There is a heated debate taking place in America right now over the topic of vaccinations. This debate is a two sided affair between the 'science denying, anti-vax kooks' and the 'trusting, mindless sheeple.'
But who actually benefits from this all or nothing approach? Identity politics benefit only those who stand to profit from the polarity, and the marginalization of any dissent only enables the most powerful to continue with the status quo.
Why can there be no middle ground? We know that: "Since the first National Vaccine Injury Compensation (VICP) claims were filed in 1989, 3,887 compensation awards have been made. More than $3.0 billion in compensation awards has been paid to petitioners and more than $120.4 million has been paid to cover attorneys' fees and other legal costs." Read more about it here.
Three billion dollars is not a trivial amount, nor is it wise to dismiss the fears of parents who don't wish to inject their children with something that for most people, will cause no harm, but for a percentage, may cause serious harm, or even death.
If you are into arguing about percentages of those who suffer no side effects, would you bet your child's life on that percentage? If so, that is your choice. But to deride another for their choice to NOT bet their child's life is antithetical to a nation built on individual freedom.
If you are into heavy reading, feel free to read the inserts that most parents don't read about the vaccines their children receive. See if those warnings can convince you of their safety, and ask yourself if a monetary compensation from the United States Gov't would be worth the life of your child before you marginalize the fears of those who aren't willing to gamble with the life of their child.
No comments:
Post a Comment