Topic: Vaccinations
started by: GORDON
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 03 2015,18:33
So yeah, there's currently a thing for parents not getting their kids vaccinated, and diseases like measles are making a comeback.What I wonder is this:
If there is a kid in your neighborhood whose parents did not get vaccinated for whatever reasons, and they get measles, and then they pass measles to your kid who is yet too young to get the MMR vaccination, possibly casing death.... can you sue the dumb parents for it? Yeah you can sue for anything... I just wonder why we haven't seen this, yet.
Posted by TPRJones on Feb. 03 2015,18:50
Sure you could sue. As you say you can sue for anything. But I doubt you'd win; the jury is likely to have at least a couple of anti-vaccers on it.Personally I am opposed to forced vaccinations. Sure it increases the danger for other children, but if the parents are dumb enough to be anti-vaccers then when their kid dies the odds are the average intelligence of the species will go up marginally.
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 03 2015,18:56
I dunno, I think there has to be a baseline for citizenship and residency, and "don't help bring back diseases through ignorance" should be one of them, right alongside, "you can't kill other peeps" and "Don't talk during the goddam movie" and "Get the fuck out of the fast lane." There are certainly much harsher restrictions of liberty than that they we already live with.
Posted by TPRJones on Feb. 03 2015,19:20
Fascist.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 03 2015,19:26
QUOTE
Personally I am opposed to forced vaccinations.
Your health is yours to deal with. However, if you start sending your kid to places society funds, like public schools and universities, shit gets different. If my tax dollars pay to treat measles for kid X because your son played with him and didn't have his shots, shit gets different.
QUOTE
if the parents are dumb enough to be anti-vaccers then when their kid dies the odds are the average intelligence of the species will go up marginally.
The average intelligence being on the uptick will happen when the dumbass parents die off. The child dying off never gets to make an informed decision about jabbing a needle in his arm so he doesn't get sick.
QUOTE
"Get the fuck out of the fast lane."
OR GODDAMN DEATH. The driving rules in this country are batshit insane. If you can't handle traffic merging into your lane on the highway, you can't handle driving. Fuck off and hand in your license.
Posted by TheCatt on Feb. 03 2015,19:27
I would think you'd have a good cause for a civil suit in today's world. They are consciously rejecting scientific advice on best practices for health, exposing others. Knowingly creating the possibility that others are harmed is often suable.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 03 2015,19:31
(TheCatt @ Feb. 03 2015,21:27)
QUOTE
I would think you'd have a good cause for a civil suit in today's world. They are consciously rejecting scientific advice on best practices for health, exposing others. Knowingly creating the possibility that others are harmed is often suable.
What if they're ... oh, I don't know, Christian scientists? Think any court will take on the sacred religious cow and say, "Your beliefs are idiotic, jump into this millennium?"
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 03 2015,19:33
Yep, too bad, there's a minimal set of things we require here in civilization.
Posted by TPRJones on Feb. 03 2015,19:35
QUOTE
However, if you start sending your kid to places society funds, like public schools and universities, shit gets different.
Agreed. But I'm also opposed to forced schooling as well, so it works.
QUOTE
The child dying off never gets to make an informed decision about jabbing a needle in his arm so he doesn't get sick.
Sure the kid didn't get to decide, but with two dumb parents (or one dumb parent and one weak parent) the kid is probably also dumb.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 04 2015,08:19
I have to say I'm in the "opposed to forced vaccinations camp" as well. I suspect the fears are overblown about the supposed problems with vaccinations, but who knows what they'll be saying 50 years from now? Plus if there really are any risks associated with them, what are the odds that the big pharms that make shit tons of money off of them will let one of those studies stand without 10 saying the opposite being funded.To the original question, I don't see how they could successfully sue. Someone here (I forget who) is always pointing out how many die from the flu every year. If your kid gets the flu and dies from respiratory issues there are a LOT of people that refuse to get flu shots every year.
Posted by TPRJones on Feb. 04 2015,12:03
Vince, 100% of the fear and hysteria around vaccines comes from a single study done in the 50s by a quack that didn't do a "study" so much as write an opinion piece composed of lies and deceit. He even confessed years later that he made the whole thing up.Since then there have been many studies of vaccines all of which have found no links with autism. At this point the science around the lack of connection between vaccines and autism is about as firmly established as the idea that the earth may in fact orbit the sun.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 04 2015,12:09
QUOTE
I suspect the fears are overblown about the supposed problems with vaccinations, but who knows what they'll be saying 50 years from now?
That statement can be made about any technology that isn't fully, 100% explainable.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 04 2015,12:48
(TPRJones @ Feb. 04 2015,14:03)
QUOTE
Vince, 100% of the fear and hysteria around vaccines comes from a single study done in the 50s by a quack...
Actually not true that this is where all the fears come from. I agree that all the autism stuff is likely bunk. There seems to be something causing a spike in cases of autism over the last couple or three decades, but I don't think they can tie it to anything at this point.
I'm talking about all the other adverse reactions from vaccines that have been documented on a case by case basis. Reactions that include, but are not limited to paralysis, seizures, brain damage and death.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 04 2015,12:58
Uh ... they don't think there's a single thing causing autism. It's a state the brain gets into by one of multiple paths. The reason there's been a "spike" in autism in the recent past is that they've put more effort into recognizing and diagnosing it.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 04 2015,13:07
(Malcolm @ Feb. 04 2015,14:58)
QUOTE
Uh ... they don't think there's a single thing causing autism. It's a state the brain gets into by one of multiple paths. The reason there's been a "spike" in autism in the recent past is that they've put more effort into recognizing and diagnosing it.
I agree that's a lot of it, but the rates have gone from something like 1 in 5,000 to 1 in 65. Now part of that is also the old "when you're a hammer everything looks like a nail", but I don't think those two things can account for all of it.
* Updating my numbers. Was measured at 1 in 2,500 in the 70's and is now 1 in 68.
Posted by TheCatt on Feb. 04 2015,13:20
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 04 2015,13:23
I would ask if there has been a change in the definition of "autism" in that time frame.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 04 2015,13:39
I think we're missing the big picture on this news story anyway. The media is doing a great job of directing focus on the anti-vaccine crowd during this measles outbreak. It's not like un-vaccinated kids' bodies are spontaneously producing the virus. It's almost as if people had been entering our country without any sort of health screening or something.
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 04 2015,13:48
Yeah there's that, I assume it has been coming from Americans traveling overseas. Measles still happens a lot overseas, and it would be easy to bring back.
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 04 2015,13:57
(GORDON @ Feb. 04 2015,16:23)
QUOTE
I would ask if there has been a change in the definition of "autism" in that time frame.
For example, is severe shyness, introspection, or just being a spergelord with no social skills considered autism, now? That wouldn't have been diagnosed 20 years ago when everyone wasn't a special snowflake.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 04 2015,14:07
(GORDON @ Feb. 04 2015,15:57)
QUOTE
(GORDON @ Feb. 04 2015,16:23)
QUOTE
I would ask if there has been a change in the definition of "autism" in that time frame.
For example, is severe shyness, introspection, or just being a spergelord with no social skills considered autism, now? That wouldn't have been diagnosed 20 years ago when everyone wasn't a special snowflake.
< This thing >. Whenever it's updated (average is about once per decade), lots of shit changes due to new research, especially in areas where there's lots ongoing, like autism.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 04 2015,14:13
(Vince @ Feb. 04 2015,15:07)
QUOTE
(Malcolm @ Feb. 04 2015,14:58)
QUOTE
Uh ... they don't think there's a single thing causing autism. It's a state the brain gets into by one of multiple paths. The reason there's been a "spike" in autism in the recent past is that they've put more effort into recognizing and diagnosing it.
I agree that's a lot of it, but the rates have gone from something like 1 in 5,000 to 1 in 65. Now part of that is also the old "when you're a hammer everything looks like a nail", but I don't think those two things can account for all of it.
* Updating my numbers. Was measured at 1 in 2,500 in the 70's and is now 1 in 68.
The first makes no difference. However many ways there are to become autistic seems moot. Any one mechanism will do.
The second is huge because there's no chemical test or brain scan or any 100% objective way to diagnose it. It's entirely based on behaviour. This isn't a gene suddenly switching on due to some retard type of plastic we're using or vaccinations or nuclear waste or something we've only started doing in the last 30 years. It's shit that has been going on for < quite some time > and we are rapidly changing our views on it, and therefore our ability to recognize it. There are strong genetic tendencies at play, but it's not of the "we're mutating into a race of Rain Men" variety.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 04 2015,14:36
(GORDON @ Feb. 04 2015,15:48)
QUOTE
Yeah there's that, I assume it has been coming from Americans traveling overseas. Measles still happens a lot overseas, and it would be easy to bring back.
I suspect it's coming from across our southern border and as soon as that idea starts to get traction we'll see any sort of story about vaccines or measles quietly get spiked.
I keep hearing about numbers of measles outbreaks but I haven't seen any of the parents being interviewed or any names floating or anything of that nature. Why aren't the reporters asking the parents why their kids aren't vaccinated instead of asking politicians their views on vaccinations? I'm guessing because the parents no hablo ingles.
Posted by TPRJones on Feb. 04 2015,14:47
(Vince @ Feb. 04 2015,14:48)
QUOTE
I'm talking about all the other adverse reactions from vaccines that have been documented on a case by case basis. Reactions that include, but are not limited to paralysis, seizures, brain damage and death.
Oh, okay.
Those things can also be caused in similarly rare cases by peanuts, various fruits, honey, milk, aspirin, some laundry detergents, and cough medicine. Better make sure your kids don't get any of those, either, just in case.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 04 2015,18:41
Given the choice between chicken pox and possible paralysis, I'll go with the chicken pox. Small Pox or polio are a different story. Point is, it should be the parents choice on things like a chicken pox or measles vaccine.
Posted by GORDON on Feb. 04 2015,18:47
< http://www.roalddahlfans.com/articles/meas.php >QUOTE
Olivia, my eldest daughter, caught measles when she was seven years old. As the illness took its usual course I can remember reading to her often in bed and not feeling particularly alarmed about it. Then one morning, when she was well on the road to recovery, I was sitting on her bed showing her how to fashion little animals out of coloured pipe-cleaners, and when it came to her turn to make one herself, I noticed that her fingers and her mind were not working together and she couldn't do anything.
"Are you feeling all right?" I asked her.
"I feel all sleepy," she said.
In an hour, she was unconscious. In twelve hours she was dead.
The measles had turned into a terrible thing called measles encephalitis and there was nothing the doctors could do to save her. That was twenty-four years ago in 1962, but even now, if a child with measles happens to develop the same deadly reaction from measles as Olivia did, there would still be nothing the doctors could do to help her.
"Are you feeling all right?" I asked her.
"I feel all sleepy," she said.
In an hour, she was unconscious. In twelve hours she was dead.
The measles had turned into a terrible thing called measles encephalitis and there was nothing the doctors could do to save her. That was twenty-four years ago in 1962, but even now, if a child with measles happens to develop the same deadly reaction from measles as Olivia did, there would still be nothing the doctors could do to help her.
Posted by TPRJones on Feb. 04 2015,20:45
QUOTE
Point is, it should be the parents choice on things like a chicken pox or measles vaccine.
Agreed. But any parent that chooses not to I will judge and find wanting.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 05 2015,03:23
And my personal choice would probably be to immunize. Now... where are all these cases coming from?
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 05 2015,10:55
< When parents > don't quite follow medical advice. But hey, they should be free to test dangerous, insane theories at the cost of their children's lives.
Posted by TheCatt on Feb. 05 2015,11:08
(Malcolm @ Feb. 05 2015,13:55)
QUOTE
< When parents > don't quite follow medical advice. But hey, they should be free to test dangerous, insane theories at the cost of their children's lives.
On the one hand, children cannot really protect themselves. On the other hand, I don't want the government telling me how to be a parent.
Super torn on this issue.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 05 2015,11:15
Up until the mid 70's, the military packed smokes with their MREs. Individuals will make poor choices. Sucks for their kids. I really do have great empathy for them. When the government chooses poorly for everyone, the resiliency of us as a society is compromised.I find the irony in that it's the same ones that say we have to only consider Darwin's theory when educating that are trying to say that it apparently doesn't work in the real world because only the state can choose what is the fittest to survive, otherwise the species will all die.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 05 2015,11:19
QUOTE
On the other hand, I don't want the government telling me how to be a parent.
They already do, it's why child welfare services exist and it's why you can't raise your kid on the wheel of pain like Conan the barbarian was. It's about certain people not pushing their psychoses on their kids and the rest of society whose immune systems have to deal with the fucking consequences. When your shitty parenting starts costing people around you, then some third party has to step in.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 05 2015,11:23
Baaaa... baaaa....
Posted by TheCatt on Feb. 05 2015,12:57
Posted by Vince on Feb. 05 2015,13:03
The hit Obama took in the polls for Ebola is why they aren't asking where these measles cases are coming from and focusing on asking politicians about views on vaccinations instead.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 06 2015,11:01
< Autism org >: vaccinate your damn kids.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 06 2015,11:14
< Interesting >
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 06 2015,11:25
(Vince @ Feb. 06 2015,13:14)
QUOTE
< Interesting >
Not really.
QUOTE
Dr. Max Wiznitzer, a pediatric neurologist at Rainbow Babies and Children's Hospital in Cleveland, said the design of Hooker's study is questionable, and that his analysis is "not fine-tuned enough to give you meaningful information."
"If you analyze data enough times and enough ways, you're bound to find something that is statistically significant," said Witznitzer, after looking at both studies. "This does not mean that the result is a true positive (vs. a false positive) or meaningful."
"If you analyze data enough times and enough ways, you're bound to find something that is statistically significant," said Witznitzer, after looking at both studies. "This does not mean that the result is a true positive (vs. a false positive) or meaningful."
Numbers do not lie. They are, however, misinterpreted.
Posted by TheCatt on Feb. 06 2015,11:31
(Vince @ Feb. 06 2015,14:14)
QUOTE
< Interesting >
Posted by Vince on Feb. 06 2015,11:48
I don't know if there is a link or not. To be honest, I kind of doubt it. But the CDC did willingly skew their study. And they're the ones telling us that everyone else is lying.Safe to say, I don't trust the CDC at this point either. Just glad I don't have to worry about it.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 06 2015,13:02
QUOTE
And they're the ones telling us that everyone else is lying.
Vaccinations were endorsed by the CDC back in 1946. The studies saying they're evil are the ones claiming the lies. The CDC has put out study and after study which supports their almost seventy year-old stance.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 06 2015,13:14
I heard if you remove the foreign traveler cases and the Amish, that this measles "outbreak" is right on par with our national yearly average.I think we're being herded again.
Posted by Vince on Feb. 06 2015,13:20
(Malcolm @ Feb. 06 2015,15:02)
QUOTE
QUOTE
And they're the ones telling us that everyone else is lying.
Vaccinations were endorsed by the CDC back in 1946. The studies saying they're evil are the ones claiming the lies. The CDC has put out study and after study which supports their almost seventy year-old stance.
As has been the norm with this sort of coverage, the more damning info is way down in this article. I just wanted to make sure I posted something from a more neutral news site.
QUOTE
"I regret that my co-authors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article," Thompson said in a statement sent to CNN by his lawyer. "I have had many discussions with Dr. Brian Hooker over the last 10 months regarding studies the CDC has carried out regarding vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes, including autism spectrum disorders. I share his belief that CDC decision-making and analyses should be transparent."
However, Thompson went on to say that Hooker had recorded these conversations without his consent, and had posted them online without his knowledge.
However, Thompson went on to say that Hooker had recorded these conversations without his consent, and had posted them online without his knowledge.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 06 2015,13:27
QUOTE
"I regret that my co-authors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article," Thompson said in a statement sent to CNN by his lawyer. "I have had many discussions with Dr. Brian Hooker over the last 10 months regarding studies the CDC has carried out regarding vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes, including autism spectrum disorders. I share his belief that CDC decision-making and analyses should be transparent."
One study tanking from ten years ago isn't enough to sway my opinion from the many that have been conducted properly.
Posted by unkbill on Feb. 06 2015,16:07
I read the first maybe 10 comments and I have no idea what the say. Force people to immunize there kids. Other course are the parents immunized? What I did and the kid next door wasn't and still cause my kid to die. I had the MMR when I was a kid. That is Mumps, Measles and Rubella I believe. Haven't had any thank God. And I haven't infected anyone else. I like the theory of it thinning out the crowd.
Posted by Malcolm on Feb. 07 2015,10:16
< U of Cali > leads the way with sanity. I repeat, Cali-fucking-fornia.QUOTE
Students at all 10 campuses of the University of California will be required to be screened for tuberculosis and vaccinated for measles, mumps, rubella and other diseases under a new health plan set to take effect in 2017, the university said on Friday.
If you want to keep your kids unvaccinated, you may as well homeschool them.
Posted by Malcolm on Mar. 28 2015,10:40
< Idiot mother annoyed > when her kid got sent home.QUOTE
"I told him that he might be called down to the office because of this," she said. "We explained to him that Mom and Dad love him very much and this is our choice because we feel this is protecting him by not being vaccinated."
You're protecting him by not giving him the shot? Ex-fucking-plain.
QUOTE
Though health professionals and researchers have said links between autism and vaccines have been repeatedly discredited, Donovan and other parents believe the damaging side effects of vaccines are not fully known and often downplayed.
You are fucking stupid.
QUOTE
"It's not right. It's truly bullying. My son is being singled out and we're made to feel like were bad parents because we've decided not to vaccinate anymore."
That does make you a shitty parent.
QUOTE
Chickenpox, she noted, is usually not a serious disease. Only in rare cases does it have deadly complications.
"They're saying it's some deadly disease but, hello, we all had it," she said.
"They're saying it's some deadly disease but, hello, we all had it," she said.
No, we haven't all had it. Because some people got FUCKING VACCINATED.
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 18 2015,09:48
< Elmo > says, "Vaccinate, bitches."
Posted by GORDON on Apr. 18 2015,12:22
(Malcolm @ Apr. 18 2015,12:48)
QUOTE
< Elmo > says, "Vaccinate, bitches."
I'm surprised there isn't a law saying religious or other reasons are not legally exempt from doing what you're told. I mean, an unvaccinated person could spread a disease to a gay person, and then that would be discrimination. :-D
Posted by Malcolm on Apr. 22 2015,10:34
< Abso-fucking-lutely > NO LINK between vaccinations and autism.QUOTE
“This was true even among those children who were at an increased risk of having autism spectrum disorders by virtue of having an older sibling with ASD,” said Dr. Anjali Jain.
None. Zero. Fucking goose egg.
And yet, shit like < this > still happens. Sorry you've got such shitty parents, kid.
Posted by Malcolm on Jul. 01 2015,10:39
< Dumb, dumber, dumbest >.
Posted by TheCatt on Jul. 01 2015,11:27
QUOTE
The issue of mandatory vaccination has even divided Hollywood. In February, actress Kristen Bell said that her friends and family weren't allowed to hold her daughter Lincoln before she was two months old if they didn't have the whooping cough vaccination. "It's a very simple logic: I believe in trusting doctors, not know-it-alls," she told
Oh, Kristen. You should have been on my list of 5 if you weren't.
Posted by Vince on Jul. 01 2015,13:06
LOL! The subgroup of "doctors" is almost 100% within the group "know-it-alls". Not that I disagree with her stance, but her estimation of doctors in general is kind of funny.
Posted by GORDON on Jul. 01 2015,13:11
(TheCatt @ Jul. 01 2015,14:27)
QUOTE
QUOTE
The issue of mandatory vaccination has even divided Hollywood. In February, actress Kristen Bell said that her friends and family weren't allowed to hold her daughter Lincoln before she was two months old if they didn't have the whooping cough vaccination. "It's a very simple logic: I believe in trusting doctors, not know-it-alls," she told
Oh, Kristen. You should have been on my list of 5 if you weren't.
Wait... didn't she say a smart thing? She likes doctors better than idiots who think they know shit?
Posted by Troy on Jul. 01 2015,13:12
Maybe he meant, "she should be on my 5 if she wasn't already"?
Posted by GORDON on Jul. 01 2015,13:14
Oh.
Posted by Malcolm on Sep. 29 2015,10:34
< Another study > says anti-vaccine conspiracy theorists are psychotic.
Posted by Malcolm on Nov. 04 2015,10:52
< Anti-vaccine > sites are utter bullshit, says science dudes.
Posted by TPRJones on Nov. 04 2015,11:46
I still maintain that anti-vaccers are inadvertently working to improve the species. We don't get nearly as much culling of the stupid as we need to, so every little bit helps.
Posted by Malcolm on Nov. 04 2015,11:49
(TPRJones @ Nov. 04 2015,13:46)
QUOTE
I still maintain that anti-vaccers are inadvertently working to improve the species. We don't get nearly as much culling of the stupid as we need to, so every little bit helps.
Awesome unless you're a six-year old dying of some easily preventable illness. Once you get past the age of majority and have a greater degree of control over what chems you can make use of (well, kind of), then it's helping natural selection along.
Posted by TPRJones on Nov. 04 2015,12:32
QUOTE
Awesome unless you're a six-year old dying of some easily preventable illness. Once you get past the age of majority and have a greater degree of control over what chems you can make use of (well, kind of), then it's helping natural selection along.
Nope, it still applies. If the parents are that stupid then the kid probably is, too, and the cull is legit. That's the whole point. If the kid were likely to be relatively not stupid while the parents are stupid then there'd be no point of culling idiots anytime and the whole theory of evolution falls apart.
Posted by Malcolm on Nov. 04 2015,12:42
QUOTE
If the parents are that stupid then the kid probably is, too, and the cull is legit.
I'm not putting enough credence in genetic intelligence to buy that one. Stupid people can still make smart children.
Posted by TPRJones on Nov. 04 2015,13:52
Can? Yes. Will? Unlikely. Like I said, that's basically the entire basis of evolution.If you reject that basic point then you are rejecting the entire concept of selective breeding, natural selection, survival of the fittest, etc etc etc.
Posted by GORDON on Nov. 04 2015,14:12
I'd like to see a slightly more civilized solution in which we don't sacrifice the kid because of the parents' stupidity. Some ignorance is genetic, a lot of it is conditioned. I'd even consider if parents dont want to vaccinate their first kid, take the kid and sterilize the parents.
Posted by TPRJones on Nov. 04 2015,16:26
But it's too late, the parents have already reproduced.No point in burning down the barn when the horses have already escaped. Or something like that.
Posted by GORDON on Nov. 04 2015,16:37
I'm a light touch.
Posted by Malcolm on Nov. 04 2015,18:52
(TPRJones @ Nov. 04 2015,15:52)
QUOTE
Can? Yes. Will? Unlikely. Like I said, that's basically the entire basis of evolution.
If you reject that basic point then you are rejecting the entire concept of selective breeding, natural selection, survival of the fittest, etc etc etc.
If you reject that basic point then you are rejecting the entire concept of selective breeding, natural selection, survival of the fittest, etc etc etc.
Intellectual potential might be genetic. I'd argue intellectual achievement on the other hand has to do with environment a motherfuckshittonload.
Posted by TPRJones on Nov. 04 2015,18:55
Environment is certainly a factor, but I suspect I'd rank it as less important than you would. Honestly I'd rate random chance (i.e. non-family external influences like friends, teachers, personal interests and hobbies, etc etc ad nauseum) over environment in terms of the parents.
Posted by Malcolm on Nov. 04 2015,19:05
QUOTE
non-family external influences like friends, teachers, personal interests and hobbies, etc etc ad nauseum
Sounds like environment to me. The things, both living and not, around you with which you interact.
Posted by TPRJones on Nov. 04 2015,19:07
Sure. But I bet I still rate it as less important than you do.
Posted by GORDON on Nov. 04 2015,19:10
(TPRJones @ Nov. 04 2015,21:55)
QUOTE
Environment is certainly a factor, but I suspect I'd rank it as less important than you would. Honestly I'd rate random chance (i.e. non-family external influences like friends, teachers, personal interests and hobbies, etc etc ad nauseum) over environment in terms of the parents.
Plenty o' evil dicks out there with genetically superior brains.