As you can see in the latest post from @ancientmystique - a new 'rule' has been proposed in Australia to essentially force vaccinate children. Besides this bringing up memories of the tragedy that took place in Uganda, where many children were killed as a result of a similar program which even saw children being vaccinated at GUNPOINT - there is a fundamental issue here about FREE WILL.
Even if vaccinations were 'safe and effective', no-one has the right to decide what others put in their own bodies
There are very long lists of medical doctors, vaccine researchers and other kinds of medical professionals who stake their reputation on teaching us that vaccines are 'junk science'. The basis of this understanding is multi-dimensional and the issues range from the toxicity of the so-called 'adjuvants' that are added to vaccines that are known to OVER
'stimulate' the immune system, right through to the reality that the immune system works best when not 'hacked' in such a way, meaning that we need to strengthen our own natural immunity with a broad spectrum of healthy choices, rather than risk weakening our overall natural immunity by bombarding the body with synthetic concoctions of poison.
Regardless of any of this, however, there is an ever more important point here - WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO DECIDE WHAT SOMEONE ELSE PUTS IN THEIR OWN BODY (OR IN THE BODY OF A CHILD THEY CARE FOR) - PROVIDED NO-ONE'S WILL IS BEING OVERPOWERED.
I have no right to choose whether or not you can take a drug into your body, or certain foods - as long as your choices do not overpower the will and rights of others. This is where things can get complicated if we don't know our own self sufficiently to be able to discern what is needed for our body and wellbeing.
It's not just our 'rights' that need to be respected, but FREE WILL MUST be respected for us to know balance
It is generally understood that the will is sacred and to be respected, however, there are still many among us who deny this and seek to overpower the will of others - we sometimes call them 'control freaks' and they gravitate towards governments.
It is generally understood that if you find another human attractive and want them to be your partner, for example, you cannot achieve that by forcing them against their will to join you in life. There are 'rules' in government to prevent this from occurring, however, there is currently a lack of clear delineation in society about what to do in the more complex situations, such as with child rearing. In this case with vaccinations, it IS the will of the child that is important as to whether they have vaccinations and contrary to the narrative projected by some in society, many children are intelligent enough to make up their own minds. In the case of babies who are not able to comprehend the situation or express themselves verbally, then it IS up to the parents to decide and NOT up to the 'state'.
Children are the creations of parents, NOT the creations of people who 'got elected' to government - note: it has already been made abundantly clear that modern democracies were carefully crafted since the beginning to be false fronts that give the impression of being democratic, but are in truth just a control system.
If we allow 'elected officials' to decide on concoctions of drugs and chemicals to be forcibly introduced into the systems of babies - many WILL die as a result. Where does it stop? What occurs when it is decided that a new strain of genetics is 'totally safe and effective' and will 'enhance life' and that if parents don't allow pharmaceutical agents to insert them into their children then they are being 'neglectful'? This outcome was the stuff of dystopian science fiction not long ago and yet it is now only just around the corner.
Loving Enlightenment is needed now.
There is one consistent solution to all these problems and that is actual, lived enlightenment. Enlightenment is not about living in a cave or wearing a robe and praying. Enlightenment is literally 'Understanding' in the sense of being the light that holds the truth of self and all that is. It is possible to have UNloving enlightenment, which results in evil deeds that on a certain level can be said to be 'intelligent' but overall will lack the emotional understanding necessary to produce truly beneficial outcomes. The invention of nuclear weapons is one such outcome of unloving enlightenment.
Loving enlightenment is balanced and causes balance. The love involves opens deep doorways into the unconscious self that facilitate a very deep awareness that is uncommon on earth presently. The wisdom that can be generated through such balance and knowingness must not be underestimated and cannot be guessed or judged in advance.
The forcing of drugs and vaccinations on people (including fluoridation of water) is very much an unloving and thus unbalanced action - regardless of how 'caring' those who propose it claim to be. To propose such a program is to also propose that:
- The proposer knows better than others who disagree with him/her about the human anatomy and health. Thus he/she also knows better than literally billions of people he/she has never met.
- The proposer therefore, is calling a large percentage of the population: unintelligent, uncaring & dangerous - just for making free will choices for their own health (Which numerous medical professionals heartily respect them for and who agree with their decisions).
- The proposer does NOT respect FREE WILL.
The fact that free will is being denied and that this is attempting to be made an 'official policy' should ring alarm bells for everyone - because this is EXACTLY how a dictatorship and authoritarian regimes (That think nothing of killing millions) operate.
If the proposers in the Australian government (and elsewhere) are to operate within integrity, they must acknowledged the potential tyranny in their chosen position and respect that others disagree with them and are free to choose as they prefer. If they do not accept the truth of this then they are only proving that THEY, the proposers, are truly enemies of humanity.
Wishing you well,
Ura Soul
Buy your "Steemit, Dreamit, Memeit, Teamit" T-Shirts, Gifts & Other Clothing Here.
in Italy they already passed a law making it compulsory for children to take 12 vaccines.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39983799
Absolute madness, but huge business for Pharmaceutical Companies.
In Italy, the compulsory vaccines are actually nine, plus the one against chicken pox, which is compulsory only for the children born in 2017.
In Italy children die of measles (!) thanks to who is against vaccinations and allows the replication and transmission of the virus.
thanks - i didn't know that.. classic BBC Bullshit.. 'conspiracy theories' 'largely based on one discredited study'.. erm. no.
yeah my bad for putting a link to the BBC...they are the ones who are totaly discredited....was just the first link I found as source.
Filling healthy kids with chemicals is not the way forward. And if classroms are such an outbreak hazard we should reconsider the education system which today just resembles intensive poultry farming.
Yikes, scary times! It is not good for the government to tell parents what is best for their children. Who knows the children best? The parent or the doctor/government?
People make mistakes. When people with the power to force other people to suffer the consequences of their mistakes do so, innocent people are harmed. For this reason, force is the problem.
When I make a mistake and suffer the consequences, mea culpa, and hopefully I learn from my mistake. If my mistake is to drive into a school bus full of children and kill them all, then the responsibility for their deaths is on my head, and the consequences of such mistakes are commonly dire, as they should be.
When government officials make mistakes, they are generally shielded from such consequences, as the US courts have recently held that the officials responsible for torturing innocent people cannot be held liable.
Government is the problem, not medicine, nor misinformation. Force is the problem.
Those that claim that people refusing vaccinations are misinformed have the burden of providing relevant information to establish their case, not the right to use force to compel those that disagree with them to undergo medical treatment.
This is why I am an autarchist.
Well said! The vaccine industry in America is also immune from prosecution - unlike any other group in society. Seems the best immune effect vaccines have is immunity of prosecution.
Quite a pithy observation!
Excellent post. An understanding of individual natural rights is crucial, in understanding why mandatory vaccination is an act of war on the individual's biology.
Well said, thanks :)
There are many facets to this argument on both the scientific and morality levels. I completely agree with Liberum Arbirtrium, or Free Will in deciding what we may or may not do with our bodies. It is, after all, our natural right to do so, no matter what a government decrees. I have had many patients ask me for my opinion and my only response is to inform themselves and make a decision, as long as it is their decision.
I particularly like the governmental scare tactic that if a child isn't vaccinated, they will be denied entrance to school. Now, I recognize that education is not a right, but it may not be denied anyone who wants it. The question that is never answered is: If every child in the class is vaccinated, how is my child a threat to them?
Now, along with my clinical experience, I taught immunology and was a contributing editor for a peer reviewed, Index Medicus journal for over ten years which dealt with immunopathology. When my daughter was sent home with an order to vaccinate against papilloma viridae, I refused knowing the side effects of the vaccination. She was 12 and her teacher held me and her up to ridicule in front of her class. This teacher, with no knowledge of anything biological, was going to tell me about vaccinations.
I stumped her with a few, simple questions:
Do you know how many strains of papilloma viridae there are?
How many does this vaccination confront?
Are you aware that HPV is sexually transmitted and that my 12 year-old isn't sexually active?
Are you aware that not all HPV converts to cancer?
She had no answer for any of these questions, nor did she have a good justification for the vaccine as a prophylaxis against a potential with no aggravating factors.
There are benefits to vaccinations and there are risks. No one can weigh these factors if their free choice is taken away by those in government who will never admit responsibility for, or suffer, the consequences of a vaccination gone bad. 100% effectiveness with no side or collateral effects is science fiction, at best, and a pipe dream, at worst.
Well said, thanks for taking the time to comment here. I have followed you - welcome to Steemit!
@ura-soul How much medical knowledge you have to make a statement like this ????? Are you an epidemiologist ???? I think that your post is totally irresponsible nd is not based on medical knowledge.
If vaccines did not exist, we would still living in ancient times.
This is a clear appeal from authority.
The ignorance packed into your short statement is staggering.
Please go back to the beginning, and study the Trivium, the Quadrivium, and Natural law. After that, please form your own understanding of the chemistry, biology, and biophysics of the matter.
The facts are what matter, not an establishment indoctrinated opinion.
If vaccines did not exist we would have one less threat to our lives sold to us under false pretenses.
The decline of rampant disease began long before the mass popularization of vaccines, due to advances in sanitation, hygiene, and nutrition. This is easily verified, if one has an operational understanding of how to know what is real and what is propaganda.
I'm a doctor. I don't want to appeal to authority. Is a disclosure of interests.
You clearly stated that the core of you position is about respecting free will. As far as free will goes not being respected you are right. There's evidence to support that is an authoritarian act.
Now here's a problem. That is of inherited contracts. Either one abides by none, absolute anarchy without recognizing the state or one accepts at least the existence of them. Those are the laws, that can be changed at any moment by people but that if accepted entail, for instance, that children are less free than adults.
If so, and one accepts previous contracts, then one is almost forced to accept the forceful penetration of the skin by the agents of the state in this case doctors. There's a scientific rationale from doctors, but this is a freedom problem and not an argument of science.
If one thinks children are equally as free as adults then, that leads to an interesting problem. Because parents have no rights over them. They have no authority over them. So children ought to decide what to do at any moment. If you can't understand them and they can't express their will even changing a diaper is you being an authoritarian.
I also clearly stated that 'The decline of rampant disease began long before the mass popularization of vaccines, due to advances in sanitation, hygiene, and nutrition. This is easily verified, if one has an operational understanding of how to know what is real and what is propaganda'.
There is plenty of information that can lead to an understanding that the scientific basis for the use of vaccines is flimsy at best or just outright fraud.
I abide by no inherited contracts, because there can not possibly be any that deserve respect. I will not be held responsible for the actions of my parents, and, as I am an adult, he cannot take responsibility for my actions. Children are the product of their parents labor. As a result, they are the property of their parents until they reach the age of consent. Children still have individual natural rights, so their parents cannot violate these rights and remain in the moral realm. Children are for a fact less free than adults, because they have no ability to express informed consent.
I do not respect any laws that can be changed at arbitrary whim of the herd. Natural law is the only law that deserves respect, because it remains whether we respect it or not. I accept no previous contracts that I could not read and sign with informed consent. Those who do accept contracts which they never signed with informed consent are called slaves.
Forced penetration of any kind is either tantamount to rape, or attempted murder, take your pick. Any forced medical procedure is even against international convention, if you have any respect for that, I don't, I didn't sign it. It is the very first line of the Nuremberg code. Forced medical procedures are a war crime under the Nuremberg code. So, mandatory vaccination is an act of war against the natural rights of the individual.
This is, indeed, as well as an issue of individual liberty, an argument of the scientific data, because the data does not say what the doctors have been indoctrinated to believe that it says. Many doctors are aware of this, and do not labor under this disinformation. The logical conclusion appears to be that those who promote vaccines are doing so, knowingly or unknowingly, under false pretenses, at the expense of the People's health. The reasoning can be found in the first paragraph of this comment. this is also evidenced by the fact that other diseases, for which there are no vaccines, also declined. There is plenty more than that if what I've stated so far is not enough for a start.
It has been said, "if the theory disagrees with experiment, it's wrong. That simple statement is the key to science. It doesn't matter how beautiful your guess is, it doesn't matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is. If it disagrees with experiment it's wrong, that's all there is to it". This appears to me to be accurate in it's letter and intent.
The whole last paragraph is rendered irrelevant, and is shown to be an appeal to ridicule, and a straw man argument, by what I've already stated. It was a good try though.
Where did you get the idea that being inherently possessed of individual natural rights implies that children are absolutely free to run riot at a whim? This is clearly not the meaning of individual natural rights.
I have only to disclose my interest in finding the facts and not laboring under the indoctrination forced on me by an incompetent state, or the manipulation of scientifically collected data to an erroneous conclusion. My only appeal is to the facts and the dynamics of the function of the natural world.
Doctors are not scientists. They are an appeal from authority, an appeal to popularity, an appeal to common practice, and stem from the genetic fallacy. Authority is always suspect, because it can never have any but false legitimacy. There is no legitimate authority except the self, within the parameters of natural law. This extends to those who are competent to advocate for themselves as adults possessed of informed consent. The incompetent, whether by stage of development, or by mental impairment, cannot advocate for themselves, as there can be no informed consent.
If you are a naturalist in your laws particularly about children, that's your choice. Is just another type of authoritarianism.
If you believe that, then you may want to look into natural law, natural philosophy, physics, grammar, logic, classical rhetoric, common law, the origins of individual liberty, the actual meaning of 'authoritarianism' and lots more.
I do my best to operate in the realm of facts, not opinions. If someone walks off a cliff, they are subject to gravity, it is not a choice after the last step is taken.
Now you appeal to polymath wisdom. This just got funny.
I am quoting medical professionals who question the status quo. They will happily correct your last comment and describe how it is you whose words are both inaccurate and irresponsible. There's no point in having a slanging match - just provide evidence and comment as the scientific method was intended to function before money and agendas got involved. You can refer to some of the videos I provided in response to another comment here if you like.
@ura-soul @lifeworship
Here I present things for and against;
In 2014, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that, among children born from 1994 through 2013, vaccination would prevent 322 million illnesses, 21 million hospitalizations, and 732,000 deaths
Vaccines that are recommended for children in the United States are fully tested in large numbers of subjects before they are licensed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). After they are licensed, they are monitored by the CDC and the FDA through the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and the Vaccine Safety Datalink. When concerns are identified, the FDA issues news releases and may temporarily or permanently suspend the use of a specific vaccine
As vaccine-preventable diseases become less common and parents have little familiarity with the devastating effects of vaccine-preventable diseases, some parents may believe that vaccines are not necessary
However, it is important to acknowledge the limitations of vaccines: They are neither 100 percent effective nor are they completely risk free. Although provision of this information helps to establish credibility, it must be placed in proper context, particularly for parents who tend to overestimate the risks of vaccines and underestimate the risks from vaccine-preventable diseases
Safety concerns include specific side effects (eg, Guillain-Barré syndrome, intussusception, pain) and more general concerns (eg, that too many vaccines overload the immune system, possibly causing autism, autoimmune disease, or increased susceptibility to infection). Concerns about safety are intensified by negative word of mouth and media messages
The conclusion is clear; there are many benefits from vaccination, but there are also risks related to its execution, however there is no scientific or epidemiological evidence to support the non-use of vaccines. Now if you are advocating for your right as a person not to be exposed to a vaccination system, there you are, your risk. Do not confuse a discussion of civil rights with scientific evidence.
Bibliography
https://www-uptodate-com/contents/standard-childhood-vaccines-parental-hesitancy-or refusal?source=machineLearning&search=vaccines&selectedTitle=3~150§ionRank=1&anchor=H8#H8
Whitney CG, Zhou F, Singleton J, Schuchat A; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Benefits from immunization during the vaccines for children program era - United States, 1994-2013. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014 Apr 25;63(16):352-5.
He is not confusing a discussion of civil rights with scientific evidence. The issue is two pronged, first, forcing vaccines onto people, second, the suitability or lack thereof of vaccines as medical treatment. The concerns raised about the second argument makes the first argument all the more necessary, and alarming.
For an individual to vaccinate or not, there is no big economic gain or loss either way. Either vaccines are safe and effective, in which case I would accept to take them, OR not, in which case I wouldn't. The decision will neither break my bank account nor make me rich. For the pharmaceutical industry, an untold amount of money is riding on whether millions of us choose to vaccinate or not, especially given how many decades, 100 years or more, they have built up their industry. Given all the influence they have, is it inconceivable they have corrupted the system, and made the scientific evidence supposedly gathered by third parties fit their agenda?
Is 'medical knowledge' based on hard science or what the Pharmaceutical Industry wishes to push on its customers?
One of the most interesting bits to me about this conversation is how it has disintegrated over the years. My oldest is 19, my youngest 3. When I first made the decision not to vaccinate, there were people who said I was weird or crazy.
In the space of those 19 years, the conversation has become violent. Now I'm dangerous, potentially a murderer even. I am guilty of neglect or abuse. It's crazy. Most of the people who talk about it from the pro vaccine side have no clue what they're talking about. They're unwilling to research or have any kind of open mind. They blindly follow the talking points of the mainstream media. What's worse is that this is even true of people who see right through the msm on things like racial injustice. Honestly the one that irks me the most is blaming unvaccinated kids for outbreaks when, even if all the things they spout were actually true, the vast majority of adults who are not up to date on their boosters would be far more likely the cause than the tiny percentage of unvaccinated kids. I've tried telling people to tone down their hate, but it just gets more aggressive.
My hope is that this is the death throes.
Yes, the situation is absurd and really shows the extent of the denial and error present in the minds of many.
I couldn't agree with you more. I am so glad that I joined this Steemit community where I see so many people talking about the truth especially about the vaccines, pharmaceutical industry which is trillion dollar industry and about health, natural remedies. I myself am trying to teach and share with as many people as I can about the natural way to take care of their health, so I am so happy to see posts like this. So thank you for sharing. These are our rights because no one can tell us what we can or cannot put into our bodies and the more we talk about it, the more people will know that there are options to take care of our health and overall wellbeing.
Very good, thanks for connecting. I followed you here. :)
Many newborns died in my country because the parents refused vaccination.
Now a law is being passed, if you refuse vaccination and your kid gets sick and dies from it the parent who declined the vaccination will be held responsible for murder.
I agree with free will, but ignorance kills and ignorant people should be locked if they cause death.
I suggest studying the FULL scientific data published on vaccines before accusing the wrong people of murder. Billions have been paid out already in 'compensation' to families of children killed BY VACCINES.
The type of ignorance that you are laboring under is what kills.
Mandatory vaccination is premeditated mass murder, and also a war crime under the Nuremberg code. ANY forced medical procedure is a war crime.
I, personally, will use self defense, by all means possible, against anyone who tries to force me to vaccinate.
ALL people promoting mandatory vaccination should be charged with incitement to mass murder. ALL people carrying it out and enforcing it should be charged with attempted premeditated mass murder, and if someone dies, as a result of mandatory vaccination, the people who enforced it, and the people who carried it out should be charged with premeditated murder. In the states we still have the death penalty. I think that people who cause the death of others from mandatory vaccination SHOULD die by lethal injection.
Thanks God you are not the one making the laws and your only power is to write on the internet...
Assumptions do not make an argument.
btw, which country is that?
Classic mis information. No one is forced in Australia to have vaccinations. The article says "essentially forced" so be careful of this misleading post. I agree that people should be free to make the choice, but it needs to be an informed choice. Not one manipulated by mis information that is dangerous and irresponsible. Seek your doctor's advice in immunization, not some doctor google. If your not happy with your doctor's advice, seek a second opinion. But please do not leave your children vulnerable to your own denial.
Did you read the linked proposed bill? https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/bills/DBAssets/bills/SecondReadSpeechLC/3386/2R%20Public%20Health%20LC.pdf
It is clear that the aim is to make life very difficult for parents if they do not bow down and conform to vaccinations.
There are a long list of highly qualified doctors who ferociously advocate for the ending of the use of vaccination. Ending denials means ending the judgements that have us convinced we are right without having examined all the information.
like i said, no one is forced, nothing in the bill says you cant choose not to vaccinate. Access to public child care will be an issue for you, but that is fair, considering the purpose of vaccination. Anyone who does not see that is being selfish. and as for the long list of highly qualified doctors who are advocating for the end of vaccintation.. where is it... can you reference it?
As soon as a precedent is set to control the national resources available to people (which you have paid for through your own tax!) - then that will always be leverage to continue that in future. Besides which, it IS a form of force to determine which services individuals will use and impose punishment for non conformity.
The wording of the proposal specifically states that non vaccination is a form of neglect - which is itself grounds to have the child taken away - by FORCE.
The purpose of non vaccination is to allow the immune system of the child to develop and adapt naturally, which requires that their full health be supported to do so - so, given that non-vaccination shares the same alleged purpose as vaccination does - your point is moot.
Have you ever looked into vaccine shedding? The proven mechanism by which the vaccinated can begin epidemics? Who is being selfish?
I do not have a simple page with a list of Doctors on it, I have a variety of video testimonies from a variety of time periods and specialities of doctors - here's a selection:
I haven't had time to look at all the videos,, but it doesn't take long to find at least a few articles exposing the subjective nature of the thinking of at least one of the doctors here. see this link for one.. https://medium.com/@visualvaccines/why-dr-suzanne-humphries-an-anti-vaccine-activist-is-lying-to-you-about-measles-ce446d0a7e0f
In the"long list" of doctors opposing vaccinations, I don't see any dedicated peer reviewed immunologists or even a pediatrician. There is a chiropractor, and there is a natropath but anywho, like I said, your free to make your choice. Science is fallible, and it is open to debate. Keep your mind open, but be evidence based, I think you will find a large weight of evidence on the benefit of evidence of vaccines, but little against it, but tons of subjective feeling around anti vaccination. It is nice to think we would be better off with vaccines, but tell that to the generations that suffered the diseases. I am sorry that I had to almost choked when I heard the piece about there being no proof that vaccines prevented small pox. That is interesting, considering that disease has been eradicated. Perhaps it was fairy dust or something that eradicated it.
You are commenting here without having looked at the evidence, while telling me not to ignore the evidence. Dr. Bergman, for example, typically provides a long list of peer reviewed papers at the end of all of his videos.
As stated, the selection of videos here is just that, a selection. If you intend to ignore the material and then try to rebutt it anyway, what purpose would a long list have?
The classic refrain of the ignorant is 'I haven't had the time to do the research'.
Here, we see it again.
Far from 'fairy dust', anyone with the knowledge and information can see that the decline of rampant disease began long before the mass popularization of vaccines, due to advances in sanitation, hygiene, and nutrition.
Simply look at the decline of other diseases for which there are no vaccines.
Gee.. the time not spent was in context of the videos posted. Not the whole subject. Sorry but you are spreading dangerous mis information.
Ignorance of the facts is not a better option than denial, of which, in this post, I see none.
Please form a functional understanding of this subject before you get someone killed by the misinformation in your own brain.
Muy buen post, muy explicativo, saludos :)
Very nice article @ura-soul. Lets keep positive , be happy and focus on the positive aspects of life, and thereby lighting the way for others to a clearer understanding of all there is. Thank for sharing!
supporting free will means unconditional of all emotions - even the ones you are judging to be 'negative'. focusing on the positive is only useful if no denial is involved.
@ura-soul got you a $1.58 @minnowbooster upgoat, nice! (Image: pixabay.com)
Want a boost? Click here to read more!
It's the same in my country, Romania, where the proposed law would make vaccinations mandatory, while parents face huge fines if they refuse. Unfortunately, there was no public outcry over this bill...
Also, just wanted to say I read your post on the situation in Uganda and was appalled by that story. Cannot help thinking of the American billionaire that runs a polio foundation...
I see, I was not aware of the situation in Romania - thanks for letting us know. It would certainly be helpful if more people looked at what went down in Uganda - the patterns repeat because the modus operandi of those involved doesn't change much.
If you are referring to Bill Gates' vaccination program - it is worth noting that his Father was at the top of a group who essentially advocated for eugenics.
This post has received a 6.41 % upvote from @upgoater thanks to: @ura-soul. Please vote @swelker101 for witness
This post has received a 5.85 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @ura-soul.
Things are getting a weird these days. The lines of personal privacy and are getting blurred. Really scary stuff.
A wise italian doctor once said "stopping at a red light is compulsory and nobody talks about the right to choose, it's not a matter of free will. Running a red light is simply dangerous and life threatening. So why we discuss about the right to choose about vaccinations? Avoiding them is dangerous for us, for other people and for all the community. Years of science and experiments say so."
And "science is not democratic" (Roberto Burioni)
Stopping at a red light IS an act of free will - it is an act of free will based on an understanding that it is the best option available in that situation. You appear to be totally ignoring the content of this post, since it is fully accepted that vaccines themselves can be dangerous, cause serious illness and death.
I suggest listening to the numerous doctors here on this very page who make clear the reasons for non vaccination.
Vaccinations, being drugs, have side effects, like every other drug. But if you have a terrible headache you'll take an anti-inflammatory drug also if these drugs may be dangerous for the stomach or cause a bleeding. Side effects of vaccinations are far more rare. Some "so-called" side effects of vaccinations are not correleted to them and scientific works has proven so, as for autism. My personal opinion is that doctor who are against vaccinacions are more dangerous than vaccination themselves. YOU appear to be totally ignoring history of diseases, epidemiology and medicine.
I'm only a cat, my human dad is a computer engineer, but my human mum is a doctor... I've learned these things talking to her 😼
I'll take direct experience and advice from vaccine researchers, doctors and even a vaccine creator over an internet cat - no offence intended to cats..
It seems that you take advice only from who thinks the same as you.
I listen to every source the demonstrates integrity and many who don't. Ultimately, I don't blindly take advice from anyone - I simply use logical analysis, mixed with my own direct experience to understand the details involved and come to my own understandings. I have studied this topic (one of many) for several years and listened to too many speakers to count.
It's not a matter of quantity but of quality of the informations. And I don't know what your sources are but I suggest you to take a look on scientific databases (for example https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ or https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/index.html
) and not only on the internet in general. If it's not true that you listen only what you want to, you'll find that the entire scientific community agrees on the importance of vaccinations.