Mon. Dec 23rd, 2024

Ken This past week had a personal Facebook landmark, and an unfortunate one. I “unfriended” someone. Worse: it was a relative.
  Understand; I have theists, atheists, conservatives, liberals: just about anyone imaginable on my feed. I like it that way: that’s why I had never “unfriended” someone…until now. But there are somethings one shouldn’t tolerate. And the irony was I was actually agreeing with the “friend.” He wouldn’t take “yes, I agree” for an answer, but insisted on lecturing me.
  Now there’s a family history here I’d rather not get into. If it had been this one incident I would probably have shrugged it off. Suffice it to say that any relationship requires a modicum of respect, an ability to listen and willingness to not treat someone as an inferior who must be lectured like a child for no damn good reason. Then there’s making promises and not keeping them, but that’s another, less related, story.
  Rather than a rant regarding any specific person, my main point is how we talk to each other, and what affect it has. To be clear: I claim no perfect moral high ground here.
  So let’s take a topic. Indeed let’s take the topic that served as the frame for this recent de-friend-ing.
  I am a big believer in vaccines. They are a necessity. We should get inoculated. We should make sure our children do too. Herd immunity: as bothersome as that animal-based phrase is esthetically, is crucial to the survival of humanity. That’s whether you might have religious objections, or are concerned about interaction between multiple inoculations, or mercury used as a preservative. Unless you’re a scientist, or high level researcher who works on the subject of vaccine safety, or medical expert, neither of us have enough information to do what would normally be the foolish thing: go against what the CDC, and the AMA, and so many experts say: get your inoculations and make sure your children do.
  Anything that brings the level of non-immunity up is beyond “problematic.”
  And I have always felt this way.
  But, and you knew there was at least one “but” coming, right? …how we react to others who we think are headed in the wrong direction is important. Do you really feel lecturing them, insulting them, browbeating them, is going to have the desired effect? If so then your concept of human nature may, indeed, be quite flawed. Doing such things: being combative, even insulting, will simply make them double down.
  You want to make damn sure they don’t get inoculated, and their children don’t? Go ahead: insult them, mock them and use such phrases as “every study has shown…” with nothing to follow that statement. Unless you’re able to actual name studies and results there’s a problem with just demanding that be accepted by these folks.
  You may find that last statement curious, but the explanation is simple and obvious. Just claiming “all studies show” will be perceived as just unsubstantiated as claiming God condemns it, mercury in shots causes autism or multiple shots/combo vaccines are dangerous. That’s regardless of science or God. You need to be able to cite case studies, experts and do so without “in your face” arrogance.
  Unless of course all you want is for the person to shut up, or stomp away, and not get inoculations, or inoculate their children.
 And there are some rational, intellectual and intelligent folks out there you might convince, or at least make them think twice. Bluster, however, usually convinces no one except to head the opposite direction.
  “Intellectual?”
  “Intelligent?”
  Yes, there are rational, intelligent, intellectual, thoughtful folks who have concerns about vaccines. They’re not all drooling religious fanatics, despite the attempt to paint them all that way. I’m fairly familiar with some of the folks who have these concerns regarding vaccine safety. They too are not “anti-vaccine,” though perhaps more so than I should ever be perceived to be.
  Once again: get those inoculations, no matter what your doubts.
  Usually these folks are concerned with mercury preservative known as “thimerosal,” and/or and multiple inoculations with multiple vaccines/combination vaccines. I’ve seen the arguments: I ran a debate on this at Volconvo.com years ago. We had researchers and scientists join the fray, and they weren’t all pro-thimerosal, all unconcerned with multiple inoculations. The debate was rather heated.
  It might surprise you is they did come to a general agreement about the fact not all was known and that additional research needs to be done. In a small portion of the populace who have genetic markers (please forgive me if I don’t have the exact term there) that might allow the body to do what usually isn’t possible: break the normal placenta barrier, and also affect the minds of young children with that genetic makeup. They agreed that pretty much no research had been done regarding that.
  One side said the chances are pretty much nil, the other said, “How do we know unless we do the research?” They both agreed that research should be done, but also agreed that with limits on funding, and funding often coming from pharmaceutical companies, such research was unlikely in the near future.
  This was at least 4 years ago, probably more, and I have no idea what has happened since. Feel free to comment and mention any such studies.
  I became familiar with this because my physician assistant brother-in-law, Chris, and his wife, noticed a distinct change in their son from birth on. Chris took charge and found the vaccines without the mercury preservative in them, put him through controversial therapy to empty his body of the perceived poisons.
  Having met the son back when an open door was an invite to run wild into the street, focusing on lights, sounds and colors was so intense people hardly mattered: sometimes even parents… well, all I can say is: the improvement has been amazing.
  I do not suggest you do the same. Indeed, unless you get a lot of guidance from several professionals I would think attempting to do the same would border on crazy and homicidal. No: I suggest this… get those inoculations.
 Just before the deadline approached I had pretty much tied the column up here, made my conclusions. Then I heard Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. on The Thom Hartmann Show talk about vaccine safety and mention a researcher (Dr. William Thompson) who in the author of one of two studies on thimerosal and vaccine safety. He is seeking whistleblower status, claiming he was forced to alter his results by the CDC to indicate thimerosal was safe. The irony here is, while I was glad to hear the other side, I also heard blanket, generalized, statements about thimerosal and its safety: just like those on pretty much every left leaning show are saying now, just indicating the opposite, as in “every legitimate study has shown…” But since I feel hearing both sides is important, I will provide a link. Unlike those with an ax to grind, either way, I’ll let you decide how you feel about counter claims.
 Please understand: no matter what side you’re on, if you’re not for vaccine safety, you’re as bad, or worse, than those who would rather run the risk of losing herd immunity than inoculate. Our vaccines should be both safe and provide herd immunity. Both stances are the only logical ones, in my opinion.
 We have gotten so screwed up as a society we think framing anyone who dares to disagree in the worst ways is “discussion,” or “debate,” or even worse: will work.
 And lumping those who have concerns in with those who have religious, social, objections to getting inoculations at all is an act of ignorance and disrespect, in my opinion. There is a difference. Calling them “anti-vac-ers” too just shuts down the conversation.
 So the question is, if you really feel those who have such concerns are flat out wrong, what do you really want to do: convince people to do the right thing? If you really, really think just lecturing, belittling, mocking, and throwing statements without providing back up at someone like Chris is more important that doing what it may take to convince people, honestly, to do the right thing, I only have one question left for you…
  Why are you so anti-inoculation?

                                                    -30-

Inspection is a column that has been written by Ken Carman for over 30 years. Inspection is dedicated to looking at odd angles, under all the rocks and into the unseen cracks and crevasses that constitute the issues and philosophical constructs of our day: places few think, or even dare, to venture.
©Copyright 2015
Ken Carman and Cartenual Productions
all right reserved

By Ken Carman

Retired entertainer, provider of educational services, columnist, homebrewer, collie lover, writer of songs, poetry and prose... humorist, mediocre motorcyclist, very bad carpenter, horrid handyman and quirky eccentric deluxe.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x