- Joined
- Jan 2, 2011
- Messages
- 7,612
- Reaction score
- 11,845
Can you please provide reference(s) to the bolded point?
I am asking you to present the unfounded claims you believe have been presented by "anti-vaxxers."
I double the point that there is a need "bringing up the need to provide proof of harm from vaccinations" and that "[i}nformed consent is in place exactly for issues like this". For this very reason, I believe that it is wrong for Donald Trump to bring up this subject as he is not as informed as medical professional would be who would providing the vaccinations and for this reason should not be arguing for or against vaccinations without being provided expert information from doctors, which Kennedy is not.
I'm not sure I follow.
My point is that informed consent is the right of the individual (i.e. the individual choosing to participate or not participate in a medical intervention). Informed consent allows an individual to decide by whatever rationale they choose to participate/not participate in a medical intervention, that is fact.
To your second point, I would be cautious at passively accepting any medical intervention. You may even be surprised by the response you get from your doctor when you ask a few simple but pertinent questions about the vaccine they are promoting. Also, note that it is largely up to YOU to recognize and report most vaccine reactions to the proper authorities.
Regarding Trump's part in this, he is simply appointing someone to this position, otherwise he stated support for vaccination overall.... I would consider that somewhat irresponsible, is that what you are referring to?
As for Kennedy being appointed to head vaccine safety, he is the EXACT right person (except for his intolerable speaking voice) because he brings true skepticism which is sorely lacking in the field right now. For more on this, refer to the quote I posted earlier about William Thompson Phd and prepare to be shocked.