Note: Our John Stone works tirelessly in the UK to dissect the vaccine safety narrative. Congratulations and thank you to him for this letter published on the NY Times site. Check out the clever headline, "How to inoculated against anti-vaxxer yadda yadda." This presents those of us in the vaccination choice community as dangerous, like a disease. WHO recently named "us" a top ten public health thread. Move over Dengue and HIV, "vaccine hesitancy" just beat you in line. Jokes aside, can you imagine that vaccine choice is deemed more of a public health threat than HIV?
The Times switched off comment at around 3 pm Eastern Time before comments got out of hand.
The no-vaccine crowd has persuaded a lot of people. But public health can prevail.
By The Editorial Board
"The World Health Organization has ranked vaccine hesitancy — the growing resistance to widely available lifesaving vaccines — as one of the top 10 health threats in the world for 2019. That news will not come as a surprise in New York City, where the worst measles outbreak in decades is now underway. Nor in California or Minnesota, where similar outbreaks unfolded in 2014 and 2017, respectively. Nor in Texas, where some 60,000 children remain wholly unvaccinated thanks in part to an aggressive anti-vaccine lobby..."
"This article is an ideological folly, and it is also deceptive - it is deceptive because vaccine critics are already and have always been completely outgunned in the mainstream media. If the NYT are paranoid enough to claim otherwise there is surely something else going on.
"Secondly, what is currently at issue is both freedom of choice and freedom of speech, and this is a dangerous combination. It is coming that we may not either criticize these liability free products or the lobby that produces them. Nor may we refuse the products. And this is entirely unreasonable - they are being placed on a pedestal, yet there are hundreds of things that can go wrong both singly and in combination (with the certainty that all or anything will be denied in advance as in this editorial). Furthermore, the industry has hundreds of more products in the pipeline, which in turn can and will be mandated for our children. The industry needs this debate kicked into oblivion because it cannot stand scrutiny.
"There is nothing in the history of either medicine or the pharmaceutical industry which suggests that this is a safe or wise way to proceed, not is it as if all doctors or medical scientists are in agreement about it.
"To want ward off serious disease is an honorable thing but that does not mean that everything done in its name is safe or beyond criticism, and if we get into a state where we think this we have a problem."
The statement that critics of vaccination are only rebutted by "just a handful of academics" is radically divorced from reality. We are constantly deluged by uncritical endorsements of vaccines by the CDC, the medical establishment, the Gates Foundation, the pharmaceutical companies, and nearly all of the mass media (including of course the New York Times). If they are losing the public opinion battle to some amateur-run websites, then this is one of the most stunning propaganda failures of all time. Moreover, the Times (and the rest of the mass media) conspicuously fail to mention the recent affidavit by Dr. Andrew Zimmerman, in which he states that Health and Human Services misrepresented his expert testimony in the 2007 Omnibus Autism Proceedings. A DOJ attorney claimed that he had ruled out any link between autism and vaccines, when in fact Dr. Zimmerman clearly stated that in some cases vaccination could lead to autism. This was reported on Sharyl Attkisson's Full Measure broadcast last week, and you can find the affidavit on her website. So why is the Times avoiding any mention of this? Shouldn't we reconsider old conclusions when new evidence comes to light?
A letter from Vera Sharav of Alliance for Human Research Protection was not published:
“Every human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body..." (Justice Benjamin Cardozo: Schoendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, NYS Court of Appeals, 1914)
"The human right to informed consent for medical procedures is the bedrock of moral medicine and U.S. law. That ethical principle was enshrined in the Nuremberg Code at the conclusion of the Nazi Doctors' trial.
"It particularly troubling that the Board of Directors of The New York Times is actively promoting draconian government measures to deny parents the right to exercise their parental right to make an informed judgment on behalf of their children -- as is their moral and legal responsibility.
"The Supreme Court has ruled that vaccines are "unavoidably unsafe" products. Congress enacted the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act in 1986 protecting manufacturers from liability for harm. Under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, vaccine injured children (and recently adults as well) have been awarded approximately $4 billion as of December 2018. [https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation/data/index.html]
These are not "easily refutable" facts. Parents' concerns about vaccine safety are based on empirical evidence; they have the right and obligation to protect their children from documented, potential risks of harm. The endorsement of dictatorial government measures befits a fascist regime, not a democracy.