‘Medical Freedom’ Activists Take Aim at New Target: Childhood Vaccine Mandates
‘Medical Freedom’ Activists Take Aim at New Target: Childhood Vaccine Mandates
Mississippi has long had high childhood immunization rates, but a federal judge has ordered the state to allow parents to opt out on religious grounds.
For more than 40 years, Mississippi had one of the strictest school vaccination requirements in the nation, and its high childhood immunization rates have been a source of pride. But in July, the state began excusing children from vaccination if their parents cited religious objections, after a federal judge sided with a “medical freedom” group.
Today, 2,100 Mississippi schoolchildren are officially exempt from vaccination on religious grounds. Five hundred more are exempt because their health precludes vaccination. Dr. Daniel P. Edney, the state health officer, warns that if the total number of exemptions climbs above 3,000, Mississippi will once again face the risk of deadly diseases that are now just a memory.
“For the last 40 years, our main goal has been to protect those children at highest risk of measles, mumps, rubella, polio,” Dr. Edney said in an interview, “and that’s those children that have chronic illnesses that make them more vulnerable.” He called the ruling “a very bitter pill for me to swallow.”
Mississippi is not an isolated case. Buoyed by their success at overturning coronavirus mandates, medical and religious freedom groups are taking aim at a new target: childhood school vaccine mandates, long considered the foundation of the nation’s defense against infectious disease.
You're viewing a single thread.
COVID regulations and handling did not help, at least from what social and regular media made it out to be.
Some things to consider that I hear from people that are vaccinated but have became more criticial after COVID:
- It made many question the scientists working for these big pharma companies, where profit always comes first.
- While the people (as in 'we the people') pay for the research/loss and the companies take the profits, while having full immunity.
- Scientists can also be like politicians, saying what they think people want to hear, without addressing the serious concerns people have; lying and moving goalposts does not help.
- Many on the left used to be more sceptical of what gov't, 3 letter agancies, and media had to say; now known as classic liberals.
It made many question the scientists working for these big pharma companies, where profit always comes first.
A lot of scientist don't work for those companies, or even worse they work for the competition. That's why constant review of scientific facts and finding a consensus is the way it works.
Scientists can also be like politicians, saying what they think people want to hear, without addressing the serious concerns people have; lying and moving goalposts does not help.
That's a media problem, not a scientific one. If there are 10000 scientists agreeing on something and one with the opposite opinion, you will see 2 scientists debating the issue. This pretends there is an actual debate going on and not just one nutjob saying bullshit for what ever reason (might be honest believe, might be money, doesn't matter...).
While the people (as in ‘we the people’) pay for the research/loss and the companies take the profits, while having full immunity.
That is true, even more so in the very commercialized US health idustry. Yet that's far less true for vaccines than for any other medicine. Or how much did you actually pay to get vaccinated? And how much did the government (which spends your tax money) pay for each dose? They surely did a phenomenally better job at negotiating costs there than what your insurance companies or you yourself are able to do...
Yes, I shall keep trying to learn while trying to get out of bubbles, which is hard to do.
Thank you for explaining a different point of view while in a manner that is easy to understand!