The Colonel
Feb 2002
So basically I cant have an opinion cause I'm too young. I already
read the inserts and i have done some research (and how do you know
how much I've done to date). My analogy was meant to enlighten what I
feel is some of the emotional responses parents go through. I have a
friend whose sister was brutally murdered, and his parents are now
death-penalty supporters on what I feel is an emotional response.
Surely parents whose children have suffered vaccine damage suffer from
the same emotional response. HOw many of them didnt support
vaccinations before? Are there any parents whose children did suffer
vaccine related illnesses, yet still support vaccinations? If there
are any, why do they support vaccinations?
I take great offense at that. I am not a person who gets up people who
dont vaccinate children for being stupid. Its your choice, but I
feel that some of the things that I've seen (and on both sides of the
argument) are highly unscientific. If anyone is going to make an
informed choice about books and the like promoting any viewpoint it is
necessary to do three things.
1. Look at both arguments carefully and without bias. My main problem
with the anti-vaccination argument, is that most of the people arguing
for anti-vaccination tend to be people whose children have suffered an
injury at the hands of vaccines. Its like asking parents of children
who were murdered, whether they approve the death penalty. Emotion is
going to take over their higher reasoning.
2. Not only is it enough to look at conclusions made by scientists.
Scientists are like the rest of us, able to err. So one must look at
the raw data. That was the point i was trying to make in my last post.
That Dr Scheibner stated one thing, but quite obviously examination of
the raw data revealed that her conclusions were wrong.
3. Look at the people making the statements. Yes I admit, I have
done a little research on Dr Scheibner, but felt that if I
instantly came out and said Dr Scheibner is a crank, I'd be shouted
down or ignored. OK, yes Dr Schiebner is a PhD and a retired
prinicipal research scientist. What does she have her PhD in-
micropalentology, the study of fossils basically. She was a
principal research scientist at the Geological Survey of Mines.
What offends a lot of people on the pro-vaccination, is that whilst
she puts up her PhD and research scientist, she doesnt seem to put
up what her PhD was in, or what she researched much. I'm studying my
PhD at the moment, in cancer pharmacology. Do I claim to be a
leading world expert in micropalentology? I have more formal training
in immunology and microbiology than most people, so have a more
scientific understanding, of what a vaccine actually does, and some of
the diseases they prevent.
If you have done all this, and still come to the same conclusion, then
fine dont vaccinate your kids. I dont agree with you, your kids
probably wont get the disease anyway, simpy because of the "herd
immunity" phenomena cause so many other kids will get immunised.
I'm also willing to admit that vaccines are not 100% effective, but
then nothing is. I still feel though that not vaccinating poses a
greater risk to society as a whole, then vaccinating.