A conversation with an anti-vaccination liar

Dawn comes up like thunder

In November last year I had an email conversation with Dawn Winkler
who runs an anti-vaccination liar outfit called "Health Advocacy in
the Public Interest". (See
http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/comment/hapi.htm) Actually, I had
several conversations with her as she had the rather unsettling habit
of answering a message with multiple replies, thus making coherent
discourse difficult. As this was combined with delusion, lack of
reading comprehension, inability to face facts, and just plain
outright lying I finally gave up when my bizarrity quotient was
exceeded. Ms Winkler has decided to contact me again, and, true to
form, she sent more than one message. Here are those messages (sent
eight minutes apart) and my kind and gentle replies.

Dear Peter,
You are polite and you gave up our conversation?
I am mentally ill?
Dawn

Ms Winkler then went on to quote something I had written to a
hospital, warning them about her

I replied:

I am not a psychiatrist, so I am not qualified to make a diagnosis,
but you certainly appear to be delusional, paranoid, phobic and
sociopathic. You freely confess to "seeing" such non-existent things
as eight-year-old autistics who **** their pants and cannot speak and
other children with "green snot" constantly running down their faces.
Normal people do not see these things. You seem to believe that there
is some massive conspiracy involving pharmaceutical companies, but you
believe this without evidence. You are fearful of non-existent threats
such as mercury in vaccines which do not contain mercury, even though
all evidence suggests that no harm would come from the mercury anyway
even if it was there. You engage in activities which, if successful,
would lead to the deaths or damage of countless children, but you show
no concern whatsoever for these children. On that last point, I am
possibly wrong to call it "sociopathic". "Psychopathic" is probably a
better word.

----------------------

Peter,
Am I a "child killer"? Because that's how you word the introduction to
our conversation.
Dawn

I replied:

I am not accusing you of being like some of the heroes of the
anti-vaccination movement and actually directly murdering children
yourself. There are, however, ways of indirectly killing children.
Anyone who actively denied food to children, causing them to starve to
death, would be be called a child killer. Anyone who denied water to
children, causing them to die of thirst and dehydration, would be
called a child killer. Anyone who denied medical care for children
suffering from life-threatening illnesses or injuries would be called
a child killer. People who place children in harm's way by using them
as soldiers or to clear minefields are called child killers. Nobody
would dispute the "child killer" label in these circumstances.

You, on the other hand, actively advocate that children should be
denied protection against life-threatening and disabling diseases, and
the inevitable result of such advocacy, should it be even partially
successful, is the death or permanent harm of many children. If you
got everything you wanted, the deaths would be counted in the tens of
millions and the blind, halt and lame in the hundreds of millions. You
would sentence children to death. You are no different to the examples
listed above. Get the words "Child Killer" embroidered onto a baseball
cap. Put the cap on. It will fit perfectly.

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

"Peter Bowditch" wrote

snip lies and garbage

--
Peter Bowditch

On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 23:59:19 +0000, Peter Bowditch wrote:

snip
I am not a psychiatrist, so I am not qualified to make a diagnosis,
but you certainly appear to be delusional, paranoid, phobic and
sociopathic. You freely confess to "seeing" such non-existent things
as eight-year-old autistics who **** their pants and cannot speak and
other children with "green snot" constantly running down their faces.
Normal people do not see these things.

Moron.
If you did not see "eight-year-old autistics who **** their pants and
cannot speak" it does not mean they are "non-existent" and does not make
people seeing them delusional etc. In the old days, I could recommend you
visit a spec-ed school and observe a class for low-functioning autistics.
These days, of course, everybody is a terrorist/child kidnapper suspect
and it is not feasible. But you can still ask a mental health or spec ed
professional or educate yourself a bit. I am afraid though you do not and
can not be educated.
Are all of you at ratbags.com such idiots?

get a life

"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message

usual hostile antagonistic drivel--see tone scale antagonism
http://www.whale.to/v/tone.html

"john" wrote:

get a life

"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message

usual hostile antagonistic drivel--see tone scale antagonism
http://www.whale.to/v/tone.html


Sadly, the children killed by the actions of John Scudamore and Dawn
Winkler don't have a chance to "get a life".

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

In article ,
Peter Bowditch wrote:
"john" wrote:

get a life

"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message

usual hostile antagonistic drivel--see tone scale antagonism
http://www.whale.to/v/tone.html


Sadly, the children killed by the actions of John Scudamore and Dawn
Winkler don't have a chance to "get a life".

Yeah, but if there's anyone qualified to recognize "hostile,
antagonistic drivel," it's John-boy. His whale.to site is brimful of
it.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"I believe that sex is one of the most beautiful, wholesome and
natural things that money can buy."
-- Steve Martin

Peter Bowditch wrote:
"john" wrote:

get a life

"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message

usual hostile antagonistic drivel--see tone scale antagonism
http://www.whale.to/v/tone.html


Sadly, the children killed by the actions of John Scudamore and Dawn
Winkler don't have a chance to "get a life".

Vaccines can save lives.

But you seem to take it as a matter of faith that
vaccines cannot have toxins, or that
the toxins cannot matter. That's plain stupid.

Use your common sense. Nobody is perfect.
Besides, some people in the planet are crooks.

Pharmaceuticals can make mistakes. They
have the usual percentage of crooks,
plus, they have a lot of money, so they
can make humongous coverups.

It's stupid to take corporate spin as
absolute "scientific" truth.

There is usually no actual science in it. It's
just business.

And "peer review" is no protection against
planted or false data.

"Peer review" does NOT even equal "scientific".
It's just good practice, is all. Not
necessarily related to the scientific method.
Alternative practitioners and skeptics
can be equally scientific or even more so than
"peer review" practitioners.

Corporations are not in it for altruism.
The executive officers got to be executive
officers because they were good at
defending their turf, sometimes by
hook and by crook. They won't stop doing
what they do, just because people are
being killed or damanged because of it.

If necessary, they will buy a few politicians
and a few major scientists to defend themselves.
Yes, even "reputed" scientists can be
purchased in some cases.

Use some common sense and observe the world
around you, and the nature of people, before
you stupidly jump to conclusions.

In short, grow up. Before you go around
accusing good people of bad things, and
defending some of the worst humans on the planet.

wrote:
Peter Bowditch wrote:

"john" wrote:


get a life

"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message

usual hostile antagonistic drivel--see tone scale antagonism
http://www.whale.to/v/tone.html


Sadly, the children killed by the actions of John Scudamore and Dawn
Winkler don't have a chance to "get a life".


Vaccines can save lives.

But you seem to take it as a matter of faith that
vaccines cannot have toxins, or that
the toxins cannot matter. That's plain stupid.

Actually, what is just plain stupid is the red herring you just caught.

Use your common sense. Nobody is perfect.

Anti-vac liars are perfect. Perfectly evil.

Besides, some people in the planet are crooks.

True. That is why one has to look at the motives of the anti-vac liars
and those that defend them.

Pharmaceuticals can make mistakes.

No, pharmaceuticals do not make mistakes. People make mistakes.

They
have the usual percentage of crooks,
plus, they have a lot of money, so they
can make humongous coverups.

When facts are few, toss in a good conspiracy. Good idea.

It's stupid to take corporate spin as
absolute "scientific" truth.

Who did that? Can you cite the words where Peter did that? No, of course
you cannot.

There is usually no actual science in it. It's
just business.

Wrong. I would explain, but, alas, there is no evidence you would
understand as I would use facts, not conspiracies.

And "peer review" is no protection against
planted or false data.

"Peer review" does NOT even equal "scientific".
It's just good practice, is all. Not
necessarily related to the scientific method.
Alternative practitioners and skeptics
can be equally scientific or even more so than
"peer review" practitioners.

Not really. I would explain, but, alas, there is no evidence you would
understand as I would use facts, not conspiracies.

Corporations are not in it for altruism.
The executive officers got to be executive
officers because they were good at
defending their turf, sometimes by
hook and by crook. They won't stop doing
what they do, just because people are
being killed or damanged because of it.

Could you take a moment and explain how this says that vaccine are not
safe and effective?

If necessary, they will buy a few politicians
and a few major scientists to defend themselves.
Yes, even "reputed" scientists can be
purchased in some cases.

Yes, that was demonstrated by Andy Wakefield. Bought and paid for by the
anti-vac lawyers.

Use some common sense and observe the world
around you, and the nature of people, before
you stupidly jump to conclusions.

That is excellent advice. When you received it from someone, you should
have adopted it, instead of merely passing it on.

In short, grow up. Before you go around
accusing good people of bad things, and
defending some of the worst humans on the planet.

Anti-vacs are, by definition, NOT GOOD PEOPLE. They promote their agenda
by providing utterly false and misleading information. In many ways,
their agenda is to promote dead children.

"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message
...

Sadly, the children killed by the actions of John Scudamore and Dawn
Winkler don't have a chance to "get a life".

These are just some of the thousands killed by vaccines
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/deaths.html then we have the hundreds of
thousands over the years given nasty diseases like autism

and, for example, measles vaccine has never saved one life that you can
prove as measles deaths had declined by 99.4% before vaccination, yes 99.4%.
Yet the MMR vaccine KILLS all the time.

wrote:

Peter Bowditch wrote:
"john" wrote:

get a life

"Peter Bowditch" wrote in message

usual hostile antagonistic drivel--see tone scale antagonism
http://www.whale.to/v/tone.html


Sadly, the children killed by the actions of John Scudamore and Dawn
Winkler don't have a chance to "get a life".

Vaccines can save lives.

No "can" about it. Vaccines DO save lives.

But you seem to take it as a matter of faith that
vaccines cannot have toxins, or that
the toxins cannot matter. That's plain stupid.

I am drinking a cup of tea. Tea has toxins in it. What is your point?
I have never denied that vaccines (or anything else) are completely
harmless.

Use your common sense. Nobody is perfect.
Besides, some people in the planet are crooks.

Many are crooks, but I fail to see what this has to do with vaccines.

Pharmaceuticals can make mistakes. They
have the usual percentage of crooks,
plus, they have a lot of money, so they
can make humongous coverups.

The total dollar market for vaccines in the entire world is not much
more than one pharmaceutical company, Pfizer, spends on research.
Vaccines are almost exclusively bought by governments and aid agencies
and price is very important. Anything which only requires three doses
in a lifetime is never going to be a big money spinner for the maker,
especially when research and liability insurance may be very
expensive.

It's stupid to take corporate spin as
absolute "scientific" truth.

Have I ever said that I do?

There is usually no actual science in it. It's
just business.

There is plenty of science in the business.

And "peer review" is no protection against
planted or false data.

You will have some evidence for the "planted data" of course.

"Peer review" does NOT even equal "scientific".
It's just good practice, is all. Not
necessarily related to the scientific method.
Alternative practitioners and skeptics
can be equally scientific or even more so than
"peer review" practitioners.

As you obviously have no idea of the relationship between "science"
and "peer review" any further discussion is pointless.

Corporations are not in it for altruism.
The executive officers got to be executive
officers because they were good at
defending their turf, sometimes by
hook and by crook. They won't stop doing
what they do, just because people are
being killed or damanged because of it.

Just as the anti-vaccination liars will not stop their murderous
practices. And - they like it so much they do it for free.

If necessary, they will buy a few politicians
and a few major scientists to defend themselves.
Yes, even "reputed" scientists can be
purchased in some cases.

Wakefield, Yazbak, ...

Use some common sense and observe the world
around you, and the nature of people, before
you stupidly jump to conclusions.

In short, grow up. Before you go around
accusing good people of bad things, and
defending some of the worst humans on the planet.

Want to see some of the "worst humans on the planet"?

http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles/vaxliars1.htm

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com