首页> 外文期刊>Advances in Sexual Medicine >How Silencing of Dissent in Science Impacts Woman. The Gardasil® Story
【24h】

How Silencing of Dissent in Science Impacts Woman. The Gardasil® Story

机译:科学中异议的沉默如何影响女性。 Gardasil®的故事

获取原文
           

摘要

> The issues of safety and efficacy of certain vaccines remains extremely contentious. The venues for this debate have included periodicals, documentary films, and an ever-increasing number of on-line sites. While debate in science is not only a common occurrence but a fundamental tenet of the scientific community, it only works when divergent opinions can be heard. When those who hold an opposing opinion are denigrated and/or marginalized by those holding the majority opinion such as in the issue of vaccination, where cultural authority for the issue is owned by the profession of medicine, both science and the public lose. What is often forgotten are the benefits derived from the questioning of drug safety that not only extends to the public but to physicians who rely on the truthfulness and accuracy of the information that is being supplied to them by manufactures and government agencies. While most physicians believe they are functioning in their patient’s best interest when making vaccine recommendations, these recommendations by in large have become a matter of rote and are made because most physicians have bought into the “vaccines are safe” mantra. What most physicians don’t realize is they have unknowingly been recruited by big pharma to assist in shutting down the vaccination debate. This suppression of vaccine opposition even among academics, is becoming more commonplace and will lead down a slippery slope that will silence opposition science, and the dangers that come with this. Those who question vaccine safety have been ostracized, misquoted and even made to appear mentally ill by those who hold the majority opinion on the issue. Physicians who question vaccine safety have had their licenses threatened or have been fired from positions. Tactics such as name calling and the use of terms such as pseudo-science, (even when the evidence being presented is from widely accepted peer-reviewed journals) or “conspiracy theorists” which has the effect of placing those holding the minority opinion in the category of such groups as 9/11 truthers, are not uncommon. Other methods of curtailing the presentation of opposing vaccine views have included pressuring venues not to allow anti-vaccination proponents to appear, or using the media to “expose” anti-vaccination groups as “crack-pots” while simultaneously presenting the majority opinion and the presenters as the sole arbiters on the issue. The more extreme elements of the pro-vaccine group will even make the statement that the issue is settled and there is no need for discussion.

“Has there ever been a society which has died of dissent? Several have died of conformity in our lifetime.” Jacob Bronowski in Science and Human Values
机译:>某些疫苗的安全性和有效性问题仍然极具争议。这场辩论的场所包括期刊,纪录片,以及越来越多的在线站点。虽然科学辩论不仅是科学界的普遍现象,而且是科学界的基本宗旨,但只有在听到分歧意见时,它才起作用。当持反对意见的人被持多数意见的人贬低和/或边缘化时,例如在疫苗接种问题上,该问题的文化权威归医学界所有,科学和公众都将遭受损失。人们常常忘记的是,从药物安全性质疑中获得的好处不仅扩展到了公众,而且还扩展到了依靠制造商和政府机构提供给他们的信息的真实性和准确性的医生。尽管大多数医生认为他们在建议疫苗时都符合患者的最大利益,但这些建议大都是死记硬背,之所以提出这些建议,是因为大多数医生都购买了“疫苗安全”的口头禅。大多数医生没有意识到的是,他们在不知不觉中被大型制药公司招募来协助终止疫苗接种的辩论。即使在学者中,这种对疫苗反对的压制也变得越来越普遍,并且将导致一个滑坡,使反对科学以及由此带来的危险沉默。那些对疫苗安全性提出质疑的人被对此问题持有多数意见的人排斥,错误引用甚至使他们精神病。质疑疫苗安全性的医师被吊销驾照的威胁或被开除。称呼等策略和伪科学等术语的使用(即使所提供的证据来自广为接受的同行评审期刊)或“阴谋理论家”,其效果是将持少数观点的人置于诸如9/11真实者这样的群体的类别并不少见。减少出现反对疫苗意见的其他方法包括对场所施加压力,不允许出现抗疫苗支持者,或使用媒体将“抗疫苗人群”“暴露”,同时提出多数意见和建议。主持人作为唯一的仲裁员。亲疫苗小组的极端分子甚至会声明问题已解决,无需讨论。

“ 曾经有一个因异议而死的社会吗?

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号