AndroidR;609117 said:
This is where this type of debate loses focus.
It's not the science of vaccination that's necessarily questioned (though to call it the only solution would be close minded), it's the substances that are often added to the vaccines themselves (e.g.- for "preserving" them) that should come into question. Another factor that comes into question is the level of trust afforded to the very large companies that mass produce these vaccines. Consider the reputation of synthetic drug manufacturers and the many, many numerous and deadly side effects and failed drugs that often lead to discontinuations and class action lawsuits. Now consider how many of these big companies are still standing relatively unaffected after these debacles. Should they be trusted without question? Do they put profit above beneficence?
Using key words like "bad" (e.g.- "capture the bad guys") almost instinctively draws most of us into defensive positions due to the way these words are often used- almost like programming. It's very easy to take sides and fall into the "pro" or "con" category without giving things much deeper thought because that's how most of us have been trained to think. "Less filling" or "Tastes great", "red" or "blue", "Rep. vs "Dem."; these may be false choices that can distract you from more objectively looking deeper into the arguments and asking the more important, vital questions.
Last edited:
