Anti-Vaxxer Website Suggests Link Between Vaccines And Being Gay
A recent Facebook post by the website Vactruth.com suggested a link between being vaccinated and homosexuality. Conspiracy theorists within the anti-vaxxer set are a special group of people.
[su_center_ad]Their question:
“Do you think vaccinating a child with vaccines, that are made up of endocrine disrupting chemicals, can affect the outcome of a person’s sexuality? Homosexuality is found in nature in other species and has occurred in populations long before the advent of vaccines. Some believe vaccines affect sexuality and some don’t. It is known that vaccines do disrupt hormonal function and can cause fertility and thyroid problems, so this is a legitimate question some people want to learn more about.
“Below is a link discussing what some doctors have to say on the issue but not in relation to vaccination status. Many people are afraid to bring this topic up and write about it. We know this is on some people’s minds, so please respectfully share your experience.”
Outbreak News Today reports:
They link to the following site Born Gay? Pros and Cons.
Really? Truly pushing the limits of absurdity on this one don’t you think?
But it should come as no surprise from the website run by a rescue swimmer in the United States Navy with no real medical or scientific background. The site routinely pushes the idea that vaccines are unsafe, ineffective and are linked to the debunked idea of being the cause of autism and numerous other conditions.
The European gay news service, Pink News writes: “To date, there is no scientific evidence that vaccines cause autism or a change in sexual orientation.”
The American Psychological Association states: “There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation.“Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.”
When asked for a statement about the Facebook post by Vactruth.com, infectious disease expert and Kent State University professor, Dr. Tara Smith told Outbreak News Today:
Just looking at the post (and that site is pretty horrible), they’re assuming many facts not in evidence to begin with, and so their question is circular. There’s no evidence vaccines are “made up of endocrine-disrupting chemicals” or “disrupt hormonal function and can cause fertility and thyroid problem,” so the basis of their question is like asking “have you stopped beating your wife?” –it’s biased in its initial assumption.
The website, The Spudd, writes:
As expected, many people responded in the comments section with outrage and anger. Most of these comments were quickly deleted and the posters banned. This is a familiar trick employed by anti-vaccine advocates – create an echo chamber on their websites and Facebook pages to make it appear as though everyone agrees with what they are saying.
Aside from that, the question suggests that having a gay son or daughter would be a bad thing. The only problem I would have with having a kid that’s born gay would be that he or she would grow up in a world still populated with homophobic arseholes.
You know who else is an anti-vaxxer? Don’t Trump. I rest my case.
H/T: The incomparable @CarlaAkins with thanks. [su_csky_ad]
Image: AATTP
Chinese Democracy December 22nd, 2014 at 10:51 am
after years of research… FINALLY a credible answer to the age old question .. what turns people gay? lol
Candide Thirtythree December 22nd, 2014 at 12:12 pm
hahaha, yea, there were no gay people before 1950s when vaccinations started.
burqa December 22nd, 2014 at 12:40 pm
So maybe it’s caused by rock and roll….
Par4thecourse December 22nd, 2014 at 1:48 pm
Depends on what you are rocking and rolling on…with,when,who,why, where
rg9rts December 22nd, 2014 at 1:59 pm
Only in the red states
mrsgunka December 22nd, 2014 at 1:54 pm
I had every disease before the vaccines came out. I lived thru them, but many didn’t. I had polio in ’46 but still had to get the polio vaccine as I only had one strain of 3. In 1959 we had 50 ironlungs working in just our hospital during the epidemic because people were afraid of the vaccine! Many died! Strange tho, I had about 10 gay teachers thru my education history and none of them had the opportunity to take any vaccines prior to their teaching careers. Oops….
rg9rts December 22nd, 2014 at 1:59 pm
No relapse???
Candide Thirtythree December 22nd, 2014 at 9:06 pm
I know, same here. I lived through some nasty stuff as a kid like Mumps, Measles, whooping cough, chicken pox, worms, scabies, lice. I lived through it all but not without scars and lots of misery and none of it I would wish on my worst enemies.
I knew people who had polio and was terrified of getting it or scarlet fever when I was a kid.
You and I and people our age know what it was like back then and educated younger people understand what is at stake.
The thing that the anti-vaxxers have in common besides being extremely stupid people born with low IQs and no common sense at all is that they didn’t live through any of this and I guess they didn’t even read about it. They are killing people with their stupidity and risking our herd immunity.
Chinese Democracy December 22nd, 2014 at 2:19 pm
of course not the earth is only 50 yrs old
Candide Thirtythree December 22nd, 2014 at 8:42 pm
hahahaha that young earth is getting younger all the time.
rg9rts December 22nd, 2014 at 1:58 pm
I thought it was fundamentalism
Kim Serrahn December 22nd, 2014 at 11:01 am
I’m confused…………………. I thought vaccines gave kids Autism but now I learn it’s turns them Gay……. Who knew!
Larry Schmitt December 22nd, 2014 at 12:31 pm
Time to double down. How about gay autism?
Kim Serrahn December 22nd, 2014 at 2:01 pm
there ya go. How could I have been so stupid.
Larry Schmitt December 22nd, 2014 at 2:06 pm
Maybe it was one of those vaccines?
Kim Serrahn December 23rd, 2014 at 7:58 am
you mean one of “THOSE”? Where’s Gordon Klingenschmitt
when you need him to save us all.
Dwendt44 December 22nd, 2014 at 11:43 am
Not just a special group of people, a special group of stupid people.
R.J. Carter December 22nd, 2014 at 11:46 am
There are plenty of good reasons to be picky about which vaccinations you allow your child to get.
This isn’t one of them.
AnthonyLook December 22nd, 2014 at 3:37 pm
Which vaccinations and what good reasons are you picking?
tiredoftea December 22nd, 2014 at 11:47 am
I am convinced that this is how religions start. These delusional idiots do not accept any proof contrary to their beliefs and contort their poor little overworked brains into new explanations for continuing to believe. We can include the gun fetish crowd and the extreme fringe right in the new religion movement.
They are right because they say so, we are wrong because we prefer facts and reality.
burqa December 22nd, 2014 at 12:36 pm
They might just be contrarians looking for something new to allegedly know the REAL reason for….
Candide Thirtythree December 22nd, 2014 at 12:06 pm
When one lie doesn’t work, try an even more insane lie, that will get people to believe for sure. *SMH*
burqa December 22nd, 2014 at 12:35 pm
Well I had all my shots when I was a kid and I’m not gay. Nosirree, not me. No way. Never could be gay no way or nuthin.’ I’m sure there’s some other reason for my little problem with women in the bedroom BUT I’M NOT GAY, I TELL YOU!
Anomaly 100 December 22nd, 2014 at 12:44 pm
Bwhaa!
rg9rts December 22nd, 2014 at 1:57 pm
Maybe you are the woman?? Suggestion
burqa December 22nd, 2014 at 2:28 pm
NO!
NO! NO! NO!
rg9rts December 22nd, 2014 at 2:39 pm
Better look to make sure
tracey marie December 22nd, 2014 at 1:29 pm
didn’t a porn star start pushing this meme against vaccinations as well, her child is autistic because…..
Dwendt44 December 22nd, 2014 at 7:19 pm
Jenny McCarthy, a well known AV activist was a Playboy Playmate of the Month and Playmate of the Year the following year, (1994), but she never did do porn as such.
tracey marie December 22nd, 2014 at 7:20 pm
what is the diffrence, she is not educated or trained…just a big mouth
rg9rts December 22nd, 2014 at 1:56 pm
And I suppose there were no gays before vaccinations
Bunya December 22nd, 2014 at 4:10 pm
I think homosexuality wasn’t invented until the early 1970’s, when Harvey Milk started a campaign to turn everybody gay.
rg9rts December 22nd, 2014 at 4:51 pm
A California thing …I understand
Bunya December 22nd, 2014 at 2:00 pm
LOL!! I put vaccines causing homosexuality right next to:
* Gay marriage leads to beastiality and/or pedophelia
* Gays caused 9/11, tsunamis and any other natural disasters.
* Having an abortion causes breast cancer
* Legitimate rape “shuts that whole thing down”
* Being beaten and raped (which results in conception) is a “gift from God”
.
And the far-right, conservative Christian clown car rolls on……
rg9rts December 22nd, 2014 at 2:01 pm
Will pick up anyone with a redneck
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 4:02 pm
I don’t understand why it is controversial to suggest that chemicals injected into the body might directly or indirectly affect the brain, and thereby affect behavior. Lots of chemicals affect the brain; some temporarily and some permanently.
Proving that vaccines have a specific effect is another matter. But I don’t see anything wrong with asking the question. I have seen numerous articles about “gender bender” chemicals in streams affecting fish and amphibians. Some people have suggested that girls might be entering puberty earlier due to estrogens in the environment or in food.
Bunya December 22nd, 2014 at 4:21 pm
“I don’t understand why it is controversial to suggest that chemicals injected into the body might directly or indirectly affect the brain, and thereby affect behavior”
.
Because homosexuality is NOT a learned behavior. Your argument makes no sense. That’s like saying vaccinations may cause one to turn from Irish descent to Puerto Rican descent.
.
Girls are entering puberty earlier because of all the hormones injected into the meat they ingest. It is a known fact that hormones have an impact on one’s growth, but only in regards to their reproductive systems, not their height, for example.
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 4:40 pm
“Because homosexuality is NOT a learned behavior.”
But sexuality is affected by chemicals. If you expose a pregnant female rat to bright lights at specific times during her pregnancy, her male offspring will exhibit homosexual behavior. Bright light causes the mother to be stressed. She secretes adrenaline. Her adrenaline crosses the placenta and enters the bloodstream of the fetus where it essentially neutralizes testosterone. Certain parts of the brain will develop differently depending upon whether testosterone is present or absent when those parts are forming. The net result is that if you stress out a pregnant rat at the right times, you can cause her to produce male offspring that allow themselves to be mounted by males.
“In a paper published almost a quarter of a century ago, a research psychologist at Villanova University was also puzzled about gender. Dr. Ingebog Ward was studying the sexual behavior of rats, years before the role of the hypothalamus was even suspected of gendering human brains. Dr. Ward divided some pregnant rats into three groups. Suspecting that something special might be happening in the early stages of pregnancy, she subjected the first group to stress during the first ten days of gestation by irritating the mother rats to bright lights, noise and annoying vibrations. Ten days in a rat’s pregnancy corresponds to the first trimester (3 months) of a human pregnancy. The second group was subjected to stress towards the end of their pregnancy, just before birth. The third group was comprised of male offspring from both prenatal stressed mothers and unstressed mothers. These babies were subjected to the same stress producing stimuli. Dr. Ward then allowed all the males to grow to adulthood without further interference. She then placed each group of males in cages with healthy females to observe their ability and desire to mate with normal adult females. Here is what happened:
“Abstract: Male rats were exposed to prenatal (i.e. before they were born) or postnatal (after they were born) stress, or both. The prenatally stressed males showed low levels of male copulatory behavior and high rates of female lordotic responding (i.e. “lordotic” refers to mounting behavior which usually occurs during mating). Postnatal stress had no effect. The modifications are attributed to stress-mediated alterations in the ratio of adrenal to gonadal androgens during critical stages of sexual differentiation. Specifically, it appears that stress causes an increase in the weak adrenal androgen, androstendione, from the maternal fetal adrenal cortices, or both, and a concurrent decrease in the potent gonadal androgen, testosterone.”
http://www.viewzone.com/homosexual.html
If the presence or absence of androgens can cause these effects, why is it verboten to ask questions about the possible effects of vaccines?
Jones December 22nd, 2014 at 4:54 pm
From the article’
There’s no evidence vaccines are “made up of endocrine-disrupting chemicals” or “disrupt hormonal function and can cause fertility and thyroid problem,” so the basis of their question is like asking “have you stopped beating your wife?” –it’s biased in its initial assumption.
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 5:30 pm
I suspect that there was a point in time when there was no evidence that Thalidomide caused birth defects. Even if the drug’s manufacturer did have such evidence and kept it from the public, the question is whether a member of the public, who had no such evidence, would have been justified in wondering about and asking about the possible effects of Thalidomide.
Everyone is biased in their initial assumptions. I am biased against taking unnecessary medications or injecting anything into the body that is not absolutely necessary. My wife and I made sure our kids got all recommended vaccinations. But when I got a colonoscopy a few years ago, I remained conscious for the entire procedure because of a concern about the dangers associated with general anesthesia.
The unintended side-effects of drugs and even dietary advice are sometimes not understood for many decades. When I was a kid, the experts recommended that people eat liver because it was known to be packed with vitamins. It wasn’t until many years later that people began to think about cholesterol.
Jones December 22nd, 2014 at 5:40 pm
” the question is whether a member of the public, who had no such evidence, would have been justified in wondering…”
You can speculate about anything and everything without evidence, that’s why conspiracy theories and pseudoscience are so rampant.
Bunya December 22nd, 2014 at 5:43 pm
I understand your concern about the side effects of drugs, and it’s understandable, but a drug turning someone gay? C’mon. That’s a bit of a stretch, don’t you think?
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 6:17 pm
Yes, it does seem a stretch. I took a neuroscience elective in college, and my wife is a nurse who has shared a lot of information with me over the years. Based upon my very limited knowledge, I don’t know what the causal link would be.
However, I think that, in general, it is a good thing for people to ask questions and to be inquisitive about the world. This is a double-edged sword. Some people are inclined to trust their gut to such a degree that they ignore science.
I understand the annoyance with anti-vaxers. I have a neighbor who insists that somebody invented a carburetor in the 1950’s that allowed a 1957 Chevy to get 200 MPG. I have tried explaining the science to this man, pointing out how the aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance of a 1957 Chevy would make this virtually impossible. But he is utterly convinced that GM bought the patent and buried the idea because they were in cahoots with big oil. This guy doesn’t want to hear about the science, because his mind is already made up.
However, I also have a friend who is constantly coming up with very creative ideas. He thinks outside the box. He is always asking “what if” questions. I think it’s perfectly natural for a young parent, who got A’s in Science, to wonder about possible side-effects from any foods or chemicals to which their baby might be exposed.
My mother craved ground coffee each time she was pregnant. She actually ate the stuff raw, right out of the Maxwell House can. Could all of that caffeine have affected my brain? My wife would say YES!
Jones December 22nd, 2014 at 6:46 pm
“Could all of that caffeine have affected my brain?”
That would have flooded her system with adrenaline…neutralizing your testosterone as a fetus…according to a study on rats.
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 7:30 pm
OMG! You’ve just outed me!
Bunya December 22nd, 2014 at 5:36 pm
Really!?! Whatever did they do prior to bright lights? And why didn’t all women who spent time in the sun produce gay babies? Give me a break. There was also a test that said women who have abortions will suffer breast cancer. Don’t know where they got their information from. Probably from the same lab rats that were exposed to bright lights.
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 6:02 pm
“And why didn’t all women who spent time in the sun produce gay babies?”
Because women don’t get stressed out and produce adrenaline when exposed to bright light, as rats do.
tracey marie December 22nd, 2014 at 6:23 pm
adrenaline does not kill testosterone
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 7:47 pm
The following is not from an authoritative source, but it appears to be from a pro-gay author who is basically saying the same things that I read elsewhere.
“All males start out in the womb as female and must be ‘converted’ into male by testosterone and other hormones. If a women during the early stage of her pregnancy releases more Androstenedione (an adrenaline-related hormone that is structurally similar to testosterone) into her bloodstream and that of her unborn child, it will bind to the receptors that would normally be receiving testosterone thereby ‘shielding’ the hypothalamus from receiving the amount of testosterone it needs to convert from female to male. In homosexual men, the hypothalamus remains ‘female’ while the rest of the body follows its XY code for male development. We now know that the hypothalamus of homosexual men is smaller than in heterosexual men- about the same size of a female’s hypothalamus. Since the hypothalamus is that part of the brain responsible for finding a mate the gay man with a [female] hypothalamus will find men sexually attractive in the same way that heterosexual women do. This is backed-up by the recent pheromone studies that show heterosexual women and homosexual men have the same olfactory nerve responses. For obvious reasons sexual orientation is assigned very early on in fetal development and it cannot be reversed once it is set. Increasing testosterone later in the pregnancy or after birth has shown to have no affect on one’s sexual orientation.”
http://newschoollove.blogspot.com/2011/07/what-is-homosexuality.html
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 8:02 pm
Here’s a more authoritative source. This is on the NIH website.
“Testosterone, progesterone, and corticosterone titers were measured by RIA (radioimmunoassay) in plasma of stressed and control pregnant rats and their male and female fetuses on days 17, 18, 19, and 21 of gestation and on the day of birth. The regimen of stress used (three 45-min periods of restraint under intense illumination daily from days 14-21 of pregnancy) causes failure of masculinization and defeminization of behavioral potentials in male offspring.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6714159
Bunya December 22nd, 2014 at 6:59 pm
So if women don’t get stressed out and produce adrenaline when exposed to bright lights, they shouldn’t produce gay babies, right? Your argument holds no water.
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 7:35 pm
I didn’t say that maternal adrenaline is the ONLY mechanism by which the male offspring might be affected. It is one mechanism.
Bunya December 23rd, 2014 at 10:41 am
I’m not saying there may be side affect from vaccinations, but tests done on rats may not have the same effect on humans. Besides, many different species of animals produce gay offspring, including dolphins, who aren’t exposed to bright light.
tracey marie December 22nd, 2014 at 6:22 pm
It is old and debunked
Bunya December 22nd, 2014 at 7:01 pm
I know it has. But the screwballs hanging outside Planned Parenthood clinics, terrorizing women in crisis, have no use for facts.
tracey marie December 22nd, 2014 at 7:04 pm
so true, when it was worse for women I was an escort
tracey marie December 22nd, 2014 at 6:21 pm
I read the study as well, you have changed the actual summation
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 7:34 pm
I summarized it in my own words, based upon my recollection. Then I found an article providing more info and added a link. I apologize if my description was not entirely accurate. It was not intentional. Was there one specific aspect that I got wrong?
tracey marie December 22nd, 2014 at 7:37 pm
the entire debunked premise that this old mice study works the same way in humans. Warm morning with lot’s of sun raise sex hormones in humans…read about that
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 8:05 pm
How do you know that it was debunked? Can you provide links? I know that Google is my friend, but he wasn’t much help with this.
Obewon December 22nd, 2014 at 10:29 pm
The Spartan warriors were LGBT way before vaccines were gay!
arc99 December 22nd, 2014 at 4:26 pm
Would you understand why it would be controversial to ask the question does a diet consisting entirely of Kosher food make people have big noses?
It is not just asking a question. It is a covert way of reinforcing prejudice.
Homosexuality has existed since the dawn of human civilization, thousands of years before any vaccines other than food and water existed. Nonsensical hypotheticals with zero scientific basis do not change that fact.
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 4:54 pm
“Would you understand why it would be controversial to ask the question does a diet consisting entirely of Kosher food make people have big noses?”
That’s a false equivalence. There is no plausible scientific connection between Kosher food and facial anatomy. There is plenty of scientific evidence for chemicals affecting sexuality. Please see my response to Bunya, below, for just one example.
Jones December 22nd, 2014 at 5:14 pm
“There’s no evidence vaccines are “made up of endocrine-disrupting chemicals” or “disrupt hormonal function and can cause fertility and thyroid problem,”
Also,there is no evidence of an increase in homosexuality with the introduction of vaccines either…so you may as well be asking if iPhones were a factor in sexual orientation.
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 5:59 pm
“…you may as well be asking if iPhones were a factor in sexual orientation.”
Cell phones may well be a factor in brain cancer and birth defects, especially for frequent users located in rural areas. The strength of the RF signal emitted by the phone is related to the distance to the closest cell tower. In rural areas, the phones put out more energy to cover the greater distances.
As a youngster, I studied ham radio. One of the first things you learn is never to get close to an antenna during transmission, because you can easily get RF burns. The RF energy literally burns the skin and underlying tissues.
When using a cell phone, the antenna is typically within an inch of brain tissue. When sitting in a chair or car seat with a phone in your pocket, the antenna could be within an inch or two of your testicles. Cell phones periodically communicate with the network whenever they are powered on, even if you are not engaged in a call. Could the RF energy affect brain tissue or the DNA of sperm cells? It is plausible, but not proven.
Jones December 22nd, 2014 at 6:28 pm
I said “There is no evidence of an increase in homosexuality with the introduction of vaccines either…so you may as well be asking if iPhones were a factor in sexual orientation.
My point was that there is no evidence of an increase in homosexuality associated with iPhones or vaccines. You could add anything to the list…fluoride, teflon, radiation, GMOs, auto emissions, preservatives, insecticides…there is no evidence of a spike in the number of gays that correlates to anything other than people being less afraid to come out.
Robert M. Snyder December 22nd, 2014 at 6:54 pm
I completely agree. I just worry about creating an environment where people are afraid to brainstorm and ask “what if” questions. There was a time when no scientific knowledge existed. What motivated someone to formulate the very first theory and conduct the very first scientific experiment? You can call it inquisitiveness or curiosity or intuition. Whatever it is, we need more of it, not less of it. It’s important to be sensitive to how questions might be perceived by others, but it’s also important to keep asking questions, even if the questions might be somewhat uncomfortable.
Jones December 22nd, 2014 at 7:17 pm
There are reasonable questions based on at least a bit of evidence which promote science, there are fantasy questions “what if people live in the center of the earth?”, and there are questions to serve an agenda…often used on Fox “we’re just asking the question, even though there is nothing to suggest its true”. The anti-vaxxers are doing the latter.
arc99 December 22nd, 2014 at 6:58 pm
It is not a false equivalence at all. “Controversy” is ultimately a matter of opinion. Your characterization of my metaphor as false equivalence tends to support my basic point that simply asking a question can and does have unsavory undertones.
There is plenty of scientific evidence between diet and physical makeup. You are certainly entitled to your opinion. But let’s not pretend that just asking a question is inherently an innocent exercise.
Dwendt44 December 22nd, 2014 at 7:11 pm
Nothing wrong with asking a question, but this question has been answered time and time again. SO enough already.
Jones December 22nd, 2014 at 4:41 pm
Anti-vaxxers are as bad as creationist in their logic, but they do more damage.
Dwendt44 December 22nd, 2014 at 7:01 pm
Don’t overlook the connection between milk and hard drugs. All of those that use hard drugs started out with milk.
Jones December 22nd, 2014 at 4:43 pm
…
Jones December 22nd, 2014 at 4:45 pm
….
Jones December 22nd, 2014 at 4:58 pm
Perhaps this would be better?
Carla Akins December 23rd, 2014 at 5:25 am
Ran across this, Australia govt takes their vaccinations pretty seriously.
http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/12/australian-court-to-penalize-homeopaths-for-claiming-vaccine-alternative/