Cornerstone to Health





To vaccinate or not to vaccinate - that is the question.

By Dr. Bernard Sirois

To discuss the subject of mandatory vaccination for all humans, I must first give you my personal background on the subject. I will also explain the six basic arguments that both sides have and why very little is being done to come up with an acceptable compromised solution to this modern day quagmire.

My personal history concerning mandatory vaccination as a child was that I received most of them as recommended. My mother did not particularly agree with the practice, but was unaware that she had a choice. I received approximately 14-16 doses of vaccines. I married a second generation chiropractor who was unvaccinated. We subsequently have had four children who have also never been vaccinated. They are approaching their 30ΚΌs, have traveled all over the world and are all epically healthy. Now before you bring a mob with a cross and some nails to my office, let me say that I have studied this subject for nearly 35 years. I have read exhaustively, almost everything ever published on the subject in the form of books, journals, research and theses. I will add that many of these resources are not readily available to the public.

I’m not going to declare myself an expert, but I’d say I am pretty darn close.

One of the biggest frustrations when confronted with this subject in conversation, whether by a new parent, doctor or nurse, is that most do not have a comprehensive awareness or understanding of the subject. In other words, their knowledge is very limited to what they were taught in school and they have never contemplated an alternative point of view. My education taught me the same bias and it wasn’t until I met my first vaccine injured child patient and I started contemplating having my own children that I chose to look deeper into this subject. So while it is obvious where I stand on the issue, I am still going to attempt to present both sides of the argument as objectively as I can.

So here are the arguments and I’m going to borrow this list from Vaccine Epidemic, co-authored by Louise Kuhn Habakus & Mary Holland. The Pro-Mandatory Camp propose: 1) Government officials are best qualified to make vaccination decisions. 2) Vaccines are overwhelming safe and effective. 3)

Science proves the benefit of vaccines beyond a reasonable doubt. 4) Vaccine refusers are dangerous and selfish. 5) Only “false prophets” suggest that vaccines may cause disorders like autism. 6) All vaccine exemptions should be abolished.

The Pro-Parental Choice Camp propose: 1) Vaccination choice is a human civil right. 2) Society as a whole benefits from the cumulative impact of free and informed individual healthcare choices. 3) Vaccine safety science is flawed and incomplete. 4) The U.S. vaccine program is rife with conflicts of interest and monetary payoffs. 5) Biomedical interventions are valid. (Acceptable alternatives to vaccines). 6) Vaccination exemption rights must expand, not contract.

Can you see the great divide? It is like oil and water, peanut butter and mustard, or Pelosi and Trump! Okay, too far! Sorry about that. The truth is there is some common ground between these two polarized groups, but no one seems to want to find a compromise. Habakus and Holland conclude in the foreword of their book, “Both want a healthy, vibrant society. Both sides want responsible health policy grounded in ethics and science. Both sides see the vaccination issue as hugely important and seek to sway the public.” Until these two sides get together, I suspect the hate and vitriol will continue to escalate.

In the next few weeks we will discuss each of the above proposals in hopes of finding common ground. Until next time, stay on the red road of life.

Comments

Last Weeks Top Story