Jeanne Sable (“I’m not getting a vaccine; here’s why,” April 2) is concerned that many of us who are pro vaccine are “aiming to squelch critical thinking about personal health decisions.”

Speaking only for myself, this is not true: critical thinking is to be encouraged.

But what does this mean? I believe it means that when we scrutinize ideas, we do this particularly to the ones we hold near and dear: i.e., the ones that support our beliefs.

In Ms. Sable’s letter there are a number of assertions that do not get this treatment. First, there is the statement that the writer knows more about her body’s health than does Dr. Anthony Fauci. The possibility that an epidemiologist might know something about her immune system that she does not at least needs to be entertained.

Second, the idea that the vaccine is “revolutionary” and was “hastily” developed and is therefore unsafe does not take into account the technological progress that may have made it possible to develop a new vaccine quickly and safely.

These kind of thoughts that run counter to the writer’s conclusion need consideration.

While it is not my intent to tell the writer she is wrong to avoid vaccination (leave that to others with a deeper understanding of the subject), it is my hope that this letter might promote the practice of disciplined reason.

TOM REISH

Westmoreland