Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

MacLEOD: Even if there is some risk to vaccinations (very very small for most), that, of itself, is the wrong question. More importantly, one has to also look at relative risk


The other day I posed a comment on my Facebook page linking to a Newsweek article which stated, “Anti-vax Movement Listed by World Health Organization as One of the Top 10 Health Threats for 2019”.   (CLICK HERE for the full story)

That prompted a response from Ian MacLeod, which he has given me permission to use on the blog-site; a commentary which he indicated has been used previously, and one which he will continue to post in places where the public will be able to read it.  Here is what he had to say:


Subject to the second to last paragraph, I think that the parents who intentionally expose their children to disease, should be treated the same way as child beaters, and charged. Those children should not be allowed in the schools.

Likewise, I hope some enterprising lawyer launches a law suit against parents who have refused vaccination for their children, and those children have gotten sick, spreading disease to those with ineffective vaccinations.

Their children, and in turn mine and everyone else's, should not be willingly exposed to preventable harm.
Even if there is some risk to vaccinations (very, very small, for most), that, of itself, is the wrong question; more importantly, one has to also look at relative risk. If the risk of serious side effects is one in a million (say) from a vaccine, but one in 100,000 (say) of getting a debilitating illness if unvaccinated, both the odds of harm, and its magnitude, to the unvaccinated are very much higher by not getting vaccinated.


Compounding that is the grossly irresponsible risk being imposed on everyone else in the community.

I understand that, for informed medical reasons, some children may not be able to be vaccinated, and that is fair enough. However, for vaccination programs to be effective, a substantial majority (apparently, about 95%) of people should be vaccinated - otherwise, everyone else is exposed to higher risk. Likewise, vaccinations are not 100% protection, but close to it, so a very few may still get sick anyway.

But if non-doctors and non-research scientists who have only modest medical education, decide that they know more that the overwhelming majority of medical professionals, and in turn decide to expose their children to polio or any other number of debilitating diseases, I have a very serious problem with that, and with their capacity to be responsible parents.

Ian C. MacLeod
Their children, and in turn mine and everyone else's, should not be willingly exposed to preventable harm.

Am I too subtle?
Ian C. MacLeod


Ian is a retired lawyer. Before law, he spent 15 years as a BC banker (4 as a small-town branch manager). He has lived or worked in 17 communities of all sizes: BC (14), NS (2) and Quebec (1).

He has been very involved in the volunteer leadership of over 40 organizations, heading 14 of them - including the BC Chamber of Commerce (1992-1993), the Clan MacLeod Societies of Canada (2004-2008) and the Richmond Aquatics Advisory Board (2008--2018). He has written widely on public policy issues.

He has received several awards, including the Queen’s Golden Jubilee Medal (2002).



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

THE SIDEWINDER -- Just quit your constant damned whining and do something positive about it

  Living in a democracy is a wonderful thing, but it comes with responsibilities such as voting and being involved. When the dust settled on Saturdays (October 24 th ) BC election, less than two thirds of the eligible voters * took the time to vote - but the loudest bitchers will probably be among the more than one third of voters who sat on their asses and complained about how all politicians are crooks, etc. How many of you constant whiners have ever done anything close to becoming involved; or do you just like sniveling to hear your own voice? Are you one the arseholes who likes to take advantage of everything our democracy has to offer, without ever contributing anything? And I don't want to listen to your crap about paying taxes, blah, blah, blah. There's more to making democracy work than simply voting and then sitting back and let others carry the ball for you. Too many people seem unwilling to get involved - and follow-up - to make sure elected po

AARON GUNN -- He is, at his core, an ideologue, meaning the facts of any particular issue don’t actually matter

Ben Isitt - City Councillor and Regional Director Victoria City Council and its resident-genius Ben Isitt is back with another dumb idea. Introducing a motion to ban the horse-drawn carriages that have coloured Victoria’s downtown streets for decades, calling them “an outdated mode of transportation”. Are you serious?   No one is actually commuting by horse and carriage. They are here for tourists and residents alike to interact with world-class animals and discover the magic and history of our provincial capital. It’s part of what gives Victoria its charm. And the truth is these horses are treated better than anywhere else in the world. They probably live better lives than many British Columbians.   And talk to anyone who works with these horses and they’ll all tell you the exact same thing: this is what the horses love to do. This is what they were bred for and trained for. This is what gives their lives purpose and meaning. But maybe we shouldn’t be su

THE SIDEWINDER: MacDUFF'S NAIVE CALL

I have just struggled through Cheryl Ashlie's column ( MacDuff’s Call: A political novice with a sizeable ego ), in the Sept. 22 edition of The Maple Ridge News. To say the least, Ashlie's comments are naive and show just how totally out of touch she has become with political reality. Ashlie lauds the decision of Darryl Plecas to accept John Horgan's invitation to become the Speaker of the House, a move described by almost everyone else as self-serving and a betrayal of the trust of the constituents who voted for him. Ashlie claims Plecas' turncoat move will help provide good governance but in making this claim, she fails to explain how he will achieve this lofty goal.

Labels

Show more