手机码报免费资料来源:中国人民银行征信中心 2019-12-02 20:41:12 A-A+


  To the Editor:

  In his excellent Op-Ed, “Swaying ‘Vaccine-Hesitant’ Parents” (March 9), Wajahat Ali poignantly underlines the risks posed to all of us by the unconscionable behavior of the “anti-vaxxers.” It is rather ironic that this group is composed of people who have lived protected by the “herd immunity” that is now in grave danger of being destroyed by their refusal to participate in the very process necessary to continue that protection.

  As to individual states being able to require immunization or not, or provide opt-out provisions, this is absurd. Just as the measles virus can travel from Israel to Williamsburg, Brooklyn, so can highly infectious diseases move across state lines.

  It is time for the adults in Congress to take charge before we have a major epidemic.

  Burt BloomBrooklyn

  To the Editor:

  When I started my pediatric practice nearly 40 years ago, a strong selling point in vaccination’s favor was the idea of community and shared responsibility — by vaccinating your child you also protected your neighbors’ children. Unfortunately, the willingness to take even a minuscule personal risk in the name of the communal good has long since eroded. I rarely bring up the “protect your neighbor” argument anymore.

  I live in Northern California, an area where low vaccination rates and recurring outbreaks of pertussis not surprisingly coexist. A measles epidemic in the near future seems inevitable. As long as parents believe that they and their families live in self-contained silos, and fail to see the impact of their choices on the families around them, children will continue to suffer needlessly from vaccine-preventable diseases.

  Mark SloanSanta Rosa, Calif.

  To the Editor:

  Re “This Is the Truth About Vaccines,” by Brett P. Giroir, Robert R. Redfield and Jerome M. Adams (Op-Ed,, March 6):

  The truth about vaccines is that although they may be effective population-wide at reducing the incidence of certain diseases, when they are widely used, a significant number of children will have life-threatening or life-altering reactions and be permanently damaged. No drug is 100 percent safe and free of side effects for every person.

  The government acknowledges this fact by routinely compensating families whose children are affected through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. This has to be done so that vaccine manufacturers are shielded from tort liability in these cases.

  Babies under 1 year old receive the largest number of vaccines, though their neurological and immune systems are still very much undeveloped. Parents are the best persons to weigh the risks and benefits of vaccine use in their children.

  Pamela H. PilchHenrico, Va.The writer is a lawyer and a former law clerk for the United States Court of Federal Claims, which reviews appeals for denial of benefits by the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.

  To the Editor:

  I was born at a time when swimming pools and movie theaters closed over concerns about polio outbreaks. As a survivor of childhood polio, I know firsthand the trauma of vaccine-preventable disease, which is why vaccine hesitancy terrifies me.

  I have visited more than 10 countries taking part in polio eradication efforts. And now, I must do even more in my own country, where diseases of bygone eras are again afflicting communities.

  This week I am testifying in front of the Maine Legislature on behalf of a bill to end nonmedical exemptions for childhood vaccinations, and I encourage readers to support similar bills in their own communities.

  I wish those who are hesitant to vaccinate their children here and across the globe could talk to some of the mothers I’ve met during my travels — mothers whose children have been paralyzed by polio who wish they had made a different choice. To your readers who do have a choice, I implore you to vaccinate and protect your children.

  Ann Lee HusseySouth Berwick, Me.

  To the Editor:

  Re “The Anti-Vaxxers’ War on Truth,” by Frank Bruni (column, March 10):

  I read and respect Frank Bruni’s opinions the majority of the time, but his description of anti-vaxxers is a bit off course. Surely, there are many extreme anti-vaxxers, but there are also many who are not extreme, like me, who feel that the vaccine schedule for children has gotten a bit out of hand.

  I have four healthy adult children who received all of the required vaccines as infants and children in the early 1980s. I never questioned it then, but I question it now. The vaccine schedule has almost tripled from when they were born to today. On top of this increase is the law that protects pharmaceutical companies from any liability associated with the manufacture of administered vaccines, enacted in 1986.

  How much testing has gone into this increase in vaccines? We are asking quite a lot of these little bodies whose immune systems and brain development are in the early stages. It’s not that we don’t need lifesaving vaccines; it’s that we don’t need so many, so soon.

  Vanessa PodgorskiGlenview, Ill.

  To the Editor:

  If a school cafeteria negligently fails to maintain kitchen safety standards, and students sicken or die, school officials may be criminally prosecuted and civilly sued. If a parent knowingly fails to provide her child with necessary health care, nutrition or medical treatment, the state can remove that child from the home and prosecute the parent for child abuse and neglect. But if that same parent decides not to vaccinate her child and sends that child to school where he infects other students, who then may sicken or die, what are the consequences?

  In America, anti-vaxxers may have the “right” to their self-serving, delusional beliefs, but not when it affects the health or safety of other people, including their children or yours.

  Laurence MillerBoca Raton, Fla.

  To the Editor:

  I believe that the attack on anti-vaxxers is really an attack on mothers. That is why the argument has been so easy to dismiss. What do mothers know against a roomful of scientists? In fact, Frank Bruni starts by stating, “How many studies do you have to throw at the vaccine hysterics before they quit?” The word “hysterical” is one that has a long history of being used against women in dismissing their voices.

  Many of the mothers who make up the anti-vax movement are intelligent, educated women who have researched the issue thoroughly and want to make the best decisions for their children. Most of them did not want to be part of this movement — they were forced into it, witnessing regression in their children after vaccination. But we keep telling these women that what they are saying is not true. How can we dismiss so many women, so many mothers?

  But on this issue, there is no discussion allowed. No one is allowed to say anything against vaccines, even if there is growing evidence that they may not be safe for all children.

  If you want to hold up on your pledge to raise women’s voices, I wonder if you would allow a woman’s voice on this issue?

  Susan WalterichHamburg, N.Y.

  To the Editor:

  Yes, the anti-vaxxers are wrong and the effects disastrous. However, anti-vaxxers’ motives seem understandable in light of the vast social and environmental harm caused by large entities misusing science to their own profit-driven, amoral ends, while spreading disinformation and corrupting willing legislators, regulatory agencies and parts of the media. There is no climate change; pesticides, fire-retardant chemicals and phthalates are safe; your privacy is protected; cigarettes don’t cause cancer. These big lies lead to big harm.

  Most of us have little defense against threats posed by toxic manufacturing processes, toxic products and toxic information. Though misguided, deciding against vaccination could be an attempt to keep children safe in one of the few areas where parents might feel they have some control.

  Adrian Ayres FisherOak Park, Ill.




  “【谢】【谢】【导】【演】。” 【回】【到】【休】【息】【室】,【白】【墨】【晚】【有】【些】【沮】【丧】。 【易】【连】【枫】【等】【人】【十】【分】【不】【解】,“【怎】【么】【了】?” “【唉】,【我】【果】【然】【太】【稚】【嫩】,【导】【演】【给】【出】【五】【分】【钟】【命】【题】【表】【演】,【可】【有】【效】【时】【间】【内】【我】【却】【没】【有】【表】【演】【完】,【节】【奏】【和】【剧】【情】【的】【把】【控】【太】【差】【劲】。” 【罗】【婧】【安】【慰】,“【别】【气】【馁】,【至】【少】【通】【过】【本】【次】【试】【镜】【发】【现】【自】【己】【的】【不】【足】【之】【处】,【我】【们】【有】【收】【获】【的】。” “【嗯】。”【可】

  【对】【于】【伊】【利】【丹】【的】【反】【水】,【铁】【牧】【是】【举】【双】【手】【欢】【迎】【的】,【所】【以】【并】【没】【有】【过】【多】【压】【榨】【对】【方】【的】【价】【值】,【能】【及】【时】【获】【得】【对】【方】【的】【情】【报】,【就】【是】【最】【大】【的】【收】【获】。 【又】【谈】【了】【一】【会】,【双】【方】【确】【定】【了】【一】【些】【细】【节】,【便】【各】【自】【离】【开】【了】。【回】【到】【路】【西】【法】【之】【墙】,【费】【隆】【纳】【斯】【便】【告】【知】【铁】【牧】【已】【经】【得】【到】【了】【伊】【利】【丹】【的】【通】【知】,【可】【以】【提】【供】【转】【职】【任】【务】【了】。 【不】【过】【首】【先】【要】【解】【决】【的】【是】【费】【隆】【纳】【斯】【的】【语】【言】【问】【题】

  【第】【一】【千】【一】【十】【七】【章】【欧】【阳】【剑】 【就】【在】【欧】【阳】【剑】【欢】【迎】【落】【下】【之】【后】,【所】【有】【人】【的】【目】【光】【都】【是】【看】【向】【了】【陆】【风】,【此】【时】【胡】【秘】【书】【向】【前】【一】【步】【站】【在】【了】【陆】【风】【的】【身】【前】【对】【着】,***【怒】【道】。“【欧】【阳】【剑】【你】【最】【好】【想】【清】【楚】【了】,【这】【位】【可】【是】【陈】【少】【爷】【的】【朋】【友】,【并】【不】【是】【你】【可】【以】【随】【意】【的】【欺】【辱】【的】,【如】【果】【今】【天】【你】【在】【这】【里】【感】【动】【了】【路】【先】【生】,【那】【么】【到】【时】【候】【后】【果】【你】【自】【己】【要】【负】【责】” 【胡】【秘】【书】【虽】【然】【对】

  【前】【一】【段】【时】【间】【颈】【椎】【出】【问】【题】【了】,【脖】【子】【无】【法】【转】【动】,【耽】【搁】【了】【几】【天】,【后】【边】【开】【始】【陆】【续】【更】【新】。手机码报免费资料。【因】【为】【是】【晚】【上】,【天】【气】【越】【发】【的】【冷】【了】。 【即】【便】【身】【为】【修】【士】,【身】【体】【虽】【没】【有】【刻】【意】【强】【化】【也】【已】【经】【比】【凡】【人】【强】【悍】【不】【少】,【一】【直】【在】【运】【气】【御】【寒】,【陌】【灵】【眉】【却】【还】【是】【觉】【得】【有】【些】【冷】。 【夜】【妖】【物】【的】【太】【阴】【之】【力】,【未】【免】【也】【太】【强】【悍】【了】【些】…… 【这】【冰】【天】【雪】【地】【的】,【险】【些】【就】【要】【把】【她】【冻】【死】【了】。 【好】【在】【她】【找】【了】【这】【么】【久】,【终】【于】【看】【清】【了】【迎】【面】【飞】【来】【的】【飞】【行】【法】【器】【中】【的】【人】【影】。 【法】

  【突】【如】【其】【来】【的】【变】【故】【惊】【到】【了】【南】【江】【河】【畔】【驻】【足】【的】【人】。 【朱】【雀】【雕】【像】【表】【面】【散】【发】【出】【金】【红】【色】【光】【芒】,【好】【似】【燃】【烧】【的】【火】【焰】【一】【般】。 “【朱】【雀】【显】【灵】【了】。” 【众】【人】【惊】【呼】。 【侃】【侃】【而】【谈】【的】【青】【年】【睁】【大】【眼】【睛】【盯】【着】【朱】【雀】【雕】【像】,【再】【三】【揉】【了】【揉】【眼】【睛】【确】【认】【自】【己】【有】【没】【有】【看】【错】。 【他】【之】【前】【说】【的】【那】【些】【话】【一】【部】【分】【是】【真】【的】,【一】【部】【分】【是】【他】【胡】【编】【乱】【造】【的】。 【他】【呆】【若】【木】【鸡】,【喃】

  【周】【末】,【陈】【一】【墨】【把】【向】【挚】【带】【回】【了】【河】【坊】【街】,【在】【那】【个】【叫】【做】【旧】【曾】【谙】【的】【小】【院】【里】,【她】、【向】【挚】、【还】【有】【宋】【河】【生】【签】【了】【一】【份】【协】【议】——【向】【挚】【入】【股】【旧】【曾】【谙】,【从】【今】【往】【后】,【旧】【曾】【谙】【赚】【的】【每】【一】【分】【钱】【向】【挚】【都】【有】【分】【红】,【算】【是】【他】【帮】【陈】【一】【墨】【做】【材】【料】【研】【发】【的】【工】【资】。 【旧】【曾】【谙】【这】【个】【名】【字】,【向】【挚】【不】【是】【第】【一】【次】【听】【见】。【去】【年】【设】【计】【系】【大】【名】【鼎】【鼎】【的】【一】【等】【奖】【第】【一】【名】【作】【品】【就】【叫】【这】【个】【名】【字】。

  “【希】【望】【我】【能】【够】【看】【穿】【战】【争】【迷】【雾】!” “【希】【望】【我】【能】【够】【获】【得】【额】【外】【的】【两】【套】【装】【备】【栏】!” “【如】【果】【不】【能】【两】【者】【共】【存】,【还】【是】【最】【希】【望】【我】【能】【够】【看】【穿】【战】【争】【迷】【雾】。【另】【外】【如】【果】【可】【以】【额】【外】【获】【得】【装】【备】【栏】【自】【然】【最】【好】,【哪】【怕】【少】【一】【点】【也】【没】【关】【系】!” 【这】【一】【次】,【周】【小】【波】【的】【愿】【望】【再】【次】【有】【了】【改】【变】。 【之】【所】【以】【这】【样】【选】,【是】【因】【为】【这】【一】【局】【周】【小】【波】【变】【成】【了】【辅】【助】,【而】【非】【上】【单】

  【强】【烈】【的】【眩】【晕】【效】【果】【逐】【渐】【消】【失】,【当】【何】【北】【再】【次】【睁】【开】【眼】【时】【却】【看】【见】【自】【己】【正】【在】【一】【个】【奇】【怪】【的】【小】【屋】【子】【里】,【因】【为】【这】【里】【没】【有】【光】【源】,【却】【很】【亮】,【让】【人】【感】【觉】【这】【里】【的】【所】【有】【东】【西】【都】【在】【发】【光】。 【小】【屋】【子】【里】【有】【着】【十】【把】【椅】【子】【和】【一】【张】【大】【圆】【桌】,【何】【北】【自】【己】【就】【坐】【在】【其】【中】【一】【把】【椅】【子】【上】,【现】【在】【除】【了】【何】【北】【已】【经】【有】【五】【个】【人】【坐】【在】【了】【椅】【子】【上】,【还】【有】【四】【把】【椅】【子】【还】【没】【有】【人】,【何】【北】【试】【着】【张】【嘴】

  • 央视新闻
  • 央视财经
  • 央视军事
  • 社会与法
  • 央视农业