So the media is asking if being an 'anti-vaxxer' should be illegal.
I think the bigger question is why are we supposed to listen to an organisation (the Media) that is owned by 'big pharma'?
Notice that the Media (big pharma) isn't directly calling for being anti-vaxxers to be declared criminals, they simply ask the question and lay out some fairly basic information (not all of it, mind you) and hopes that people jump to attention.
I mean, it's not like vaccinations have ever been withdrawn from use due to bad side effects like it was in Japan in 1989-91 or Britain in 2009.
I mean, it's not like the manufacturers of these vaccinations and the doctors who administer them are completely immune from Civil lawsuits if the vaccinations kill or permanently disable someone. Oh wait, thay are.
For the record, I am pro-vaccination, but I very much like the media programming whereby they attempt to label people who may have legitimate concerns over the industry as kooks. We should all have a right to be able to question something without being labeled undesirable.
It would be a different story if, like most other professions, the company that provides the vaccination were legally liable for the outcome. Perhaps then they'd have a bit better incentive to have a zero harm vaccine. Either that, or they'd just jack up the prices of their already expensive vaccines (which the government is happily making mandatory for all children) to cover the cost.
Do vaccinations have a place? Yes. Should it be that a child by the age of 18 has 69 does of 16 different vaccinations? Sounds like a lot when I put it that way, doesn't it.