Facts, not Fantasy

Amazon Contextual Product Ads

Sunday, June 19, 2011

Vaccine Times: Russell Blaylock MD - The new Wakefield?

Is anyone taking bets on when this charlatan will be on some credulous TV show spouting off his nonsense?

The anti-vaxers’ ability to find real doctors to support their particular brand of quackery is admirable: think Dr. Jay Gordon, Andrew Wakefield and countless others. Someone I was not previously aware off joins the illustrious ranks; we are  introduced to Dr. Russell Blaylock M.D. In a recent tweet, Meryl “I’m not anti-vaccine I’m pro-safe-vaccine even though vaccines=rape” Dorey linked to an article ominously titled “If You Are In Support of Vaccinations, Read This If You Dare“, published at thehealthy- economist.com. Now, how could I be expected to resist a dare from thehealthy- economist? I had to read.

As the first sentence of the article shows, we’re in for quite a spectacle:
If you are in support of vaccinations, this well written, concise and compelling letter by world renowned neurologist Dr. Russell Blaylock MD will dismantle every single argument used to support this inhumane, barbaric practice.
Wow, he’s world-renowned and is going to dismantle every single argument supporting vaccinations in one letter. What could possibly go wrong with that? I’m sure a world-renowned neurologist won’t stoop to the tired, old, already debunked anti-vaccine talking points. No, this guy will present earth-shattering evidence, unassailable arguments that will just leave the rest of us in the pro-health community flabbergasted and speechless. Did I mention he’s a world-renowned neurologist?

Who is Russell Blaylock MD?
He’s not new to the pseudo-scientific world according to the Skeptics Dictionary. He’s been around for a while apparently dabbling in pseudo-scientific endeavors with regards to vaccines, cancer, and other woo lovers topics such as water fluoridation, teeth fillings, aspartame etc.
CLICK HERE TO READ THE REST OF THE ARTICLE.  It's a long one, but forewarned is forearmed.  And this nutter needs to be shown for what he is!


  1. If you love science you would not resort to rhetoric and ad hominem attacks. If you have scientific issues with what anyone is saying use science and studies to debunk them, it should be easy if they are indeed quacks. Otherwise you are only showing yourself to be untrustworthy, emotional and irrational.
    Have a go at debunking this


    Then we can have a balanced debate
    thank you

  2. Argument via youtube paste is as productive as quoting whale.to...


Please keep posts here respectful. Those that cross boundaries will be deleted, and then placed in a special place for future ridicule.