I can't believe I'm writing on here again... First of all, Troutman, thank you for the pbs link above, I enjoy their programming and will watch when I get the chance. I agree that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks.
I flipped through the last page or two of this thread, and there seems to be two viewpoints at play. Is there room for a third?
I would have liked to discuss in some depth the composition of the vaccines themselves. The changes that are being made to the delivery seem to be based on two things, cost and reaction to deaths and injury. I realize that this is not an uncommon practice in drug development, but this is a set of products that are nearly universally given and generally required at a very young and vulnerable age.
The militant reaction of support for vaccines are giving companies a pressure free ride in terms of composition, where this should be one of our most heavily scrutinized products. Can one be pro-vaccine, but safely have this viewpoint?
(Also, I've been sending some citation nazis over here to get it out of their system, so that one is on me. Sorry. I think of this thread as a kind of therapy, so that citations in other threads are for people who want to actually learn more about a subject. It's like the House of Commons in here, sometimes.)
|