Although I understand your point of view, I can’t agree that an inferior treatment should be substituted – at public expense – for one that those best qualified to judge the evidence considered both better and completely safe. (Of course there’s nothing to stop those who refuse to accept the evidence arranging private treatment at their own expense).

And, yes, I agree that the experts do sometimes get things wrong – and we should always try to see for ourselves, not just follow blindly. But in this particular case the world-wide evidence was known to be overwhelmingly against the scare story, and this should have been made clear by all the responsible print and broadcast media.

So we’ll just have to agree to differ on this!
By the way, I think we’re the only two left here

“If for some reason, good or not, people have lost confidence saying, that they are wrong to have lost it and demanding they regain it, because you are an expert, doesn’t strike me as a winning strategy.”

That is very well put & I agree absolutely.

The advocates of “I’m an expert-believe me ” always see the issues entirely from the point of view of the establishment, who of course want things to be as they have planned.Any change upsets the plan & probably costs money.

In the case of MMR-they were saying to mothers of young children-look , OK, there has been some evidence ( Lancet) of (potentialy severe) side effects-but the risks are vanishingly small-so take that risk.And forget your fears of single jab overload-its not a problem. And anyway you can’t have three jabs seperately.

And they got the predictable response from mothers who refused to take a risk which they believed existed.

The lesson of burgers & CJD was indeed in their minds-and it was two fold.Firstly the experts were wrong. Secondly the responsible politician believed them & put his own child at risk- in public- because of it.
These are the people responsible for public scepticism-Inexpert “experts” and complacent politicians.

So in effect what you are advocating is that even if offering the option of individual jabs to those who had doubts would have upped the immunisation rates the the levels needed you would still have insisted on MMR or nothing even if it had meant, more illness, more permanent disablement and more deaths.

Just to prove that the scientists were right.

Lets not forget that less than a decade before the same scientific establishment had overwhelmingly ruled out a link between eating beef and nvBSE, only to have had to reverse it’s view within five years.

If for some reason, good or not, people have lost confidence saying, that they are wrong to have lost it and demanding they regain it, because you are an expert, doesn’t strike me as a winning strategy.

Peter.

Not “my way”, and nothing really to do with government; but the way recommended on the basis of evidence by the medical experts. Otherwise we’ll be heading back to the dark ages, ignoring evidence and making decisions based on prejudice and ignorance.

Of course that does NOT mean we all have to follow the “experts” like sheep. But (going back to the origin of this thread), there are some situations where those who have the training and expertise need to be trusted and, where cynicism and lack of trust can damage individuals and society.

It also points up the need for reliable, accurate information from the media, especially in an era where the internet can so easily spread misinformation and wild rumour, as well as being a marvellous way of spreading genuine information.