6 Comments
User's avatar
Dr. X's avatar

When the HBV was made a requirement, the Public Health folk were explicit that treating all babies and families the same was about reducing stigmatization of HBV prone behaviors, and that's all it was about. Many Public Health folk are strongly motivated to promote and enact stigma reduction programs for mental illness, drug use, and risky sexual behavior, while the "studies" showing benefit are themselves controversial.

Expand full comment
Tiffany Ryder's avatar

I'm listening to the ACIP meeting as I type and the data has not improved since it was originally rolled out universally! It's incredibly disappointing and demoralizing. I was hoping to be proven wrong.

Expand full comment
Dr. X's avatar

I should clarify the comment about “studies” - the reference is to studies about reducing stigma, not about HBV effectiveness.

Expand full comment
Devin Ryder's avatar

Really well articulate, Tiffany. Controversial issues need to be discussed openly and often. If everybody already agreed, it wouldn't matter. Thanks for doing your part!

Expand full comment
Tiffany Ryder's avatar

I would love to have any holes in my logic pointed out. Debate is how we advance science and society as a whole. Much needed.

Expand full comment
Rogue Psychologist's avatar

Well written and could not agree more. This is a great example of what we discussed on the podcast together. New born parents are in a heightened state of anxiety and very vulnerable to pressure and very tuned into the safety of their babies. One could argue that they are being manipulated in light of the evidence you present. Thank you! https://thehealthcarelibertylab.substack.com/p/your-doctor-doesnt-know-everything?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=email

Expand full comment