It may not have been in the best interests of the public to present a Pro vs. Con column devoted to the topic of mandatory vaccinations. Participating in such a forum may suggest that both sides of this topic have legitimate standing. In this case, the overwhelming consensus in the scientific community is that there is no debate about the efficacy (risks vs. benefits) of childhood immunizations. Mr. Borges’ column may plant seeds of doubt.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention got into the vaccination “business” not to make a profit (they are already federally funded) but to ensure that there would be vaccines available for childhood immunization, since the private sector did not perceive of vaccinations as a lucrative endeavor.
To lay people “herd immunity” may seem like “nonsense.” To those with training in epidemiology, there is abundant evidence underpinning this concept. Herd immunity is essential to protect unimmunized children, some of whom cannot be vaccinated due to previously existing medical conditions.
Mr. Borges asks “where have all the epidemics gone?” It’s a funny thing, but the epidemics which lead to significant levels of childhood mortality from pertussis and diphtheria disappeared after the introduction of universal childhood immunizations. Back in those early days, no one was protesting vaccines, because they had lived in a world where the effects of those once prevalent diseases were all too apparent.
— Roland Lamarine, Chico
