Dave Wallace: Reader sticks to position on vaccines
After reading the Craig Press editorial on Friday, Nov. 16, which addressed a comment I penned to a previous Memorial Regional Health article, I feel compelled to explain and defend the comment, where I stand firmly by every word.
As stated in the comment, “Many vaccines have been very beneficial in eradicating certain diseases in our country and around the world.” I believe this is terrific, but unfortunately, many advancements throughout history which have brightened our world of today also have a dark side.
Let’s take, for instance, the polio vaccine, which was developed in the 1950s and has allegedly eradicated one of the most feared diseases in modern history. The early distribution of this vaccine in California left several children dead and many more paralyzed, but the worst was yet to come. The vaccine, which was delivered to an estimated 98 million individuals between 1955 and 1963, contained a cancerous virus known as SV40. Even though this issue had surfaced prior to 1960, there were no recalls issued, and the information was concealed. The carcinogen-laced vaccine continued its distribution to the unsuspecting public until 1963, when mandatory testing for SV40 was established (thetruthaboutcancer.com/polio-vaccine-cancer/)
Let us move ahead to 2014, when a statement from William Thompson, Ph.D. and senior scientist with the CDC, was released regarding a previous article concerning the possible relationship between MMR vaccine and autism. As stated in the release, “I regret that my co-authors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal “Pediatrics.” The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at an increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data was collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.” Thompson goes on to state his believe that there are many positive aspects of vaccines, and they are very beneficial. He also states there are recognized risks that come with vaccines, and it is the responsibility of the CDC to properly convey these risks (rescuepost.com/files/william-thompson-statement-27-august-2014-3.pdf)
There are many research articles referencing both the positive and negative aspects of vaccines, I included these two, for each contains three point I would like to make.
• Both support positive and beneficial aspects of manufactured vaccines.
• Both identify risks and the repercussions that can accompany vaccines.
• Both were involved in the concealment of information.
A suggestion of an occurrence or development without supporting evidence is only a theory, but once we have evidence of an occurrence or development, the theory now becomes a possibility, and as more evidence becomes available, the possibility becomes likely. What once was a point of suggestion has now reached the threshold of probability.
Let us now look at the term “propaganda.” Webster’s defines the word as “any systematic, widespread dissemination or promotion of particular ideas, doctrines, or practices.” The MRH article of November 10 falls under this definition. The article embraces two distinct elements associated with propaganda: “fear” and “children,” with a clear and specific objective. The MRH article is laced with references to “children, death, and dying.” Not once was there a reference to potential side effects or risks associated with vaccines. Ladies and gentlemen, it matters not whether you support or oppose vaccines; the MRH article was designed to be very persuasive. The MRH article is a classic illustration of propaganda and would provide great subject matter for classroom discussion.
As I stated in the comment which led up to these articles: “Please do your own research prior to making decisions regarding vaccines.”
The “Historic Donation” article in June 12’s newspaper brings up several questions in my mind.