Vaccines and Climate Change: Weirdness Reigns

Rand Paul, and others running for office, are fond of trying to sound reasonable. Paul, a physician like his father, was recently asked where he stood on vaccination. He said that while he personally recommends that children be vaccinated, parents have the right to decide for their children.

This is nothing short of idiotic and irresponsible.

The children are the ones in jeopardy here, not the parents. The children are not in a position to make well-judged decisions. The parent who refuses to vaccinate their child endangers that child’s health and that of other children who might come in contact with an infected child. I wonder how he’d respond if we were talking about a vaccine for Ebola and an epidemic was spreading. I bet, suddenly, this personal choice gambit would go by the boards.

This whole anti-vaccination frenzy is moronic and it just won’t die. The fact that it won’t suggests that there’s something very interesting going on here — and my guess is that it has to do with science and how the average bloke on the street views it.

Parents who refuse to vaccinate their children typically say they’re worried about the supposed link between vaccines and autism. This “finding” was the result of a “junk science” publication in 1998 by an English physician named Andrew Wakefield. The article was subsequently found to have used abysmal methodology; the data were largely fabricated and it essentially made up the link between vaccines and autism out of thin air. No other study has ever replicated Wakefield’s results and Wakefield himself refused to carry out a replication when asked to.

Lancet, the journal that originally published the paper, has subsequently retracted it. The British General Medical Council found Wakefield to be guilty of reckless and unethical practices and the British Medical Association revoked his license to practice medicine.

Yet people still believe there is a link between the MMA (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine and autism —and celebrities like Jenny McCarthy have been on an anti-vaccination bandwagon for years. Frankly, it boggles the mind why anyone would think that a actress with not a shred of biomedical training knew anything about the foundations of autism.

Now, let’s juxtapose this little spasm of irrationality against another one, the evidence for man-made global climate change. Oddly, we see the opposite pattern. The evidence for it is overwhelming. Virtually the entire scientific community acknowledges that the climate is changing, that global warming is real and that it is human activity that is the primary driving force. Yet we find skeptics everywhere, from Congress to school systems where, in a move of stunning stupidity, some states are pushing legislation that would require that climate change denial be on the curriculum.

So here’s my dilemma. How, on one hand, can people point to truly awful science and claim that there just may be something there while on the other, deny overwhelming scientific evidence in support of something else. If you believe that science can tell you something about how the world works then you really should reject the utter nonsense about vaccines and autism (or any other disease or disorder) and accept the crushing evidence that we are on the cusp of a very dangerous moment with regard to anthropogenic climate change.

One possibility is that one of these, the vaccine case, involves closely held circumstances, your own children. It also involves an actual vaccine where a foreign substance is forcefully inserted under one’s skin. In many ways this feels like a violation of self and, by projecting these feelings onto one’s child, it’s possible for a parent to be rather easily persuaded that something dangerous could be going on.

The climate change issue is more remote. It doesn’t involve individuals. It’s away in the future. It doesn’t feel like it’s a real problem now. And, importantly I think, there’s no individual, personal element to it. No one is violating one’s body. It’s all “out there.”

While these psychological factors are likely playing a role, there’s a deeper issue and it is the truly troubling one. Americans are frighteningly ignorant about science, how it’s done, what methods are used, what the underlying philosophical elements are. There’s a sense that, somehow, scientists have agendas, larger political or economic aims in mind — that they’re not really objective, hard-working people whose primary goal is dead simple: to understand the world about us.

There is also, I suspect, another component. Scientists tend to lean to the left politically. They tend to be agnostic or atheistic in their beliefs. They are highly educated and often speak and write in ways that others find obscure and intimidating.

Layering all these elements on top of each other and you end up with this weird discoordination where people embrace science when it suits them or fits with their preconceived notions and beliefs and reject it or take a skeptical stance when it doesn’t.

The incoherence that underlies these beliefs is disturbing but the real danger, the long-term social, economic and political danger lies in a greater sphere: those who are in positions of power and authority often (all too often) hold the same cluster of inchoate beliefs. It doesn’t auger well for the future.

'Hawks Lose

The call that made the Pats the Super Bowl champs is going to be dissected, analyzed and critqued to death. A mere 1 yard from the touchdown that would virtually cement Seattle’s second consecutive Super Bowl win, Russell Wilson threw and an undrafted afterthought named Malcom Butler stepped in front of the intended receiver and ended what looked like another remarkable, unlikely comback. 

Howls will be heard, accusations hurled about and they will mostly all say the same thing: “What a stupid call.” “Just run ‘beast mode,’ send Lynch into the mosh pit and take the Lombardi trophy home to Seattle.”

But here’s the thing: Everybody knows that Seattle’s gonna go beast mode. The Pats know it, the fans know it, the pundits know it. And here’s what good football strategy is all about: When everybody knows you’re going to do X, do Y.

I think the decision to go with a pass was the right call. An interception was wildly unlikely (about as unlikely as Kearse’s catch of a pass that bounced off his leg and stomach while he lay on the ground). And, if the pass failed, there were still two downs for beast mode.

It didn’t work. Life’s like that. Regroup for next year. Like Brady said in a press conference, “This isn’t ISIS. No one’s getting killed.”

It was a football game — and it was a damn good one and this message, my friend, is from a Seahawks fan.

New Update on the Towers Project in Point Roberts

Time for an update on the international squabble that has erupted over the plan to put a ridiculous array of radio transmission towers on our isolated, funky exclave of Point Roberts. As noted in earlier postings, here and here, this fight started well over two years ago when we formed an international coalition of Canadians and Americans to block the project. As explained in the earlier of the two blogs, our “Cross-Border Coalition” was formed because the signal these towers would broadcast was to be at the maximum the FCC allows and would flood the town of Tsawwassen in British Columbia with blanketing interference.

For those who don’t know, blanketing interference occurs within a determinable radius of radio towers and disrupts electronic equipment, compromises the functioning of anything with a receiver, interferes with cell phones, slows down dsl lines, wrecks HAM radio operations and can, in fact, produce unwanted sounds coming through any speaker. The signal was to be broadcast at 50,000 watts and aimed due north, right into Canada. The 22,000 residents and businesses of Tsawwassen were going to get hammered.

As explained in the second blog, we won Round I. Our legal team filed a pre-hearing petition to deny based on zoning codes. The judge who functioned as the Hearing Examiner for Whatcom County agreed with our argument and ruled that the project violated the height restrictions that are imposed in the county’s regulatory zoning code. He denied the application for a permit and cancelled the hearings that had been scheduled.

This was quite a remarkable decision in that a full week had been set aside for the hearings. But his ruling was that none of the many, many issues that BBC Broadcasting (and, no, this company has nothing to do with the UK’s famous “Beeb” — it is a local corporation) wanted to bring into the proceedings were relevant. If the towers had to be 150’ high (as the FCC had determined) then they violated local zoning codes and couldn’t be permitted.

BBC, of course, appealed to Whatcom County Council. Their argument was that a radio station is an essential public utility and that the zoning codes don’t apply because they are pre-empted by Federal regulations. The Hearing Examiner rejected this claim. The station was already received in Point Roberts from its current location so moving didn’t make it essential. In addition it was noted that the FCC has, in fact, never pre-empted a local zoning code.

Tonight Council issued its ruling. It voted, unanimously, to support the Hearing Examiner’s decision that his ruling was made correctly in law and that no permit should be issued. In short, we won Round II.  

We had one hell of a party at the Rose and Crown. Two dozen members of the Coalition toasted the ruling and felt a rich, deep warmth run through our veins.

This has been one hell of a fight. It’s been going on now for two and half years, since August, 2012 when we first discovered that the FCC had approved the project and that the County’s Planning and Development Services was processing the paperwork.

As those earlier blog postings describe, it has involved Industry Canada, the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission, the FCC, the FAA, Whatcom County Planning and Whatcom County Council. Politicians on both sides of the border have gotten involved including Vicki Huntington, the representative to the British Columbia Legislative Assembly, the Honourable Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Minister of Revenue and the Honourable James Moore, Minister of Industry Canada, Suzan DelBene, our Congresswoman and Senator Patty Murray.

But, since the fat lady is still warming up in the wings, it ain’t over yet. No official announcement has been made but all the hints in the air suggest that BBC will make yet another appeal. This next level will likely be a “LUPA” or an appeal based on the land-use protection act. These kinds of appeals are, as our legal team notes here, no joke. If they do, we will enter Round III. I’ll let you know what happens next.

If anyone out there is feeling generous, go here where you can make a donation to the cause. Battles like this aren’t cheap. So far our legal fees in DC and locally have run close to $170,000. It’s all been raised locally by us and at a host of events, silent auctions, fundraisers, street fairs and good old door-to-door solicitation. If they file a LUPA appeal it’s going to cost us another $25,000 minimum to fight it. The other side has deep pockets. We barely have pockets.

PLOCT

Just a quick note: Poker, Life and Other Confusing Things, a collection of essays on, what else, poker, life and all manner of other confusing things is now available in hard copy as well as an e-book. It can be ordered here in either format.

The book consists of forty essays grouped into four categories:

I. Poker & Psychology

II. Psychology & Poker

III. Mathematics, Psychology & Poker

IV.  People & Poker

Some prominent poker authorities have had some pleasingly positive things to say about it.

Ed Gallo (Editor, publisher Fun ‘N’ Games Magazine): “Reber is the author of two major books on gambling, final-tabled major tournaments and is winning cash game player. He is also a distinguished scientist who held an endowed chair in the City University of New York, been elected Fellow of the Association for Psychological Science, the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the Fulbright Foundation. These parallel lives give him a special perspective. In this book he takes what is known about human psychology and uses it to gain insight into poker and, with a gentle twist, takes what we know about poker and uses that to provide further understanding of the human condition.”

Alan Schoonmaker, Ph.D. (author of several important books on poker): “Whenever I have a question about psychology, Arthur Reber is my ‘go-to-guy.’ He almost always has the right answer. You’ll love his novel way of looking at poker, life, and other confusing things.”

Lou Krieger[1] (leading authority on Hold ‘em and Omaha): “… this book will raise your game by providing the connecting tissue between a disparate variety of ideas, concepts, and philosophies that you might have thought about, but never managed to quite connect the dots to see how so much of life, psychology, statistics, and poker—their overarching metaphor—are connected. It’s a wonderfully written, easily read, compelling view of the worlds all of us inhabit. I highly recommend it.”

Tommy Angelo (respected poker coach and author): “Arthur Reber displays all the qualities I look for in an essayist. He has things to say, and he says them well. Very well. … he is of the greatest explainers I have ever known. It doesn’t matter what he is explaining. When he gets going, I pull up a chair. It so happens that what he explains is us. We the people. His understanding is deep and his perspectives are wide. And he writes with flair. My kind of guy. My kind of book.”

My novel, Xero to Sixty will be ready for print in a month or so. I’ll post details when I have them. The protagonist Xerxes (Xero) Konstantakis is, of course, a poker player with a penchant for digging into psychological issues, his own and those around him.

---

[1] Disclosure. Lou (who died recently) was a co-author on Gambling for Dummies.

Football Thoughts

Some thoughts on the NFL playoff games this past weekend. First, a memo to Mr. P. Manning: Retire. Retire classy like Bradshaw, Marino, Montana. Don’t go the Favre route. The no-longer best QB in recent memory (pace Brady) missed four downfield targets that the once best QB would have hit at least two or maybe three times. It is time to take a seat at an ESPN desk or a role as a VP for player development…. time to enjoy your life.

Andrew Luck is the real deal. It will be fun watching him against the Pats. The gurus in LV have Brady et al. at -7. If I were a bettin’ man I’d be tempted to shove some loose change on the Colts….

The Seahawks are very very good. Wilson did nothing that anyone would stop and take notice of. Yet, when the dust settled he racked up a QB rating of 149 (a drop over 156 is considered a “perfect” performance). He was 8 for 8 on 3rd downs, two of them for touchdowns. The defense got all the press. They deserve it. Just wanted to toss a food pellet Mr. Wilson’s way.

Next weekend gonna be fun.

On a side note: I hope everyone noticed that in the last two weekends of play there were virtually no helmet to helmet shots? No cheap hits? No chippy crack-back blocks? These guys are the top of the league and they do not do this kind of shit. It’s the bozos at the bottom ….

And, speaking of bozos, what was that audible that Rogers used? Manning yells out “Omaha” all the time. Rogers changed a play by screaming “New York Bozos, New York Bozos.” I have no idea what it meant but I loved it!