12 Comments
User's avatar
Den Arto's avatar

Whenever I write about vacs supposedly being safe and effective, I write [All] vaccines are safe and effective [for Everyone, All the time]. The editorial comments in brackets are the fallacious assumptions made but unspoken when the vacs religionists talk about vacs.

I recommend everyone read Aaron Siri's book, Vaccines Amen.

Den Arto's avatar

Great article. 100%. But the bottom line is that it Doesnt Matter what the safety profile is of any medical product, Informed Consent is critical. Each individual (or their parents) is informed fully and each individual makes the decision, No Matter What society wants to say. Otherwise we are all just cattle on the farm.

MSB's avatar

I agree with you about informed consent, but also feel there needs to be a type of informed statement signed by vaccinators and mandaters to say the following:

• They are aware of all vaccine ingredients including known toxins and their adverse reactions

• They are aware of deaths in the context of the number from the actual disease over period of time

• They are aware that drug companies (in the US) have indemnity from liability.

• They have or have not been paid extra for vaccinating

• Their confidence in the safety of these vaccines and their eagerness to vaccinate is reflected by their willingness to accept moral liability for any near-term/future adverse reactions caused by the vaccines.

Perhaps others could add to this list

Jennifer Smith, PhD's avatar

I agree. There are responsibilities of the patient as well as responsibilities of the provider. The clinicians would then have to actually go through training because as it stands all the training that doctors and nurses get in school on vaccines is the schedule and what to give if there is a reaction.

Den Arto's avatar

I replied to this as well, below.

Den Arto's avatar

I think everyone in the chain of childhood vaccination is free of liability from the manufacturer to the Walgreens stooge. So it doesnt matter to them if they sign something like that. Liability protection needs to be removed.

Jennifer Smith, PhD's avatar

actually my understanding is the manufacturer had indemnity but not the provider. Liability is passed on to the clinician or pharmacist who actually injects a person. Informed consent is not just an ethical obligation but a legal obligation as well. Failure to provide informed consent could constitute malpractice as well as assault and battery. If a medical practitioner attempts to treat a person without valid consent, then they will be liable under both tort (civil) and criminal law. The consequences would be payment of compensation (in civil) and imprisonment (in criminal).

MSB's avatar

I agree with you about removing the indemnity from liability. But whilst that move is hopefully taking place, my suggestion is to push for greater accountability by laying out all the aspects that I suspect most of the vaccinators/mandaters have a clue about.

Bill Rice, Jr.'s avatar

"Ineffective and maybe toxic."

"Maybe worth the risk, but maybe not."

Inspired by your piece, I think I'm going to write a column with 100 different possible slogans.

Dr Rachel Taylor's avatar

Love this - you know how I detest “safe and effective”. I am of the opinion that people should do what they feel is best for themselves medically as long as they have the truth.

Alann Smith's avatar

Thank you for your efforts Jennifer , read all your posts,always appreciated .