. And for those who are concerned about thimerosal, the H1N1 vaccine is available without the preservative.
First she claims that the vaccine hasn't been sufficiently tested and therefore could be dangerous and could cause horrible illnesses or even death... and therefore, she says she wants to see Obama's children vaccinated with this horribly dangerous and potentially lethal substance on TV. That's classy.
Must be a common trait in female right wing nut jobs. I read your comment before I saw the video and thought you were talking about Orly Taitz.
LOL! I was just about to post that, you beat me to it!
That being said, I have no idea why she gets any credibility to be on a nationwide talk show. Being the wife of Don Imus is not a qualifier.
Second Paragraph: Misinformed person.
Don Imus has done more in 69 years or at least 25 years that you will do for 5 lifetimes.
Don Imus has nothing to do with this thread or discussion. Another misleading article by Media Matters.
They don't. But *her look* certainly does..;p)
DellDolly also said: "Just like Obama's skin color"
Oh please.
No seriously.
If you do some research, back in '76 when there was a Swine flu scare the gov. attempted to create a vaccine in haste. In their haste, they screwed it up royally and thousands died as a result.
On another note, people should be wary of all medicines. Prescription medicine is said to be the third biggest killer of Americans, killing over 100,000 people a year.
http://www.ohiomm.com/blogs/da_kings_men/2009/01/14/bush-deregulation-caused-it-all/
You really do need to read the Constitution because I don't think you know how the government works.
I just love it when people who don't know what they're talking about come here and try to educate us!
Should I get some kind of counseling?
I couldn't resist.
They are saying the H1N1 is hitting kids worse than most flu strains, which typically hit the elderly a lot more.
That's right-wing rationality for you.
.."my brain turned to jelly.."
"people have to get educated.."
"it says it right there..!"
"we are too quick to medicate our children.."
that's as much as i could take..
They (Rush, Hannity, et al) are using the H1N1 happenstance to fight against healthcare reform.
They are trying to scare people into being worried about government advice. Because they want people to be more scared of a government worker determining if the healthcare the patient's doctor advises will be covered than those same people would be if a health insurance rep makes that determination.
Now, you know and I know that, all things being equal, a for profit person making that determination is NOT the best choice for most Americans. But they can't let people trust the government. And the government is making the recommendation for the vaccine, so they can't be shown to favor that.
Of course you KNOW that Hannity KNEW what side of the vaccine debate this woman would come down on. It's not random that she was on.
Get a life
You're equating running of operations vs money made by the post office. They lose money, but that doesn't mean that they're poorly run operation. Bad example to use.
Nice conspiracy theory that this virus was concocted in a lab somewhere.
I can think of exactly one time in my adult life that the USPS has failed to deliver a letter or package for me... and even in that case, I'm pretty sure it's because my neighbor knew that I was on vacation and helped himself to my Netflix order.
I am aware of your Cancer Ranch work but suggesting that the President have his children given the vaccine on TV serves what purpose? If he does that will you become an avid proponent of the vaccine....I doubt it.
Now, shut up and get back to the ranch and help those kids. It is admirable work..but this display of your intelligence is frightening. Maybe people should questioning what your intentions are on that ranch. How would you feel about that one?
What she should have said (but wouldn't in a million years, is that kids get the flu and die or they infect someone else who dies. Why do you think hospitals all over the nation are restricting visitors? Because they don't want visitors sick with the flu (or infected but not showing symptoms yet) infecting other people. They aren't restricting visitors because they are worried that visitors will get diseases - they want to prevent the flu from entering the hospital! That's why they want hospital workers to get immunizied too.
And she's right that there are thousands of parents who assume that a vaccine was the cause of their children's health issues, and in almost all cases, nothing could be further from the truth. When kids get sick, parents want someone to blame, and the average American makes too many correlations that don't exist. There are a few symptoms, some severe, to vaccines, but very few, and the symptoms from getting the diseases are worse, overall, than from the vaccines.
Doctors do bariatric surgery even though many patients die, because without the surgery the patients outcomes will be much worse. Just because patients die, that doesn't mean that the surgery was a bad idea, or that someone is to blame.
Vaccinating children is a good idea for most childhood illnesses and looking at anecdotal evidence when one should be looking at group results is ALWAYS wrong.
That SODIUM person should pray heaven will help them. Because attacking an educated woman is not only downright evil it is misogynistic.
Double Standards abound on MMFA. They stink.
Double standards...atgtacking educated women...tunnel vision...prayer will help. You have just described the Fox Channel and 98% of its programming.
Let me put it this way..Mrs. Imus was wrong about mercury and is wrong now. To be part of the "government control of medicine" routine that Fox is promoting really stinks.
So "attacking" an un-educated woman is not? Okay, thanks for clearing that up.
anybody else see the similarities?
I applaud her environmental stance, but if she wants the American public to stay away from flu vaccines, show me the science.
And I agree with the poster who says she has a wild eyed look. Most of Fox commentators and guest do have that look. Must be the conditions on the show.
Please stop acting like third graders and pointing fingers! This is serious stuff and most adults can make a logical decision when it comes to their own children.