Really can't tell if you agree with my statement that science should explore, not assume.
i agree, insofar as its ok to second and triple check the work and diligence of the developer of any new medicine; it is not ok to assume it to be detrimental until those checks are performed.
this is why trials are conducted methodically, slowly. rats, cows, pigs, before terminal humans who sign their lives away to science.
it isnt as though some evil man decided one day "yeah i'll invent what they think is a vaccine against polio but really i hate everyone so im going to stick some really poisonous shyte in there just to kill as many idiotic worthless people as possible because middle finger to the human race"
no, dude set out to protect generations against a fatal debilitating disease that is difficult to watch as it develops. consequences be damned, get the polio gone. and it frigging worked.
same with the flu, and its thousand forms.
to assume this medicine to be non beneficial is to be seeing oneself as the most important person to have walked the earth. ive said it earlier, the 7 and a half billion people that walk this earth are a direct consequence and proof that vaccinations work and bring longevity to our species. the fact that measles hasnt killed anyone in 3 generations is testament to its potency.
if it were poison people would be dead and we'd be having a hard time living past 40.
a few MICRO grams of poison isnt fatal; alcohol is more poisonous than that and we drink that like water.
now some self important moron comes along and observes 8 people with autism and vaccinations and makes a causal link. he assumed before he proved. and even in the face of his proof he is emboldened in hs assumption.
about as smart as linking the drinking of tea to being british and never leaving britain to find out if its true.
when the oversight that threw out his license to practice did so, they demonstrated that to everyone. this science is rubbish and you are endangering lives by publishing it. a big board of people reviewed it and arrived at this conclusion. not some panel of paid-for big pharma. actual physicians. hell, even the pharma companies - not that they can be trusted to do much - were like "no man, what r u talkin bout? are u crazy?"
which, to nobody's surprise, emboldened him further.
one of those people believing the conspiracy goes all the way to the top. theres an old joke, two conspiracy theorists die and are greeted by peter at the pearly gates, who says "before you go in you can ask one question about anything on earth" so they debate amongst each other and ask him "who did 9/11 was it bush or the jihadis?" and st peter goes to fetch God. God answers through the gate "Jihadis" and the men are aghast and whisper to each other "this goes higher than we thought"
