If I don’t eat a corn chip at my local taqueria because I have doubts about the lack of research on GMOs and believe it’s because science and the government are in Monsanto’s pocket, I’m not going to put my dining companions at risk of disease. But if I decide not to vaccinate my kid, I make him a potential carrier. He may be able to fight off measles, mumps, rubella, and other illnesses — but what if he spreads a disease to somebody who, for whatever reason, isn’t so lucky?Lessley Anderson • In a new editorial, discussing those who choose not to vaccinate their children, published by The Verge earlier this week. Anderson takes a rather strong stance in the article, arguing that those who choose not to vaccinate are endangering more than just their own families, and even suggests that vaccine deniers are just plain “dumb.” What say you, dear SFB readers? Think Anderson was being a bit rough on the anti-vaccination crowd, or was she dead-on with her critique?
I think as far as the case of Mr. Afridi is concerned, it was in accordance with Pakistani laws and by the Pakistani courts, and we need to respect each other’s legal processes.Pakistan Foreign Ministry spokesperson Moazzam Ali Khan • Discussing the sentence the country gave to Dr. Shakil Afridi for ”conspiring ‘to wage war against Pakistan or depriving it of its sovereignty,’ ‘concealing existence of a plan to wage war against Pakistan’ and ‘condemnation of the creation of the state and advocacy of abolition of its sovereignty’,” according to Pakistani newspaper Dawn. Afridi’s work running a vaccination program that doubled as a DNA-tracing program helped the U.S. find Osama bin Laden, making the decision to imprison Afridi one that has built tension between the two countries. Will the U.S. respect Pakistan’s decision?