Amanda Peet on autism, science reporting

[bascule]

There's been a lot of media attention recently about Jenny McCarthy appearing on Oprah to spread pseudoscience about vaccines to the nation. Well, Amanda Peet has come out against her:

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/AutismNews/Story?id=5483159&page=1

 

...and well, she's so rational and articulate, not to mention well-researched! When the interviewer asks for her opinion on a complex scientific matter, she says "don't ask me, ask the experts!".

 

There's an incredibly lulzy scene with Jenny McCarthy where she cites some numbers (which Peet at least claims are wrong) and then *bam* correlation = causation! I can understand McCarthy's frustration with having an autistic child, but obviously her blame is horribly misdirected.

 

She then goes on to rant about how the media pays far too much attention to "controversies" where one side involves pretty much the entire scientific community and the other side involves celebrities spreading pseudoscience.

 

I wish reporters would be more in-your-face and confrontational with pseudoscience, but sadly we can't have a Richard Dawkins do all our science reporting.

 

Hats off to Amanda Peet for this one, she rules!

[iNow]

...and well, she's so rational and articulate, not to mention well-researched!

And gorgeous, ta boot.

[bascule]

And gorgeous, ta boot.

 

Well that goes without saying, although I'll always remember her as the evil bitch from Saving Silverman.

[ParanoiA]

This is awesome. It's just too bad we don't get more of that on every subject. You wouldn't listen to a scientist about acting, so why listen to an actor about science?

[iNow]

I dunno. You should ask all of those parents who refuse to vaccinate their children due to something they heard a dumbass scientologist say on Oprah.

[Sisyphus]

One of my best friends is currently doing autism research at Columbia. Apparently a ridiculously large part of her job is correcting misinformed (and very often belligerent) parents of autistic kids. It's bizarre. Let's hear it for celebrities advocating actual science!

[Glider]

This is awesome. It's just too bad we don't get more of that on every subject. You wouldn't listen to a scientist about acting, so why listen to an actor about science?

I think it'd be really good though. Have the more famous scientists appear on chat shows and bang on about the Oscars or BAFTAS and famous music awards and whatever and how the politics of them and their voting systems needs to change and who should/should not have won and why...you know the kind of stuff.

 

I think it woiuld make a nice point. 'Here I am, a person whose fame alone qualifies me to make loud public assertions about anything at all' I wonder how long it would be before some actor/singer stood up and shouted 'what the hell do you know about it?'

[Pantaz]

In September 2008, McCarthy made this statement about Amanda Peet's position: "She has a lot of [nerve] to come forward and be on that side, because there is an angry mob on my side, and I like the fact that I can say she's completely wrong"

 

(Don't ya' just love the "angry mob" reference?)

 

Original interview with Amanda Peet: http://www.cookiemag.com/entertainment/2008/07/amandapeet

Follow-up statement (apologizing for a poorly worded phrase.):http://www.cookiemag.com/entertainment/2008/07/peet_apology

 

The same magazine published a "Vaccine Expert Q&A". (One doctor cites studies disproving any link between vaccines and austism. The other doctor cites his "29 years" of practice, and finishes with, "I think that the public health benefits to vaccinating are grossly overstated."

[Pangloss]

Well Peet apparently made an unfortunately disparaging comment that she later apologized for which probably generated some of that ire. Perhaps actors sometimes need to be reminded that it's not about who has the best dialog, it's about who has the strongest science. Kudos to Peet for doing the right thing on two fronts.

 

NBC/Universal waded into the quagmire last week with an episode of its hit franchise "Law & Order" guest-starring Hilary Duff and Annie Potts. The story revolved around a mother not immunizing her home-schooled child, leading to the death of another child who was too young to be immunized, via exposure at a city park. The non-immunizing mother was charged with murder, and the jury found her not guilty, reasoning that what she did wasn't a crime even though they felt she should have had the child immunized.

 

The point of the episode apparently being that the law needs to catch up with the times and make it illegal not to immunize. Makes sense to me; I'm not sure I understand why it's not illegal already.

[bascule]

Well Peet apparently made an unfortunately disparaging comment that she later apologized for which probably generated some of that ire.

 

Yes, she called people like Jenny McCarthy "parasites". Perhaps that was not aptly phrased. I would call people like Jenny McCarthy pseudoscience-peddling f*cktards who deserve as much criticism and ridicule as the public wishes to vest upon them.

 

Perhaps actors sometimes need to be reminded that it's not about who has the best dialog, it's about who has the strongest science. Kudos to Peet for doing the right thing on two fronts.

 

Yes, agreed. Peet's arguments are steeped in science as she learned everything she knows from doctors whom she consulted about whether autism poses a risk.

 

The point of the episode apparently being that the law needs to catch up with the times and make it illegal not to immunize. Makes sense to me; I'm not sure I understand why it's not illegal already.

 

I don't know if it needs to go that far, but if a non-immunized child causes an outbreak, I feel the parent who failed to immunize their child should be charged for any collateral damage the outbreak causes. They should, at the very least, pay the medical bills of any children affected by the outbreak, and if the outbreak causes death, they should be charged with manslaughter.

 

I think parents should have the right to immunize their children or not, but failure to immunize can have drastic consequences, and the parents who choose not to immunize should pay for those consequences, either out of pocket or with jail time, depending on the circumstances.

[padren]

The term 'parasites' may be insulting, but it is accurate. Even if a parent believes any statistic Jenny McCarthy spits out: The risks of the side effects are far lower than the risks contracting illnesses because so many parents expose their kids to the risks of immunization.

 

That's parasitical, plain and simple.