-3
$\begingroup$

While it is widely accepted that vaccination is preferable to not vaccinating, would anyone like to give a shot at providing evidence in favor of not vaccinating? Anything goes.

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ This is a scientifically minded site. Why would you think we would want to engage in such a waste of time? $\endgroup$ – anongoodnurse Dec 19 '15 at 3:12
  • $\begingroup$ Ya OP, we are scientists here. Science is about stagnation and NOT challenging hypothesis. As scientists, we find the right answer, put it in a text book, and never revise it. Duh. Go read a book or something. $\endgroup$ – DonJulian Dec 25 '15 at 6:53
2
$\begingroup$

Here's the thing. No one has been able to repeat the results seen in the discredited "vaccination is linked to autism" study that started this whole dangerous mess (I'm not even going to bother looking up the citation, I care that little about it). Scientists, including those funded by so-called "anti-vax" groups, have been trying for the past 15-20ish years, and they can't do it, because

there is no causative link between early-childhood vaccination and autism.

Your question is akin to asking us to advocate against Pasteur's germ theory of disease, or for the idea of phlogiston in chemistry, or against the theory of relativity in physics.

So, given that the scientific evidence is firmly pointing in one direction, why would we waste our time on this endeavor, especially when anti-vaxxers will cling to any sort of misquoted, out-of-context, partial evidence that they can find?

The only reason a child should not receive a vaccine at the scheduled time and in the recommended dose would be because she is severely allergic to one of the main components of the vaccine, or she has a significantly-depressed immune system, typically associated with cancer and other severe medical conditions. At such times, medical recommendations by the specialist treating the condition should be followed.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Really good answer, however I don't want to vote up, because then the question will hang around even if closed. Maybe it should become a community wiki on why early childhood vaccination? Or an ask and answer? I'd vote up. $\endgroup$ – AMR Dec 19 '15 at 4:49
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This has been covered already on Skeptics and Health, so I don't see the need to cover it again here. $\endgroup$ – MattDMo Dec 19 '15 at 5:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Not to mention that "study" wasn't even a study at all. It was "hey, I looked at the guts of 6 of my patients and now I am convinced vaccines cause autism". What the heck? It's been retracted and denounced by the journal that published it by now, anyway. $\endgroup$ – YviDe Dec 19 '15 at 7:17
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Phlogiston! :'D $\endgroup$ – user19679 Dec 20 '15 at 2:33
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @DonJulian and why is that? Because we rigorously tested a hypothesis, found it to have no support, and discarded it? That's exactly what science is supposed to do. $\endgroup$ – MattDMo Dec 25 '15 at 13:47

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.