News coverage of vaccine controversies drives down support for vaccines

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: artistpoet

The same Italian court that jailed scientists for manslaughter because they didn't predict an earthquake?

As I understood it, the scientists were not convicted for failing to predict an earthquake, but for failing to properly inform the public of the potential dangers and appropriate preparations and/or responses, resulting in many people being killed by staying indoors. It was subsequently overturned on appeal because it was not the scientists' responsibility to warn and/or advise the general public; it was the bureaucrats who dropped the ball.

Courts are not where scientific evidence is validated.

Strictly speaking, yes. But that's why we have expert witnesses whose credentials are approved/accepted by the court prior to testimony -- "voir dire." In theory at least, these expert witnesses would testify to all evidence as known -- the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So the court would be validating the expert witness' credentials, not the scientific evidence testified to by the expert witnesses.

a reply to: Boadicea

Yes I know exactly what you are saying ...

The recent hysterical propaganda campaign who's agenda is forced vaccination needs to countered as you and others have been doing.

Actually we are having small victory's thank goodness
By victory I mean making level headed investigation and research to keep the wolf of Tyranny at bay

Like I always say ... It is about free choice and the right to choose

btw Thank you for all your hard work and courage ... It is respected and appreciated

As for myself ... I prefer a natural approach to all things
Hence good nutrition through wholesome foods and allowing the natural immune system to do it's work

My concern is that with all the unnatural stuff/ chemicals which are everywhere in most everything ... that the natural immune system is mostly damaged or impeded by over load of crap basically

a reply to: artistpoet

Thank you for your kind words And right back at ya! I appreciate your contributions. It's a serious issue with implications and repercussions that go far beyond just to vax or not vax. For most of us, there's not much more we can do than to exercise our right to free speech and political dissent to engage in the discussion. I still want to believe that when people are given the facts and the truth to make an informed decision, we do the right thing. Hence the need to hide and obfuscate the truth, while personally attacking anyone who dares to disagree. Divide-and-conquer.

a reply to: Boadicea

No, courts of law are not where scientific evidence is validated. Period. The bar for evidence is WAAAAY lower than in science.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Boadicea

No, courts of law are not where scientific evidence is validated. Period. The bar for evidence is WAAAAY lower than in science.

Well, I' have to agree at least in part, but I'd take it farther -- both courts and science are less than trustworthy in what passes for evidence and what is omitted... all depending on who's running the show. Our justice system has degenerated into a legal system, while true science has degenerated into consensus of opinion. Both can do better.