The practice of vaccinating healthy newborns indeed raises questions and prompts diverse perspectives. It appears unconventional to subject infants to chemical injections, especially considering historical practices where many cultures did not adopt such measures without facing significant health consequences.
Some argue that historical shorter lifespans cannot be solely attributed to the absence of vaccinations, as various factors like limited access to food, resources, and protection played crucial roles. There is skepticism about assuming a direct causation between increased lifespan and the introduction of vaccinations.
Additionally, the pursuit of longevity as the primary goal might not be universally accepted if it compromises the quality of life due to potential side effects from vaccinations. Concerns are raised about the potential repercussions of suppressing the immune system, contrasting it with natural immunization methods observed in different cultures. For instance, practices like breastfeeding in some cultures or exposing babies to cold in Scandinavia and heat in Asia are seen as natural forms of immunisation that do not suppress the immune system.
The skepticism about current vaccination practices stems from a perceived arrogance in assuming that contemporary medical practices supersede the wisdom of past generations of medical practitioners who laid the groundwork for modern conventions. The shift toward heavily insisting on or even enforcing vaccinations is relatively recent and prompts questioning whether this approach aligns with what’s considered normal or natural.
The discussion around vaccinating newborns and the broader practice of vaccination itself revolves around the tension between modern medical advancements and historical, natural methods of immunization, leading to ongoing debates regarding their necessity, safety, and alignment with past wisdom.