Okay, that is clearer, thanks.
When you have pre-existing conditions, then there is a sort of division of responsibility, in most people's minds.
A range of possibilities comes into sight.
I'll lay out a few:
Child really was perfectly healthy, vaccine caused all problems.
Child wasn't really perfectly healthy, vaccine exacerbated pre-existing problems.
Child really wasn't perfectly healthy, however the vaccine caused the damage because the child's health situation was minor and without the vaccine there wouldn't have been anything serious going on.
Child looked okay, but was actually terribly ill, what looks like vaccine damage is totally a coincidence.
and so on, through millions of possible variations.
I think the tendency among vaccine critics, myself included, is to lean hard toward the "vaccine is at fault" side, just because the medical authorities/government lean so hard on the "vaccines didn't do it, just a coincidence" side.
True objectivity is hard to achieve.
When you have pre-existing conditions, then there is a sort of division of responsibility, in most people's minds.
A range of possibilities comes into sight.
I'll lay out a few:
Child really was perfectly healthy, vaccine caused all problems.
Child wasn't really perfectly healthy, vaccine exacerbated pre-existing problems.
Child really wasn't perfectly healthy, however the vaccine caused the damage because the child's health situation was minor and without the vaccine there wouldn't have been anything serious going on.
Child looked okay, but was actually terribly ill, what looks like vaccine damage is totally a coincidence.
and so on, through millions of possible variations.
I think the tendency among vaccine critics, myself included, is to lean hard toward the "vaccine is at fault" side, just because the medical authorities/government lean so hard on the "vaccines didn't do it, just a coincidence" side.
True objectivity is hard to achieve.
