I ran into this article. Now I could talk about how vaccines aren't safe, I could talk about medical ethics and the Nuremberg code, I could even talk about conflicts of interest by having ex pharmasutical and Monsanto employees in public office or how big pharmasutical companies and agricultural companies like Monsanto donate to politicians. I'm not going to go into any of that in this post. None of it. Instead I'm going to talk about something very simple.
If you are practicing medicine and are not concerned with safety you are a danger to your patients and should not be practicing medicine.
If you are practicing science and do not want to be criticized or questioned you are not practicing SCIENCE but rather RELIGION and should start a church rather than continue to claim to be practicing science.
I am all for patient choice. In fact I believe it should be the patient that makes a choice as to the risks to take with their health. But they need to make an informed choice. Which requires studies into how safe any given procedure might be and the risks involved. The moment you care more about making profit than you do about giving your patients an informed choice then you are no longer practicing medicine OR science. The moment you are more worried about getting elected than you do about giving patients an informed choice you are no longer allowing medicine OR science. This vaccine thing has crossed the line beyond "Do vaccines work?" into "Can we practice medicine or science without government or corporate approval?" And let's not forget this isn't about safety anymore, this is about power. This is about not preventing those in power from aquiring more power. This is about compromising people's health for the sake of profits and votes.
It doesn't matter if you think vaccines work or don't work at this point. The fact of the matter is if you can't QUESTION whether they work or not should be of concern to anyone who dares to claim they even care about science. The fact that they don't want to have safety studies should be of serious concern to anyone who cares about their health or health of others. If you can't question the answers given by the authority it is not science! If you can't question it then it's a religion! Vaccination is a religion! Statism is a religion.
A deity does not need to be supernatural or superhuman. Buddha was neither superhuman nor supernatural. Buddha was a man yet he became deified and a religion formed around him: Buddhism. And even HE encouraged people to question. But the thing with deities is we DON'T question them. That's what worship and reverence IS! It is the focus of one's attention, the reverence for and deferment to, and most importantly, and most importantly one does not question their deity. One might ask why God does something but they don't question God's authority TO do something. If one questions a deity's authority then that results in a lack of worship, hence TO worship is not to question. Get it? To revere without question is not science, it's faith!
The argument is often made that the laymen is too uneducated to possibly engage in scientific discourse. I would argue that the scientific method be applied to this assumption. If one assumes one is too uneducated then knock down their argument and educate them. If one can't then educate oneself. Simple experimentation and rational debate. A degree does NOT mean one is beyond question. Neither does a political office. This is an assumption that is also made in academia: "Oh he has a degree and therefore what could you possibly know to question him on the matter?" And from there we get academic institutions and medical institutions that are "beyond question." And that's how we got into this mess in the first place. No one is above question. No one. We need to make this crystal clear and we need to remove the stigma around the asking of questions.
There is an assumption that an academic authority is beyond question because it has been tested and criticized to get where it is. What one fails to realize is the questions never end. Answering them may be delegated but the questions never end. And to try and silence them is to abandon science itself. Politician, kings and priests would have us have FAITH in them and not question their authority. So let me ask should a medicine be allowed because the king or God declares it so or it be accepted because it has been tested to work and is considered safe by those who would use it and have been informed of the possible risks? In short should we have an authority dictate terms to us or should we decide for ourselves?
If a deity would compel you to worship them are they worthy of your worship? If they would disregard your well being and safety are they worthy to hold authority over you? What is life without freedom? If we are so picky about our Gods why then are we not equally so about the mortals that would attempt to rule us? If we would fight fierce battles over choosing not to worship any God or be particular about worshiping a particular God or even multiple Gods and Goddesses, why oh why do we allow mortal rulers to be dictated to us? And why would anyone stand to not be informed of their health safety risks or their rights to pursue such knowledge? If the state is your God then what kind of God requires to pursue power over the well being of his worshipers? And if the state is your God and does pursue power despite your well being WHY do you worship it?
Science is never settled. If it can't be questioned it isn't science it's religion. If your doctor doesn't care if it's safe do you really want them practicing medicine on you? If you can't be fully informed how effectively can you give consent or make health decisions for yourself? If any health or state personal try to silence your ability to ask questions about your health review the previous questions.
