Click to Translate to English Click to Translate to French  Click to Translate to Spanish  Click to Translate to German  Click to Translate to Italian  Click to Translate to Japanese  Click to Translate to Chinese Simplified  Click to Translate to Korean  Click to Translate to Arabic  Click to Translate to Russian  Click to Translate to Portuguese  Click to Translate to Myanmar (Burmese)

PANDEMIC ALERT LEVEL
123456
Forum Home Forum Home > Main Forums > Latest News
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Why People Want to Believe the Zika Conspiracy
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Tracking the next pandemic: Avian Flu Talk

Why People Want to Believe the Zika Conspiracy

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Albert View Drop Down
Admin
Admin


Joined: April 24 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 47746
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Albert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Why People Want to Believe the Zika Conspiracy
    Posted: February 18 2016 at 7:58am


Why People Want to Believe the Zika Virus Is a Conspiracy


Revellers gather during pre-Carnival celebrations on January 31, 2016, in Recife, Pernambuco state, Brazil. Mario Tama/Getty Images

Look at today’s Internet with the right lens, and you can watch a conspiracy theory being born: While scientists are increasingly convinced that Zika virus is behind an uptick of the birth defect microcephaly in Brazil, an Argentinian activist group Physicians in the Crop-Sprayed Towns has blamed—perhaps not surprisingly—spraying. In this case, the activists are blaming insect killers called larvicides. Bonus conspiracy points! The larvicide vaguely has to do with ag-chem company (and perpetual badguy) Monsanto.

The group’s speculation spread. Small online news sites covered it over the weekend, and then on Tuesday, the Washington Post published a story. Here is a secret about journalism: Headlines that are questions are for butt-covering. Case in point: “Could chemicals—rather than the Zika virus—be to blame for birth defects in Brazil?”

More bonus points! A celebrity tweeted it out.

https://twitter.com/Alyssa_Milano/status/699969705264545792

Look, it’s almost certainly not a Monsanto larvicide hurting kids. But the fear is understandable. “Zika is a good one for conspiracy theories because there’s a lot of uncertainty. It hasn’t been proven and there’s this absence of information,” says Rob Brotherton, the author of Suspicious Minds, a book about the why people believe conspiracy theories.

Since scientists can’t yet definitively link the virus to microcephaly, the information vacuum has brought out all the usual bogeymen. The Monsanto larvicide conspiracy has made it the furthest into the mainstream press. (In fact Monsanto doesn’t make the larvicide, and the larvicide is not dangerous to humans, and even the latter half of the Washington Post story backtracks—classic move after a question-hed.) But … then it must have been genetically modified mosquitoes released by scientists! (Nope.) Vaccines! (Nope.) The Rockefellers! (Yeah still no.)

You know what doesn’t work to convince true believers that a conspiracy is not afoot? Thorough debunkings. These ideas persist not so much despite evidence to the contrary, but because of it. “Conspiracy theories are to some extent wired into our brains with the biases and shortcuts in the way we think,” Brotherton says. “Conspiracy theories resonate with these biases in our intuitions.”

One of these biases is called proportionality bias. “When something big happens in the world, we look for big explanations,” says Brotherton. For example, it’s hard to believe that President Kennedy’s assassination—with all its political repercussions—could have been the work of one lone gunman. So you end up with the grassy knoll, the umbrella man, weird bullet trajectories, and so on. Similarly, it can be hard to believe that an invisible virus can all of sudden cause very visible brain defects in babies.

Reading intention into disaster is another source of bias. “People need somebody tangible to blame and give them a target for their anger, rather than have something that happens by happenstance, by chance, by force of God, or by force of nature,” says Ted Goertzel, a retired sociologist at Rutgers University who has studied conspiracy theories in science.

But a virus? Whom do you blame?

And once someone has become suspicious about the government or corporations—even for legitimate reasons—those suspicions are hard to shake. That’s why the same bogeymen come up again and again. Confirmation bias means that people tend to dismiss the information that contradicts their worldview as yet more evidence of conspiracy. Like anytime I point out that GMOs can have benefits, I get dismissed as a shill for Monsanto. (Hello, comments section of this story.)

Given that conspiracy theories grow in the dark corners of our brain, the way to combat them isn’t always with debunking them with the overwhelming facts, says Viren Swami, a psychologist at Anglia Ruskin University. Swami has done research that suggests people fare better against conspiracy theories when armed with better analytical tools. In one study, students who took a course with the book Critical Thinking Skills ended up being less conspiratorially minded. Make people aware of their cognitive biases, and they draw their own more logical conclusions.

And it’s hard to argue against critical thinking, right? Unless, of course, Critical Thinking Skills is all part of a conspiracy to brainwash us into swallowing the party line…

http://www.wired.com/2016/02/zika-conspiracy-theories/


https://www.facebook.com/Avianflutalk
Back to Top
Albert View Drop Down
Admin
Admin


Joined: April 24 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 47746
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Albert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 18 2016 at 8:07am
The WHO has created this entire conspiracy theory with the chemicals because they have failed to confirm or to come clean with the Zika link to Microcephaly.    The WHO once again in their attempt to downplay the situation has created a mess.  That group is nothing but one huge problem these days. 

In this article, the WHO is now going to announce the link to Zika.  Any bets that they will?  



Report says pesticide is to blame for microcephaly outbreak - not Zika

Right now, the Internet is abuzz with questions over a report that states it’s more likely that the outbreak of microcephaly - a rare neurological disorder that causes newborns to develop abnormally small skulls and brains - is linked to pesticides rather than the spread of Zika virus. The pesticide in question is pyriproxyfen - a larvicide that targets the Zika-spreading Aedes aegypti mosquito, produced by Sumitomo Chemical. 

"In the area where most sick persons live, a chemical larvicide producing malformations in mosquitoes has been applied for 18 months, and that this poison (pyroproxifen) is applied by the State on drinking water used by the affected population," the report, published by Argentinian group Physicians in Crop-Sprayed Towns (PCST) last week, states.

The group adds that it’s "not a coincidence" that cases of microcephaly have proliferated in Brazil where pyriproxyfen is being used, while in Colombia, Zika infections have not been linked to microcephaly, despite the fact that it has the second highest incidence of the virus after Brazil. 

And even within Brazil, not every case of microcephaly has been linked to presence of Zika. "After experts scrutinised 732 of the cases, they found that more than half either weren’t microcephaly, or weren’t related to Zika," The Washington Post reported last month.

In response to the report, one Brazilian state has suspended use of pyriproxyfen until further notice.

"We decided to suspend the use of the product in drinking water until we have a position from the Ministry of Health, and so, we reinforce further still the appeal to the population to eliminate any possible mosquito breeding site," Joao Gabbardo dos Reis, state health secretary in Rio Grande do Sul, told the press over the weekend.

So what exactly is going on here? While some say the evidence supporting a link between pyriproxyfen and microcephaly is "overwhelming", others are calling it a "conspiracy theory", and the World Health Organisation (WHO) is insisting that pyriproxyfen is safe in drinking water at the recommended levels. 

The reality is that, right now, we have circumstantial evidence suggesting that pyriproxyfen in Brazilian drinking water could be increasing the risk of microcephaly, and this link is made stronger in the absence of a definitive causal link between the neurological disorder and Zika virus. People want answers, so it’s understandable that new evidence or hypotheses are given credence as we try to make sense of what is going on.

But is the lack of scientific evidence linking microcephaly to Zika equal to the lack of scientific evidence linking microcephaly to pyriproxyfen? Not exactly. 

While the WHO has explicitly said that the link between the microcephaly and Zika outbreaks has not yet been confirmed, this is less about a lack of scientific evidence and more about giving scientists the time they need to carry out their investigations properly. 

If they’re going to explicitly state that there is a link, they want to be 100 percent sure that this is backed by solid, causal evidence showing how an infection by Zika virus can cause biological changes in a foetus that severely disrupts growth. 

“Unlike the relationship between the Zika virus and microcephaly, which has had its confirmation shown in tests that indicated the presence of the virus in samples of blood, tissue and amniotic fluid, the association between the use of pyriproxyfen and microcephaly has no scientific basis," the Brazilian government said in response to the PCST report

"It’s important to state that some localities that do not use pyriproxyfen also had reported cases of microcephaly."

According to Donna Bowater at The Telegraph, the WHO says a definitive link between Zika and microcephaly is within weeks of being confirmed. "Two separate studies last week also found evidence of Zika virus in the brain tissue of aborted foetuses or babies who died soon after birth, who had microcephaly," she reports.

The director of Disease Control and Diseases of the Health Department of Pernambuco in Brazil, George Dimech, pointed out to the BBC that the city of Recife currently has the highest reported amount of cases of microcephaly, and yet pyriproxyfen is not used in the region - they use another insecticide altogether. Neurologist Vanessa van der Linden added that, "Clinically, the changes we see in the scans of babies suggest that the injuries were caused by congenital infection and not by larvicide, drug, or vaccine."

Orac over at the Respectful Insolence blog points out that "humans do not make or use sesquiterpenoid hormones (aka insect juvenile hormones), which is what pyriproxifen targets", and over the years, great deal of research has been carried out on the pesticide's physiochemical properties, toxicology, and safe levels.

If we take the circumstantial evidence linking microcephaly and pyriproxyfen at face value, it’s a wonder why microcephaly isn’t a much bigger, global problem. The pesticide is approved for use in the US and Europe, and has been for many years - albeit not in the drinking water, as it has been in some regions in Brazil.

There are still a whole lot of questions about why cases of microcephaly appear to have exploded in the recent months and years - many of which will not immediately be answered if scientists do come out and say there is a definitive link between it and Zika virus. But until we have causal evidence for a link between the disease and a certain type of pesticide, it’s unscientific to jump to conclusions based on inconsistent circumstantial evidence. 

What we’re about to say is a total cliche, but it’s a cliche for a reason: keep calm and carry on until we have all the facts.

http://www.sciencealert.com/argentinian-report-says-monsanto-linked-pesticide-is-to-blame-for-microcephaly-outbreak-not-zika


Comment:  You all can blame The WHO for chasing your tales on this thing.  After they announce it, watch what happens to the Olympics and you will see the point I've been trying to make for quite awhile now.  Keep your eye on the ball, as they say.


https://www.facebook.com/Avianflutalk
Back to Top
CRS, DrPH View Drop Down
Expert Level Adviser
Expert Level Adviser


Joined: January 20 2014
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 26660
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CRS, DrPH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 18 2016 at 3:14pm
Thanks, Albert!  The medical community really doesn't have a clue, this is a very good article about Zika virus in general:


The ongoing pandemic confirms that Zika is predominantly a mild or asymptomatic denguelike disease. However, data from French Polynesia documented a concomitant epidemic of 73 cases of Guillain–Barré syndrome and other neurologic conditions in a population of approximately 270,000, which may represent complications of Zika. Of greater concern is the explosive Brazilian epidemic of microcephaly, manifested by an apparent 20-fold increase in incidence from 2014 to 2015, which some public health officials believe is caused by Zika virus infections in pregnant women. Although no other flavivirus is known to have teratogenic effects, the microcephaly epidemic has not yet been linked to any other cause, such as increased diagnosis or reporting, increased ultrasound examinations of pregnant women, or other infectious or environmental agents.
CRS, DrPH
Back to Top
Albert View Drop Down
Admin
Admin


Joined: April 24 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 47746
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Albert Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 18 2016 at 5:01pm
Good article, thanks Chuck.
https://www.facebook.com/Avianflutalk
Back to Top
CRS, DrPH View Drop Down
Expert Level Adviser
Expert Level Adviser


Joined: January 20 2014
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 26660
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CRS, DrPH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 18 2016 at 5:15pm
No problem, boss!  More from CIDRAP....this thing is starting to look like a monster to me! 

Microcephaly cases rise; Zika detected in amniotic fluid

Filed Under

Today the number of suspected microcephaly cases in Brazil grew, and yesterday scientists detailed Zika virus findings in the amniotic fluid of two pregnant women, adding more evidence to a possible link between the condition in infants and Zika virus infection.

In other developments, local transmission was confirmed in two more Caribbean territories—the Dutch islands of Aruba and Bonaire—raising the total affected locations in the Americas to 28.

More microcephaly cases

Brazil's health ministry today reported 201 more suspected microcephaly cases, a condition that might be tied to Zika infection in which infants are born with small heads and underdeveloped brains.

The ministry also confirmed 46 earlier cases but ruled out 72 others, putting the number under investigation at 3,935, according to an official statement translated and posted by Avian Flu Diary, an infectious disease news blog.

So far 508 cases have been confirmed and 837 have been ruled out, from a cumulative total of 5,280 suspected cases. Brazil's confirmed microcephaly cases are from 203 cities in 13 of the country's states.

Virus in amniotic fluid

In research developments, Brazilian scientists yesterday published full case findings on Zika virus detection in the amniotic fluid of two pregnant women who had microcephalic fetuses, initially announced by Brazil's health ministry in the middle of November. The team published its findings in an early online edition of The Lancet Infectious Diseases.

Both women had symptoms of Zika virus infection in their first trimester of pregnancy. Ultrasounds at 22 weeks gestation confirmed microcephaly, and researchers obtained amniotic fluid at 28 weeks. Tests confirmed the presence of Zika virus genomes as well as Zika antibodies.

Tests on the women were negative for other infectious diseases, and samples of blood and urine were negative for Zika virus. When researchers compared the Zika virus genome from the amniotic fluid to samples from a previous outbreak, they found that they were genetically related to the strain implicated in French Polynesia's 2013 outbreak.

French Polynesian and Swiss experts writing in a related commentary said the findings strongly suggest but don't prove that Zika virus causes microcephaly and that the next step is to do case-control studies to sift out the risk of microcephaly and other complications stemming from maternal Zika virus infections.

CDC travel restrictions for Aruba, Bonaire

The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) added the Dutch territories Aruba and Bonaire to its list of locations in the Americas with confirmed local Zika virus spread, bringing the number of affected areas to 28.

Aruba and Bonaire are part of a trio of islands in the Caribbean off the coast of Venezuela, and local spread had recently been confirmed in nearby Curacao.

The confirmations prompted the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to add the two destinations to its level 2 travel warning, which urges pregnant women or those considering becoming pregnant to consider postponing travel to areas where the virus is circulating.



CRS, DrPH
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down