Here is a random thought and question:
Before advanced weaponry was suggested and manufactured, many battles were fought with swords and shields and walls and landscape.
If you knew that fully armored knights were out there as a potential threat, wouldn't you do everything you can to help prevent them from attacking? I mean, there is no guarantee that they WILL attack, but they HAVE attacked and conquered other villages nearby, so what steps need to be taken?
Well, a wall might be built, swords and shields would be made, and you would likely have a plan for if they do happen to attack.
Of course, shields cannot protect you from everything. Neither can armor. A sword will not guarantee your survival, but it will help. A shield will not shield you from being attacked, but it can help you survive an attack. You do not have the perfect tools, but you have SOME tools to help you survive longer. These weapons sometimes add to the burden - armor, shields, and swords are extremely heavy - and they can also be used against you, no matter how advanced your fighting capabilities are.
So my question is this:
Even though the tools used for survival are not without flaws, would you prefer to simply accept defeat and allow yourself to be attacked without ANY defensive measures?
If you do not like the shield, because it often causes significant pain or even damage while holding it up, would you simply decide to forego the shield and only rely on your wall and sword? What if you don't like the sword, and would prefer to rely only on walls and shields, even though the best possible way to fight off an attacker is with a sword?
Would you give up and say: "Well these tools do not guarantee my survival, and I don't really like the way the sword feels, soooooo yeah, I will just rely on my wall and my shield to protect me, and if I die, so be it." ?
And THEN, what if you have friends in battle with you? Actually, it doesn't even have to be friends, but simply allies. What if your carrying a sword can give a better chance of survival to others? What if some others are too weak or too elderly to even lift a sword or shield, and so they are looking to you to help them survive?
What if YOU were the person who was too weak to lift a shield? Would you hope that your comrade in arms would help protect you by carrying a shield him-/her-self? Would you feel safer if your nearest partner or neighbor was able to use a sword? How would you feel if you were incapable of using a shield or sword, but your roommate CAN use a shield, but simply won't?
There is no guarantee that carrying a shield could prevent others from being attacked or killed, but the odds are better at helping them survive by using your own shield as their protection.
Furthermore, what if using armor helped yourself AND others, but would NOT be any kind of danger to anyone else? What if the sword could only be used defensively, so as not to directly harm anyone but the invader?
Until there is a better solution; a more effective way to eliminate the enemy, we need to use the tools we DO have.
This is how I feel about healthcare in general, and vaccinations in particular.
Yes - medications (or any kind of 'remedies' for that matter), have risks. There can be adverse effects. They can be dangerous.
Yes - vaccinations can trigger unwanted adverse effects. Vaccinations are not perfect, and they do not guarantee your immunity to an attack. But they have been scientifically proven to make a significant difference.
These are the best known ways to battle these diseases - for now. So until we have a better way to fight off illness, until we have a better solution, this is our best defense.
Yes - there are other ways to try and prevent developing illness. Eating healthy, keeping active, and avoiding gratuitous damaging behaviour, will all help (like the shield and wall and armor), but if you die from the attack, or if your comrade was attacked and killed right beside you, in hindsight would you have continued to refuse using another well-known weapon? Because of the risk of damaging your shoulder? Because the sword hinders your movement and flexibility? Because you think it might make you feel worse during the fight? Or because the odds are not up to your standard?
We need to improve efficacy, we need a more concrete solution, but for right now, this is the BEST solution we have.
P.S. Or take vehicular seatbelts for example. They are not perfect. In certain crash situations, the seatbelt can actually injure you MORE than if your seatbelt was off, or could even result in fatality. But, right now, seatbelts are also our best possible 'weapon' to avoid serious injuries, or worse, when being involved in a car accident. Would you prefer to go without a seatbelt just because it hurts your stomach and is not always 100% effective?