Then there are those who understand science so badly that it does worry me:

Is H1N1 just the seasonal flu for 2009/2010 with a new name? Is it a pandemic? What is a pandemic anyway? I think of Anthrax or Ebola and people dying in droves. Feel free to correct me.

She then goes on to quote an article about the vaccine being developed. The article closes with this:

China has seen 1,668 cases of the virus, according to health ministry statistics, but no deaths have since been reported.

I should point out that China is not always the most reliable when it comes to news stories. Of course, Age of Autism isn’t the most reliable either (spend some time searching his site for more examples). Examples of unreliability do not mean that someone is always wrong, but personally, I take everything they say with a grain of salt until I find proof of them being right or wrong.

Back to the author’s original questions. Why did I feel the need to post them? Why do I worry? Because the same author posted their comment of the week (two hours later):

6,772,357,798 people on Earth, 429 deaths, from 94,512 cases, worldwide. How is this a pandemic?

So, Ms. Stagliano doesn’t know what a pandemic is but decides to give an award to someone who questions the H1N1 pandemic without even looking up the definition? A 20 second search on Google for the definition of pandemic gave me this from Merriam-Webster:

pandemic (adjective) occurring over a wide geographic area and affecting an exceptionally high proportion of the population

pandemic (noun) a pandemic outbreak of a disease

I don’t see the word death in those definitions. The same goes with the WHO’s site, no mention of death that I saw. For a nice breakdown of pandemics, I suggest the blog Aetiology by Tara C. Smith:

Does 7 deaths REALLY constitute a pandemic? Are we that wussy and panic-prone as a society that the WHO freaks out over a couple deaths from the freakin’ flu?

And this is what I was getting at with my comment on pandemic phases. The number of deaths don’t matter–it’s the transmission in the human population that’s key.

Ok, they got a definition wrong, no big deal, right? Actually, it is a big deal when you’re implying that it’s not really a pandemicl so don’t worry. It is a big deal when you imply that someone doesn’t need to get a vaccine because the fatality rate of the disease is so low, they’d likely be fine even if they got it.

I got into a discussion the other day with some coworkers about the flu vaccine (the regular one). They were saying they never get the flu so they were going to pass on it. I told them I was going to get it because it would not only help protect me but also those around me. I don’t know about anyone else, but I’d hate to get any vaccine preventable disease and then know I may pass it on to someone who couldn’t get the vaccine for some reason (they may have health reasons, are too young, or have parents who don’t understand science) are now permanently harmed (or worse) by that disease. It’s called Herd Immunity, pass it on.

A number of prominent neurologists now believe it helps to look at the brain, especially to rule out seizure disorder, which can often produce autistic symptoms, and which is treatable. (That’s what McCarthy found, among other things, by the way, when she decided to trust her instincts instead of conventional wisdom.)

I noticed that they didn’t say autism, but autistic symptoms. This is rather telling to me when I had previously read this at Left Brain/Right Brain. To summarize what he says is that, according to some articles he’s read, it’s possible that Jenny McCarthy’s son never had autism. Keep in mind that this is not a diagnosis, but a hypothesis based on available information.  Still, it’s rather telling.

Obviously, more work needs to be done on this, such as on the Internation Space Station, but I’m wondering if this could help pave the way for agriculture in space.  We know that at least for short periods, we can grow food up there. At the very least, we could bring seeds up for every generation (to prevent severe mutations, if they occur). Still, with our population growing, this may be a possible solution if we can just find an alien farmer.

You see, Jenny McCarthy is getting an additional venue to spread her antivaccine nonsense. This is a woman who, without real proof, has gone on a crusade against vaccines. This angers me, because it can affect my daughter. That is what scares me. People like her make me sick because they can make my daughter sick, or worse.

My wife and I had a discussion about this. We did not talk about whether or not to immunize out daughter. We’d already looked into it and believe there is no proof of vaccines causing autism. I’ve spent many hours reading both sides (warning, junk science site) as well as reading some books and magazines. We already know that the benefits far outweigh the risks to our little girl. We agreed to stick to the schedule, barring unforeseen research in this area. What we talked about was what to tell my mother-in-law.

I’m going to insert a warning here. I’m not likely to add many links to the rest of this post. This is for two reasons: 1) it’s late and I’m getting tired & 2) I believe most of the links I’ve already posted covers what I’m about to say. Besides, the rest of this is an anecdote and I’m posting it more to show how we handled this, rather than why.

You see, she was initially wary of us following the vaccine schedule as recommended by the doctor. Her other daughter’s kids didn’t follow the standard schedule, at least according to my mother-in-law. She was following the “too much, too soon” mentality. My wife thought we should just tell her we were spacing them out where I disagreed. This isn’t because I dislike her¹ and disagreed on that basis alone. I thought about it for a little while and this is what I told my wife (paraphrased):

If we lie to my mother-in-law and tell her that we spread out my daughter’s vaccinations, we’d just be adding ammunition to the anti vaccinationists arsenal. If she talks to other people about whether or not to spread out the shots, she may tell people that her granddaughter had her shots spread out. Honestly, I don’t want my daughter helping kill other children.

So, we decided to tell her the truth. She wasn’t thrilled. She saw my daughter and I the day after her first set of vaccinations (after the Hib shot in the hospital). My daughter was running a slight fever and was being a little more fussy than normal². My mother-in-law was not happy. She then told me that she read that if your child is highly fatigued after getting her shots, then you should tell the doctor to spread out the rest of them. Her next words were what floored me. You see, she didn’t read this recently but had read it in a magazine 25-30 years ago. I held my tongue that day but I was about ready to laugh. When I was working on my BS, I rarely cited anything older than 5 years and here she was quoting me something more than 25 years old.

To make a long story short (because I’m getting tired), when my daughter’s second round of vaccinations came up, we did not hesitate. My mother-in-law still gives me some slightly dirty looks but I think that’s because she thinks that as the grandmother, she knows best because she’d done it before. Unfortunately for her, that’s not how I was raised¹.

1 – I actually have a pretty good mother-in-law. She does have a downside, though. She is used to certain things, like being relied upon. When my wife and I moved into town, she helped us a lot and despite her complaints, I think it made her feel needed. Unfortunately, when push comes to shove, I was raised to be self-reliant. As a result, I do things my way and as independently as I can. So, I sometimes find her overbearing. I know she means well but it can get on my nerves.
2 – Her reaction was about what I expected. I would have been surprised if she had no reaction at all. Her behavior for the days after the shots can be difficult but I also know that in the long run, she’ll be much happier, healthier, and alive.

I’m learning to use WordPress.

Another time I remember was also when I was a kid. In fact, it was well before high school. I think I was 11, but I’m not sure. My age, though, is not important. It was a brief talk with my dad. I remember telling him that I wasn’t sure I believed in God, I needed proof of his existence. His was response, in hindsight, was no surprise. He said something along the lines of: “that’s what faith is”. I didn’t voice this aloud, but my immediate thought was something along the lines of: “but I need more”. While it took a long time to take hold and develop, I think that was my first time that I can label myself as thinking skeptically.  I couldn’t just assume something existed, I needed evidence.

As I’ve gotten older and more adept at using technology, I’ve learned a lot. I think I can attribute this start to Phil Plait at the BadAstronomy blog³. I learned of him from some news article on the Moon Landing Hoax, looked up his website and have been reading it ever since. He was the one who introduced me to so much of what I read today. If it wasn’t for him, I wouldn’t know of Skepticality or The Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe. I wouldn’t even know of Pharyngula. Due to these sites and more that I’ve found through them, I’ve learned so much. Amongst the things I’ve learned is what good science sites do.

Since I want to have a good science site, I want to emulate that as much as possible. Below are my personal rules for this site. They can change, and I am open to suggestions.

1. Comments: I won’t delete a comment just because they disagree with me. That doesn’t guarantee I will respond, though. Why not? Does that mean I’m not open to criticism? No, what it means is that I’m a busy person so I cannot respond to everything. Also, I may not dignify someone with a response because their response does not apply to what I wrote.  There’s a tactic sometimes used in debates by people whose scientific points are weak where they flood the audience with so many points that their opponent just cannot respond to them all. Unfortunately for them, this doesn’t work well on the internet. So, before you ask me to address a new point, be sure to address the ones I made first.
2. Corrections: With the exception of correcting a typo (unless that typo alters the meaning of the sentence) or an error on the website, you won’t see posts or text disappear. What you will see are one or two things, depending on the circumstances. If I make a mistake that I need to correct, then the text will be crossed out with an explanation following. The other is if I need to add something, I will use some form of: “Edited to add”. My final note on this is that I am human. I will make mistakes. Knowing me, I will rush to get something out and make a mistake, such as forgetting to do one of the above things (though the latter seems more likely than the former). If I do that, I invite you to call me on it and I’ll make the approriate change.
3. Quotes: Depending on the post and topic, it is less likely that I will post something that looks like one of the following:
   

   You won’t see something…..that looks….like…..this.

   You may see…..somethng that looks like this.

   What’s the difference? The first one could be assembled from multiple parts of a paragraph or even a whole document. It’s worse than cherry picking because it could be used to create whatever I want it to say. I might as well be quoting the dictionary. The second one isn’t as bad. It’s not perfect but I may use that one. Usually, it’s likely to mean that I just removed something unimportant from the sentence. For example, the original quote could have read:

   You may see unicorns, fairies, or somethng that looks like this.

   It’s not ideal but may be unavoidable. To be honest, though, what’s most likely for me to use is a block of text. This may or may not include emphasis added by yours truely. Want to be sure I’m making an accurate quote? Then follow me to #4.

4. Links: I should include, in posts, relevant links to sites. By including those links, you may follow them to read the relevant site yourself. It also keeps me honest. If I don’t include something, then by all means, ask me to add it. I should have done it in the first place (see #2).
5. Final thought: When in doubt, there’s a good possibility that I’m being sarcastic. I think I have a similar sense of humor to the Bad Astronomer

1 – While I did go to public schools, I can assure you that whatever he was talking about was relative to the class. While I can’t remember the details of the lecture, I remember the teacher to be one who was quite dedicated and would not go significantly into irrelevant topics.
2 – I made up the first name, I’m going off of my memory from about 10 years ago.
3 – His blog was also the first I ever read. I resisted reading them for a long time (don’t ask why, I’m not even sure why), but once I started reading his, I was hooked. It was actually by reading his blog, not his site, that I found the sites I also listed. Another interesting side note, I had never heard of the Moon Landing Hoax before that article, but if I hadn’t read the Bad Astronomy site, I might have thought that the Apollo landing were faked.