Why the Seat Belt Analogy to Vaccines is Flawed
In forums around the internet, and in face-to-face discussions on vaccines, well-meaning proponents of vaccination sometimes invoke an analogy to the safety provided by seatbelts. The argument usually takes the form of “seatbelts cause injuries, too, but you still used them, and states have laws mandating their use because the benefit outweighs the risk. Vaccines are the same”, they argue, “and just like everyone should wear seatbelts, everyone should be require to get vaccines”.
Flaw #1. Unlike vaccine injury, there is no genetic risk to seat belt injury; unlike vaccines, the risk of seatbelt injure is random, and is therefore truly share among all people. People injured by one vaccine likely have a higher probability of serious adverse health outcomes from additional vaccines.
But is there truly a genetic risk of vaccine injury? Observational data suggests yes. There appears to be a higher incidence of autoimmune disorders in parents, especially mothers, of children who are reported to suffer neurodevelopmental disorders or serious autoimmune reactions. The question is whether the risk of such health outcomes has a higher specific risk within families. My reviews of the literature show that the correct types of studies to anwer these questions have not been conducted.
Flaw #2. Unlike vaccines, seat belts routinely are subject to recall due to injury lawsuits, providing essential product quality feedback to seat belt and automobile manufacturers. By contrast, vaccine manufacturers are immune to liability lawsuits. Instead, families of individuals killed or injured by vaccines have to sue the US government – specifically the Department of Health of Human Services, via the Vaccine injury Compensation Program. Liability for vaccine injury was removed for vaccine manufacturers and for medical doctors and nurses in 1986 with the National Vaccine Injury Act. No vaccine injury damages visited upon vaccine manufacturers compel them to improve their product. Instead, vaccine manufacturers and the HHS are incentived to deny that vaccine injuries and death occur.
Vaccine mandates without the safety valve of philosophical, religious and medical exemptions pit the reality of the biology of vaccine injury risk, which is clustered in a potentially identifiable (albeit heterogeneous) subgroup of citizens, who should be afforeded equal protection under the law. Families forced to knowingly injure – or kill – their own child by acquiencing to vaccination will become increasingly agitated. As I’ve published previously, vaccine risk denialism thereby fuels vaccine skepticism and grows the vaccine risk aware community – both by direct injuries that accrue every week, and by increased repugnance at the injustice of forced vaccination wihout choice.
The long-term effect of extreme and heavy-handed vaccine mandates without the time-tested safety value of exemptions is nothing short of revolution. Those in power should consider undertaking meaningul reform, including revisiting codification of monopolies-by-contract for vaccines. Currently, ingredients in vaccines do not have to be dose-tested for safety.
Science-based public health policies, not propaganda, may return confidence to the vaccination program. Censorship, including overt programs by Facebook and Google, will only fuel awareness. It’s amazing how large power factions and monied entities in society fail to learn that oppression of human beings has never proven sustainable.
So, honor your fellow citizen’s rights to informed consent, and respect their right to choose. Don’t kick them out of your practice: work to change the way incentive quotas are calculated to exclude individuals with exemptions. Read how no chemicals included in vaccines have to dose-tested; indeed, only proteins are supposed to checked for safety. Remarkable, I have never seen any published studies showing that proteins used in vaccines are safe to inject into humans.
It is illogical to retort that millions of people have been injected with no ill effect. Nearly 54% of all children have a chronic illness. Fetal demise has never been higher; our birthrate is at an “all-time low” – this after vaccination during pregnancy was adopted (TdaP and influenza) without consideration of the health of infants. Autommune rates, neurodevelopmental disorder rates, rates of diseases of unknown origin are all higher than ever.
This after CDC expanded the vaccine schedule to include many aluminum-containing vaccines, without dose escalation studies or studies of the effects of using so many vaccines on infants and children.
Time will bear out the truths of the early warning system provided by mothers and fathers of the vaccine injured. They will never cease their quest for rational approches to immunity – even if that means accepting the risk of natural infection. The fear that people will cease vaccinating has driven vaccine death and injury denialism. it has twisted and warped vaccine safety science. Is had failed.
Looking to the future on the vaccine safety science issue, the question is: will governments choose reform, or revolution?
James Lyons-Weiler
Allison Park, PA
Support jameslyonsweiler.com
This effort is funded by any means, except some meager ad revenue. Your support will help me offset costs. Won’t you pitch in?
$5.00
Original source: https://jameslyonsweiler.com/2019/07/27/why-the-seat-belt-analogy-to-vaccines-is-flawed/
