Re: MEPs devise strategy to tackle vaccine hesitancy among public
It may be of interest that this letter column [1] has just been featured and BMJ praised on Robert F Kennedy jnr's World Mercury Project [2], which in itself points to the extent to which legitimate comment on these issues is excluded from global media - the other possibility being in so many mainstream media outlets that anyone raising a critical or cautious voice about the increasing grip of the industry on our institutions, or the safety of the products, is simply showered with abuse. I am glad to say that this did not happen here. (I note, however, that WMP are unfortunately mistaken in stating that BMJ's electronic letters are Pubmed listed.) What was more noticeable was the absence of almost any vaccine lobby advocates defending the project, which echoes the position here last year when the British Medical Association opened a debate about vaccine compulsion - when faced with robust criticism, and perhaps the requirement for a modicum of politeness, they apparently preferred to stay away [3,4,5].
I think it is reasonable to remark that the proposition that generically vaccines are safe is scientifically unsound, nor can it be established by, for example, turning Andrew Wakefield into a scapegoat. Their safety in so far as this is technically feasible at all would be dependent on huge caution and the most careful and un-conflicted scrutiny, which is very far from the situation described in the letters below. Unless we escape the ideology of vaccines being safe, and unless we take major steps to ensure the genuine independence of the institutions licensing , monitoring and advising the use of products (and not just engage in pious sentiments), the population will be at risk from both the products and the system.
If the system was working it would be listening respectfully to people who report injury, not trying to shout them down or indeed humiliate them.
[1] Rapid Responses to Rory Watson, 'MEPs devise strategy to tackle vaccine hesitancy among public',
BMJ 2018; 360 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k1378 (Published 23 March 2018)
Rapid Response:
Re: MEPs devise strategy to tackle vaccine hesitancy among public
It may be of interest that this letter column [1] has just been featured and BMJ praised on Robert F Kennedy jnr's World Mercury Project [2], which in itself points to the extent to which legitimate comment on these issues is excluded from global media - the other possibility being in so many mainstream media outlets that anyone raising a critical or cautious voice about the increasing grip of the industry on our institutions, or the safety of the products, is simply showered with abuse. I am glad to say that this did not happen here. (I note, however, that WMP are unfortunately mistaken in stating that BMJ's electronic letters are Pubmed listed.) What was more noticeable was the absence of almost any vaccine lobby advocates defending the project, which echoes the position here last year when the British Medical Association opened a debate about vaccine compulsion - when faced with robust criticism, and perhaps the requirement for a modicum of politeness, they apparently preferred to stay away [3,4,5].
I think it is reasonable to remark that the proposition that generically vaccines are safe is scientifically unsound, nor can it be established by, for example, turning Andrew Wakefield into a scapegoat. Their safety in so far as this is technically feasible at all would be dependent on huge caution and the most careful and un-conflicted scrutiny, which is very far from the situation described in the letters below. Unless we escape the ideology of vaccines being safe, and unless we take major steps to ensure the genuine independence of the institutions licensing , monitoring and advising the use of products (and not just engage in pious sentiments), the population will be at risk from both the products and the system.
If the system was working it would be listening respectfully to people who report injury, not trying to shout them down or indeed humiliate them.
[1] Rapid Responses to Rory Watson, 'MEPs devise strategy to tackle vaccine hesitancy among public',
BMJ 2018; 360 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k1378 (Published 23 March 2018)
[2] World Mercury Project Team, 'Vaccine Mandate Efforts in Europe Get Pushback' ,https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/vaccine-mandate-efforts-in-europe-g...
[3] Rapid Responses for Moberly, UK doctors re-examine case for mandatory vaccination, http://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j3414/rapid-responses
[4] Rapid Responses for Arie, Compulsory vaccination and growing measles threat, http://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j3429/rapid-responses
[5] Rapid Responses for Cave, Debating the future of mandatory vaccination, http://www.bmj.com/content/358/bmj.j4100/rapid-responses
Competing interests: No competing interests