Vaccination Can Potentially Kill Us
On December 21, 2012, Christina Moore took her 8-month old son, Trent, to Seymour Medical Center to be vaccinated. She felt uneasy with the doctor’s decision to give Trent five shots in a row. She argued with the nurse for 30-45 minutes but they hospital staff refused to split the shots. The baby was given four shots, including a vaccination called Rotavirus Oral. Although reassured that no harm would be done to the baby, Christina lost her son less than thirteen hours after his shots.
Although vaccinations do decrease one’s susceptibility to disease, there are always going to be side effects due to harmful ingredients. Despite trace amounts of these harmful ingredients, people have suffered from painful side effects. Rotavirus Oral side effects are diarrhea, vomiting, irritability, allergic reactions, and blood in the stool. Although rare, such cases like Trent’s occasionally happens.
In this particular case, Christina’s protests were ignored under the pretense that she was less knowledgeable than the doctor. Throughout the United States, hundreds of people are vaccinated every day under pressure. Many states mandate public schools to require their students to be vaccinated despite personal beliefs. In the 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts’s case, the U.S. Supreme ruled that vaccinations could be mandatory during the Cambridge smallpox epidemic, supporting common welfare over individual rights. Support for vaccination is based on the idea that it helps the majority. However few the minority, individual human rights cannot be diminished. Every life counts.
Many parents are uncomfortable with the unnatural method to build immunity vaccines use. It has been proven that natural immunity against diseases lasts longer than immunity from vaccinations. It is extreme to consider all unvaccinated people potentially dangerous. Even right after vaccination, parents are warned to keep away from recently vaccinated children and visitors with a recent live vaccination because recently vaccinated people are still capable of spreading the disease. Natural immunity is considered a healthier option because you are not injecting potentially life-threatening chemicals into your body. Also due to the astonishing advancement in the medical field, many diseases are not as potentially threatening as they were in the eighteenth century.
We interviewed two teenagers and one adult to gather different opinions. First, we asked the interviewees about their background knowledge on vaccines. Then, we discussed forced vaccination using the example state mandates that students of public schools be vaccinated to attend.
Daniel Yi
When asked about forced vaccinations in public school, Daniel Yi supported forced vaccination as “reasonable.” He had been unaware of the harmful ingredients used in vaccines and after being informed, his tone changed.
“I don’t think it’s justified to give these kinds of shots because some people might have, like, an allergic reaction to the chemicals that they put in. It could really be like a fail.”
We shared Trent’s story. This reinforced his decision that forced vaccination could not be justified.
“I think it’s sad, and I don’t think that the government should make it a requirement.”
Changho Kim
Right from the beginning, Chang started with “I think it’s someone’s choice to do vaccinations.” He was aware of the harmful ingredients in vaccines and used the fact to further his stance. He gave a pretty interesting cause and effect response we had not thought of: “If they take away your right to get vaccines, they’ll start taking away more rights.” He clarified that he had nothing against vaccinations but that he was “against forced vaccination.”
Min Woo Kim
Min Woo defined the purpose of vaccination as a prevention of future diseases.
He began with a position different from the previous two. He believed forced vaccination was “justified” because statistically, the number of deaths from vaccinations was not high enough compared to the risk. The common welfare was of greater importance than individual rights. Even with Trent’s story, he believed a single case could not be used for the majority.
All agreed vaccinations were more beneficial than harmful. However, two agreed forced vaccination could not be justified while one disagreed.
