A year ago today, I read an article that was warning the public about a political party, called Health Australia Party. This article warned people to avoid voting for this party, as they are an anti-vaccination group. This post, on Facebook, was promptly flooded with comments from people arguing the distinction between ‘anti-vaxxer’ and ‘pro-choice’. However, in my opinion, they are the same thing. The argument of pro-choice is that they are not skeptics; they are simply advocating a choice. But a choice between herd immunity, and potential risks to society seems illogical. Reading through these comments, I became very angry. Angry, that people with degrees in natural healthcare were stating that natural supplements are a viable replacement for medically researched and tested vaccines. In my mind, I put an ‘anti-vaxxer’ or vaccination skeptic in the same boat as climate change skeptics, anti-feminists, and people who are ‘anti-Muslim’. All of these people have the same thing in common – they cherry pick convenient statistics, quotes or archaic rules, to justify their point of view. Climate change and vaccination debates both have the same two sides – on one side, scientific and research based evidence, versus opinions, that seem to thrive on social media pages, often private or closed groups, where fear is spread. However, should anyone promote a ‘pro-vaccination’ point of view, it seems the followers of these groups come out of the wood work, ready to make a variety of unsubstantiated claims. The classic claim is that someone read a book, or researched on the Internet, and based on this information, which is usually based on someone else’s opinion, as a justification to try and recruit other likeminded people. However, I would question, unless you have a medical degree, you are unqualified to comment or debate this issue. A quick search on Facebook for vaccination brings up an array of anti-vaccination closed groups. It was alarming to read the disclaimers on these pages, in which they have a ‘troll’ authentication process, in which you must supply proof that you haven’t vaccinated your children. One page also suggests the creation of a new Facebook profile, so that your friends won’t know you are part of an anti-vaxxer group. Surely, a few alarm bells should be ringing, if this level of effort is required to be a part of such a group. Surely, someone who is pro-choice must understand that they are in the minority, and that they have enough self-awareness to understand that these groups do not have any scientific evidence to back up their claims.
While I believe in freedom of speech, it is vital that people are educated before spreading dangerous information, that in this case, has the potential to harm, or to even kill people – and not just people who aren’t vaccinated. Un-vaccinated people have the potential to bring disease in to the herd population of immunised people, and therefore, we are all at risk. Up until today, I have only written what I would be considered 'safe' blog entries, reviewing television shows or concerts. However, the reason why I want to write a blog is to encourage debate. Maybe I should no longer play it 'safe' !!
1 Comment
Peter Mills
7/16/2017 01:15:39 am
Vaccinations researched and tested? On whom? And where is the latest credible papers that prove their effectiveness. And why the hell is mercury and aluminium and animal cells in them? Why is a hazardous waste if broken container? And if it works, why the hell are you worried if u and your family are vaccinated? Or are u just a paid troll for big pharma, banks and corrupt governments that have to force this dangerous practice on citizens. Then blame parents for the injuries incurred. Scum
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
About the authorObservations and opinions of popular culture, covering everything from music, film, television, people and other things. Archives
June 2018
Categories |