‘Virtually everyone was brought up pro-vaccine, until either their child died or was injured following vaccination and/or they actually researched the scientific evidence beyond the headlines, soundbites, dogma and “vaccines are safe and effective” mantra. So "ex-vaxxers" is a more accurate label, if one really requires a label.
I disagree with the basis of your observations. Firstly, I was not ‘brought up pro-vaccine.’ I have never been pro-vaccine and never will be pro-vaccine. And I am sure I am not alone!
I am ‘pro’ or supportive of verifiable scientific evidence. If the scientific evidence does not agree with the claims of the drug company or inventors of a vaccine and they refuse or limit the free distribution of raw data which allows their medical claims to be verified or challenged then I will await further data or scientific consensus based on rational and logical conclusion. Centuries long protocols demand such further evidence - beyond reasonable doubt. That is how scientific discoveries including novel vaccines evolve into becoming accepted. And not by grand conspiracy or the oxymoronic determinism of Trumpian logic so embraced by many antiVAXer individuals.
Hence, I will never accept propaganda in the form of an antiVAXer lobby group’s attempt to foist its political ideology onto the citizens of a country - simply because there are a small group of people who believe empirical observation has the same credibility status as scientific (testable proof) evidence.
The so called ‘scientific evidence’ in your hot link is nothing more than an ICAN lobby paper profuse in antiVAXer mythology and the usual scientifically refuted vaccine claims.
No where in the document is there a big picture or historical review of vaccination evidence.
Simple logic tells even the most poorly educated individual that vaccines work because the causal nature of epidemiology will always be revealed in the decreasing incidence of an outbreak thanks to vaccination. There is no other counter logic. Otherwise most viruses and bacteria would remain endemic in populations and epidemic levels and frequency would occur with much greater regularity through out all nations.
Even your attempt to moderate the growing negativity towards antiVAXer movements is disingenuous. Name changing will not work. So I will continue to call a spade a spade.
Like the cigarette companies, you are attempting to normalise what is an aberration of the norm. You may be confused, but I’ll give you an example: I am not a non-smoker! Sounds like I am a smoker? Which would be a rather silly thing to do? Since, most people are aware that ingesting poisons from the tobacco leaf is not the norm and very unhealthy. Yet the tobacco and cigarette companies still managed to have us believe (until science disproved their lies and logic) they were correct to categorise populations into smokers and non-smokers. Do you understand? Me thinks you do indeed!
So I will continue to identify antiVAXers for what they.
Broosta
