The Mail carries on. Look at today's headline for what I mean.
Cervical cancer jab girl died from unrelated chest tumour as researcher calls vaccine plan a 'mass experiment'
They can't call her Natalie, or teenager; no, she's still 'cervical cancer jab girl' despite the fact the cervical cancer jab had nothing to do with her death. Yes, they say the tumour was unrelated, but they can't help putting some criticism of the vaccine into the headline - as if to say, yes, we were wrong, but the vaccine's still a bad thing: we've managed to dig up an expert who backs us up!
Also, once again the URL tells us about the story:
So, there you have it. They can't just leave their story as saying that they were entirely wrong and unjustified in linking the HPV vaccine to the tragically early death of a teenager - who, it now turns out, had a fatal tumour. You'll remember from yesterday's post that the Mail was determined to cling on to links with the vaccine. And still today.
Teenager Natalie Morton died from a malignant tumour in her chest and not from a reaction to the cervical cancer jab, it was revealed today.
Not today, yesterday. But you decided to plough on ahead with your disgraceful linking of her death to the vaccine yesterday; you were too busy scaremongering to care about the facts.
The findings come as the cervical cancer vaccination programme was branded a 'public health experiment' by a senior researcher who helped develop the drug.
Not really. The Mail was desperately looking for someone to slag off the vaccination programme, and they found someone. It didn't coincide with the findings at all - findings which make their panic-porn attitude all the more irresponsible.
And, under the story, a torrent of antivaxx nonsense in the comments box, with people claiming that it's too much of a coincidence that the girl should die at the same time as being vaccinated. People claiming that there's no need for mass vaccination. And the Mail washes its hands of it all, and looks the other way, and walks off whistling.
My favourite comment is this, written I think without irony:
"Yesterday the Department of Health said it had 'great confidence' in the safety of its cervical cancer vaccination programme."
MMR Mark2 or what??
- Vivienne, Newcastle UK, 1/10/2009 7:30
Yes, MMR mark 2 indeed. A safe vaccine branded as dangerous by irresponsible fools.
For the backstory on the jab: NHS Choices on the HPV vaccination.
No related posts.