Comment of the Week: Don't "Do Research," Just Assume Vaccines Are Evil

This week's exhaustively reported cover story "The Refusers," by Nina Shapiro, examines the growing anti-vaccine movement that's taken hold across the country--nowhere more than in Washington state.

As Shapiro's reporting shows, many vaccine opponents rely on debunked science and baseless conjecture to support fears that vaccinating their children will not keep them from getting sick, but will in fact do the opposite.

Commenting on a subsequent blog post, one reader summed up this kind of head-in-the-sand recklessness in a few short sentences.

Kathe wrote:

there is no evidence that vaccines have done anything but make people sick. Do the research before you make the jump. Injecting viruses into your blood is ridiculous, for starters, let alone the other toxic soup that goes along with it. Viruses are either DNA or RNA, does it seem like a good idea to inject them? Here, its easy, you don't even have to do any research, just think about how they "GROW" the viruses and on what and then think about injecting that festering goo into the clean, healthy blood of your newborn. Who, by the way, is born with the mother's natural immunity that lasts for months (longer if you breastfeed). If you don't want to believe anyone that spouts data, then just go and talk to the parents of all the children that have been injured by vaccines. They were ill-informed and they have nothing to gain (or lose at this point). Its an 8+ billion dollar industry, Ken, follow the money.

Again, "you don't even have to do any research, just think about how they "GROW" the viruses."

Such seems to be the logic among certain vaccine refusers. Instead of "doing research," they rely on a kind of gut feeling that vaccines are dangerous and deadly to guide their immunization decisions.

At one point the anti-vaccination movement believed they had science on their side. When British physician Andrew Wakefield published a paper in the scientific journal Lancet that linked autism with vaccines, people already skeptical about immunizing their children had, as Shapiro writes, their "a-ha! moment."

But later when Wakefield was found to be getting payouts from lawyers who wanted to sue vaccine makers and his research found to be fraudulent, the scientific community wholly disowned Wakefield and his supposed scientific revelations.

So now, with no science to back them, we have folks like Kathe, a person who seems content to ignore things like "research" and "facts" and is content to simply base their children's health on the idea that vaccines sound too much like "festering goo."

Follow The Daily Weekly on Facebook and Twitter.

comments powered by Disqus