Why Vaccines are not Healthy for You
Debate on vaccines is a topic of converse in our modern society. Even though vaccinations carry a serious health risk, the medical benefits they offer have led the United States of America to enact compulsory childhood vaccination laws to combat the spread of communicable diseases. However, the success stories associated with vaccines have been overtaken by events. The choice to vaccinate or otherwise is a decision that has the potential of affecting the health of a person and even generations to follow. Mainstream health care professional admits that vaccines are dangerous and can cause serious side effects especially when they are wrongly administered. Furthermore, compulsory vaccines violate the fundamental belief that people have the right to choice. This paper will strive to analyse two articles; Misconception about vaccines, published by the college of physicians of Philadelphia which supports the use of vaccines and Why I explored vaccine problems authored by Sherri Tenpenny which opposes the use of vaccines, in order to establish which article has a more convincing argument on the vaccine debate.
The strength and weakness of the article published the college of physicians of Philadelphia
An article on misconception about vaccines published by the college of physicians of Philadelphia endeavours to clear the misconception associated with vaccines. First, the articles try to clear the misconception that increased vaccination at a close interval overloads child immune system. The overloading misconception emerged when the childhood vaccination schedule expanded to incorporate more vaccines some of which were to be administered in a combination of a single injection. The author of this article counters this claim by arguing that the vaccines have no effect when administered in combination. The weakness of this argument fails to provide scientific evidence to substantiate the claim.
On the disappeared disease misconception, the article clear indicates that some infectious diseases like polio have disappeared from the United States of America. The article further argues that there is the likelihood of these diseases being reintroduced to the countries by the people who come from other parts of the world where the disease is rampant. Hence the author advocates for vaccination as a prevention strategy. The weakness of this claim is that it does not have empirical evidence to support it.Furthermore; vaccination may not be the best option for the inhabitants of the country hosting the immigrant. After all, it is more convenient and cheaper to vaccinate the person coming from polio-prone areas than vaccinating the inhabitants of United States of America.
In terms of better nutrition and hygiene versus vaccination misconception, there is no empirical evidence to support the argument that vaccines rather than better nutrition and hygiene are responsible for the drastic drop in death rate resulting from infectious disease like chickenpox. Scientific evidence indicates that the improvement of hygiene and better nutrition led to the decline the cases of chickenpox, even before the introduction of chickenpox vaccine. But the safety of these vaccines still remains in doubt.
Another misconception about the vaccine is that when there is an outbreak of a disease, the numbers of vaccinated persons who get sick outnumber the unvaccinated persons who get ill. The articles argue that these statistics are ill-informed because the percentage of the vaccinated person who gets sick is much lesser compared to the percentage of unvaccinated persons who get ill, taking into consideration that during immunisation many people participate in the exercise. However, this misconception, the number of vaccinated persons who gets sick outweighs the number of the unvaccinated people who gets ill, can be valid to some extent taking into consideration that vaccines are not 100% effective and the possibility of side-effects as result of administration of vaccines which might result in reported cases of sickness.
Finally, the article endeavours to clear the misconception that naturally acquired immune is better than the vaccine-induced immune system. The strength of this article is that it advocates the use of natural methods of inducing immunity because they have no side-effect and the naturally acquired immune lasts longer. However, this argument overlooks the risk of acquiring natural immunity which is higher as compared to artificially acquired immunity.
Strengths and weakness of the article written by Dr.Sherri Tenpenny
Sherri Tenpenny in his article, why I explored vaccine problems, condemns the use of vaccines due to the harmful health problems which arise as result of vaccines. The strength of this article is that provides scientific evidence to demonstrate that vaccinations overburden body immune system especially when child receive many vaccines at the same time. For instance, in 1985, there were only three vaccines given regularly to children; namely polio, DTP and measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccines. These three vaccines were administered at intervals and in most cases children were given one to two doses of a vaccine. In 1991, a vaccine for Hepatitis was included in the vaccination schedule for children without undertaking research on its safety. In the same period, cases of autism increased. By 2015, there were 15 vaccines for children under the age of 6, which implies that if a child received all the recommended vaccines, they could receive 15 vaccines of 49 doses. None of these vaccines was ever tested for carcinogenicity or carcinogenicity. Are we not observing increased incidences of child sickness than it was before the introduction of many vaccines?
At the same time, articles question the safety of vaccines. Convincing information on the safety of vaccines has never been given. For instance, a Hepatitis b vaccine was introduced in 1991 without undertaking a scientific research to establish the side-effect of the vaccine. As result of this vaccines, cases of autism drastically increased in the same year. And even if this information could be availed, there are several legal and political issues that surround the vaccination debate that need to be addressed before the use of vaccines is accepted. Tenpenny argues that vaccines were not responsible for eradicating diseases such as chicken pox and polio.
Tenpenny validly criticizes the generalised assumption in the use of vaccines, whereby the same vaccine is administered to more than one person without examining the individual immune system. For example, in the United States of America, the government demands that every child must be vaccinated before joining school without careful evaluation of the immune system of each and every child. Making vaccination, the only medical undertaking in which person’s medical history is overlooked. The compulsory introduction of foreign materials in vaccine into the bloodstream of all children of a country goes against their right to consent. For that reason alone, the public should demand a convincing proof on the safety of the vaccines before vaccination. While vaccination before joining school has been credited with bringing control and elimination of several childhood diseases, critics like have continued to raise concern about the legal and political implication of the exercise.
Tenpenny correctly states that use vaccines allow parents to make unconsented health decision for their children. For instance, Tenpenny objects a system whereby a parent forces their children to undertake an injection without their judgments. Ideally, any vaccination should be delayed until the child is mature enough to make an informed decision. Even if, seeking consent from infants is not practical because several diseases that require vaccination are more prevalent in infants than adults. The alternative mechanism should be put in place to delay the administration of vaccines to infants without them being involved in making the decision. For instance, nearly 40% of American parents delay the administration of a recommended vaccine to their children until they fully assess the safety of the recommended vaccine. This comes even after getting an assurance from the mainstream medical and scientific institutions. Clear demonstrations that parent ignores the need to wait until the children are mature enough to decide on their own. Therefore, Tenpenny opposes healthcare system that does not allow individuals especially children to make choices.
Finally, before vaccination there is a need to provide adequate information about the vaccine and potential side-effect, to inform the decision-making process. Because most of the information given to the general public by relevant public departments and public health workers is inadequate and even deceptive in some instances, these makes vaccination unhealthy medical procedure. There is a need for all stakeholders in health sector question the eligibility any vaccine before it released for medical use. At the same time, side –effects associated with vaccines need to be diagnosed and treated. Furthermore, meaningful discussions cannot take place without allowing information associated with vaccines to be openly shared by all stakeholders in the health sector.Furthermore,vaccination caused injuries and even death to many people, thus underscoring the very basic purpose for which they are intended to serve, protection of life.
Therefore, the strength of the article, Why I explored vaccine problems, is that it provides empirical evidence to demonstrate that vaccines cause more harm than good , it demands research be undertaken to establish their side-effects before their use and it condemns unconsented and sometimes forced vaccination. The weakness the article is that it places individual interest first rather than a national interest in the administration of vaccines. Most medical and scientific experts agree that vaccines are not an effective way of boosting human immune system.
In a nutshell,the article published by the college of physicians of Philadelphia supports the use of vaccines. On the other hand, the article by Sherri Tenpenny, Why I explored vaccine problems, is against the use of vaccines. While the former articles try to clear the misconception that surrounds the vaccination debate, the later article by Tenpenny gives a detailed account supported by scientific evidence that actually vaccines have harmful effects on human health .Surprisingly, more vaccinated individuals are more likely to get sick as compared to the unvaccinated individuals. The article also asserts that mandatory violates individual rights in making medical decisions. Therefore, the article by Tenpenny provides a more convincing perspective on the vaccine debate.