Published April 13, 2017
Informed consent is a basic human right in which a person has the ability to voluntarily accept or reject a...
— William Wilberforce
The number of parents questioning the safety of vaccines, the ingredients used, and the expanding 70-dose CDC schedule is growing, and medical organizations are trying to understand why. Numerous studies have been conducted to learn the reasons more parents are selectively refusing vaccines and what tactics may work best to overcome their doubts. Proponents of mandatory vaccine laws are now hosting medical conferences on how to use the right sound-bites to persuade parents to follow the full vaccine protocol without question.
But shouldn’t these seminars be designed to help doctors take a closer look at vaccine safety in order to better understand the legitimate concerns parents have?
The main reason more and more parents are now opting out of vaccination is safety. No doctors can discuss vaccines transparently with their patients without revealing the many possible side effects both the CDC and FDA disclose. Ironically, safety is the one aspect of vaccination that Pro-Mandate supporters don’t want doctors to talk about. But isn’t an honest conversation really what informed consent is all about?
The only goal of these Pro-Mandate conferences is to reduce vaccine refusal, regardless of how legitimate parental concerns are. Those who support this agenda are recruiting doctors to help. The problem is doctors are supposed to be impartial. They are supposed to be invested in the well-being of each patient individually, which means any course of treatment can vary depending on the child. Addressing parental concerns about vaccine safety acknowledges that there is risk, that parents should be fully informed about the risk, and that we need to better understand why some people have reactions. Instead, the new directive in these conferences is to use emotional tactics to persuade parents that vaccines are safe enough without admitting there is any risk.
This new strategy has been featured in several recent news magazines sent to all pediatricians and was unveiled at the Confronting Vaccine Resistance Conference in New York, hosted by Senator Pan (D-California) and Dr. Offit (creator of the rotavirus vaccine). They’ve determined that pediatricians who capitalize on the emotion of the doctor-patient relationship may be more successful in persuading parents who won’t follow the full vaccine protocol to change their mind.
But no parent should be emotionally manipulated. Educated parents who research vaccine safety on a deeper level conclude that vaccines have more risks than they are being told by their doctors. And many parents just don’t trust much of the vaccine safety research anymore due to conflicts of interest in the pharmaceutical industry. Parents now know that many of the doctors and researchers (including the former head of the CDC) who determine vaccine policy receive funding from vaccine manufacturers.
The Pro-Mandate agenda now advises doctors to ignore these vaccine safety questions and focus on the fear of disease to manipulate parents into compliance. But compliance isn’t a real solution. Improved vaccine safety is a solution. A less aggressive vaccine schedule is a solution. Giving fewer combination shots and less doses per visit are solutions. And that should be the goal of these medical conferences.
Asking questions about whether or not vaccines are safe enough doesn’t make you anti-vaccine. It makes you pro informed consent.
Note: The article was reprinted with permission. It was originally published by the Immunity Education Group—a community of medical and legal professionals, businesspersons, educators, journalists, and advocates who are passionate about immunity education and the right to informed consent.