Or does first amendment override such cases and they can go on undeterred? After all, this is a case where this speech caused direct harm to particular individuals.
I wonder if, though, he could be prosecuted for practicing medicine without a license. Certainly a foreign physician without a US license (or a licensed US physician in a state in which she is not licensed) would be subject to that.
As a non-physician (and non-former physician), if I tried propagandizing on this issue I think I'd be safe. But it's not the license that makes you a physician.
Unfortunately, while 97% sounds great, "effectiveness" must be considered in light of the infectiousness of the virus. In this case it appears measles may be so infectious (eg one infected child can sneeze and expose an entire school, so-called "superspreaders"), that vaccination will cause a "honeymoon period" that ends with a gigantic epidemic.[I discussed this earlier here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13656252]
Now we are pretty much stuck with measles vaccination, but I doubt the original program would have been begun if they had today's knowledge. Anyway, when/if this giant measles epidemic happens, that is where you should point your fingers.
The honeymoon period, role of vaccine failure rate vs R0 value in epidemic generation, and herd immunity are all derived from the same general SIR models... So I don't see how you can reject what I am saying while still accepting the herd immunity concept (which is generally accepted).
EDIT: I wanna add to this that if you make things government-mandated and force it on people, you only give the conspiracy theorists more reason to be suspicious.
Why hasn't the government made it mandatory then (IMO it should be) ?
There is no controversy about SSRIs' ability to provoke suicide ideation in people who take these drugs.
http://ahrp.org/prozac-revisited-concerns-about-suicides-sur...
Commonly used psychiatric drugs are notorious for worsening patients' conditions.
Which one should we sue? Slippery slope. In the end no one was forced anyone not to vaccinate the kids.
If vaccines are made mandatory then the state can fine/jail the parents and do them even if the parents chose not to
My point still stands. If it was so ironclad, it would illegal to refuse to vaccinate. Refuse to "care" about your child and you go to jail and lose the child Yet, you can refuse to vaccinate him/her and suffer no consequences. So you have a choice. If I tell you that you do not have to vaccinate, why should I be sued or jailed?
Let's start fresh:
1. Vaccines apparently are not mandatory. You can vaccinate your child or not.
2. Someone that's telling parents not to vaccinate, shouldn't be going to jail, because he's not doing anything illegal (see point 1).
3. The state should make vaccines mandatory first, which IMO is the correct choice.
There's no FUD or anti-vaccine thing, simply saying that as long as vaccines are optional, people should not go to jail for saying don't vaccinate.