The classic moral dilemma of the runaway train is one that pits the good of the many vs the good of one.  In the dilemma a train is headed for two tracks: one has 5 people on it and the other has only 1 person on it.  You are positioned at the lever that will determine which direction the train will take.  What do you choose and why?

For many this situation is one that is wrestled with daily.  The only difference is that this train is an infectious disease and choosing to spare the many, can violate the fundamental rights of the one.  Scientist and government officials are confronted with this problem when the issue of how to preserve the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness can cost millions of lives due to an infectious disease.  This has given rise to various debates about how to quarantine, isolate, and research infectious diseases.  One debate that is close to home involving these issues is the right to choose vaccination.  While the studies of Andrew Wakefield have been retracted and proven wrong on many fronts, the principle of the issue remains prevalent.  Who has the right to choose the level of health care and control over their own body, the government or the individual.

For those who seek to increase vaccine laws and regulations the concepts of herd immunity and solid scientific evidence serve as a solid foundation for support.  Many point to the massive decrease, and almost elimination of measles in children in the United States as firm evidence of the success of vaccines.  This principle of the common good is also relatable to the stance of many on quarantine and isolation.  The personal beliefs of one person should not put the lives and health of thousands in danger.  The science behind these innovations against diseases is both proven in concept and practice for many years.  The only problem is the element of human nature in this system.  While science is an unbiased weapon against diseases, many examples show it can be manipulated and abused by those in power.

For too many the examples of a government abusing the trust of the public with their health is an all too recent event.  The Nazi regime was infamous for carrying out ruthless experiments in the hope of bettering mankind in the fight against diseases.  Thousands were dissected, abused, and killed without consent or knowledge of the procedures.  While this example seems to be a distant memory, the Tuskegee Experiment proves it can happen close to home.  In 1932 was a blatant abuse of government power.  The men involved were unknowingly infected with syphilis and allowed to die without treatment or knowledge of what was actually happening.  100 men died due to the disease, infecting their wives, and children with the terrible blight.  The study was unethical and racist in nature, yielding results that were too saturated in prejudice to give any scientific knowledge.  This model of experimentation without consent was repeated in Guatemala with much of the same results.

The abuse of power of government health officials can be as deadly as the diseases they claim to attempt to cure.  Public fallout and distrust with any government involvement in health can keep legitimate vaccines, treatment, and experiments from being seen as credible.  These examples of abuse only feed into conspiracies of  government euthanizing muslims in foreign countries, pharmaceutical companies seeking to cause autism, and shady government undertakings to sedate the population.  The fact that these abuses are most common in minority populations, african americans, jews, and immigrants, only serves to further marginalize a population and leave millions susceptible to both infectious diseases and social abuses.