Neudorf needs to rethink his stance on vaccines

By Letter to the Editor on November 19, 2021.

You recently ran a column by Lethbridge East MLA Nathan Neudorf who holds the opinion that an individual’s right to “security of the person” extends to the “right” to refuse to be vaccinated.
As we have recently celebrated our 102nd Remembrance Day, perhaps a little history might be in order:
By 1918, 40 million people had died in the Great War. Over 50 million people died in the 1918-20 influenza pandemic.
Recall that there was neither vaccine nor cure for this flu. Over the next decades, vaccines were developed against many deadly diseases.
My bet is that, before entering Grade One, Mr. Neudorf and his childhood friends (having had the good fortune to be born in Canada where many vaccines were developed and all children entering school are provided with vaccines) had all been given the following shots:
 * Diphtheria, tetanus, and whooping cough
* Polio
* Measles, mumps, and rubella
* Chickenpox
* Influenza
It’s safe to assume that neither Mr. Neudorf nor any of his classmates went blind after having had measles, were crippled by polio, or died from diptheria, whooping cough, chickenpox, or the flu.
These diseases were leading causes of disability and death among children prior to vaccines.
Between 1950-55, in Canada alone there were roughly 1,000 cases of polio and 100 deaths from the disease every single year.
In poor countries right now, up to 60,000 children every year go blind from contracting measles.
Perhaps if Nathan Neudorf’s parents had put the “security of his person” above the need to be vaccinated to protect him and his friends, his life may have turned out quite differently. Unvaccinated people who contract COVID – and survive – often find their lives changed forever.
Mr. Neudorf should rethink his stance.
Leslie Lavers