It’s been more than two years since parents were threatened with fines and/or jail in Maryland
and elsewhere if they didn’t vaccinate. And now we have the news
about the snatching
of an unvaccinated, home-schooled child from an airplane by the Swedish
government as the family was about to move to India, as well as a Christian sect
in Malawi barricading
against being forced to vaccinate their children against
and unless we support organizations that support our rights as parents, we are
all at risk. In honor of the launching of the first “American Rally for Personal
”, I resubmit the following ever timely column, originally
Call me naive,
but I don't think that most people who unquestioningly promote vaccination as
the end-all and be-all of preventive health care are evil or have evil intent.
In fact, other than a possible select few, I think most ardent vaccine
supporters honestly believe they are helping humanity.
are. And if properly designed studies ever are conducted, time will
their intent, however, I do not view their unwavering support as benign,
fair-minded or responsible.
For as the
saying goes, the road to Hell is paved with good
In the past
week, pavement of that road has appeared to bring us closer than ever to that
wretched place. I am referring, of course, to recent efforts to force
vaccination in Maryland by threatening parents with jail
There are so
many aspects of this story that are alarming, it is hard to know where to
begin. But let me start with what I once said in a speech
from which I will be quoting: "We parents deserve the right to choose what we
feel is best for the children we love, and for whom we are responsible. No one
else will be expected to care for our children if the vaccines or diseases maim
them. No one else’s heart will be broken like ours if they are killed or
No one, indeed.
Of course, the
all-trusting supporters of vaccination will argue that vaccine damage is minimal
and that the benefits outweigh the risks. But as anyone who has read my column
knows, from what I can tell and have provided credible evidence for, those
studies that purport to show zero to minimal damage are based on flawed
research, which includes, in part 1) improper comparisons between vaccinated
groups and the failure to include any never-vaccinated people as controls, 2)
outright dismissal of virtually all anecdotal and other evidence, as well as
failure to properly follow up on any of it, and 3) dismissal of biological
evidence in support of damage claims.
But even if
vaccines had been genuinely shown to be mostly safe, there are some very
insidious things going on here. As the National
Vaccine Information Center
has aptly warned, "If it happens to
your child, the risks are 100%". Thus, implied in the argument that damage is
minimal is a dismissal of the harm done to some children. I would submit that
the amount of harm vaccines do is unknown. But even if it were small, the
implication is that vaccine damage or death is less important than disease
damage or death, or that all that matters is sheer numbers. And although most
would not say this directly, also implied is that vaccine-harmed children are
less important than disease-harmed ones.
children are also often treated like drafted casualties
in our war against disease. It is as if being drafted for this
purpose is inherently a good thing, an honorable thing, that vaccine risk is
obviously a risk well worth taking. Even if it were a good thing, however,
isn't it a risk that the parents of the potentially damaged child should be
allowed to take? Is it right to force vaccinations on anyone? Does the end
justify the means?
And isn't the
very subtle implication that only death or harm from disease is "bad"; that
death or harm from a vaccine is somehow okay or "good", because it is in support
of the "cause" of "public health"?
Also implied in
the argument that it is okay to force vaccination is the notion that "you", an
unwilling vaccine participant, should be forced to vaccinate your child(ren) to
protect "my" (the one who seeks protection) child(ren) from disease. There are
two major problems with this argument. First, why should someone be required to
risk their child for another? What makes the child being "protected" more
important than the "protector"?
Second, if the
vaccines work, anyone choosing them will be protected. If they don’t prevent
the spread of the disease to the vaccinated, why are we vaccinating? It hardly
seems right that those who don’t want to be vaccinated should have vaccination
forced on them because vaccines don’t always work.
And to whatever
extent vaccines are being required because the 'immune suppressed' cannot be
vaccinated, and are more vulnerable to the adverse effects of disease, while my
heart goes out to such people, they are not more important than children who are
harmed by vaccines. Nor should the notion that vaccination may in itself be
creating immune suppression be left out of this equation.
Besides there is
documented proof of outbreaks in 100%
The irony is, of
course, that even if they don't recognize it, those who support forcing
vaccination are doing so precisely because they don't believe in the
effectiveness of vaccines.
is the sense of history
the recognition that medicine as practiced and promoted has often been found to
be lacking or even just plain, dead wrong?
But even if we
were to assume virtually 100% effectiveness and safety of vaccines, is forcing
vaccines in a free society ever justified? As I said in that speech, "I also
consider any notion of 'public health' to be suspect, which sacrifices the
individual to some alleged higher goal. Many of us find it way scarier that the
state would sacrifice children to someone's idea of the common good, than to
take our chances with Mother Nature. Who decides? What's the right number?
Who's counting? Even in wartime, the draft of adults is only used very
judiciously and sparingly. We also go to considerable effort to avoid enemy
civilian casualties. Yet we seem to think nothing of sacrificing our own
soldiers have fought and died, and will continue to fight and die, in order to
protect us from tyranny which threatens our freedom and way of life, including
what the Declaration of Independence "hold(s) to be self-evident", the right to
"Life, Liberty and the
pursuit of Happiness
Do we really
want to force vaccination and violate this most basic American right? Do we
really want to pave that road?
"Eternal vigilance is the price
of liberty." - Wendell Phillips (1811-1884), paraphrasing John Philpot Curran