botulism toxin was still a toxin.
If she was going around saying "Smallpox is a disease, I don't want it injected into me." would she get the same reception?
In controlled amounts under medical supervision
Which is exactly how Emma Thompson would get it
it can have positive uses
And she has decided that none of them are useful enough to her for to get it. Which is perfectly fine! But going around saying "Because it's a poison" is more like anti-vaxxer medicine than anything else to me. Start at the the other end. Say it's way more extreme than you would have done to yourself for results you don't value.
I don't think paralyzed facial muscles and frozen expressions are a positive use for actresses
Good botox is like a good boob job. You don't notice them. The difference between the two I had, both of which had to affect my forehead, were night and day, and I'd challenge many people who know me to notice the second job.
No medical procedure comes without risk. It's not a choice *I* particularly respect. But to trash talk it because it's poison and because bad Botox adminstration exists--that a weak-assed argument, but irritatingly to me, a very popular one.
And you know what effect that has? Pushes the positive uses of botox further into the shadows. I've read "botox treatment serves no good purpose" articles on IO9 masquerading as science (I haven't seen their scathing expose of hair plugs, but I am sure it's coming right up) where under pressure they added half a sentence mentioning that "some positive uses exist" And adds one more bit of credence to the people who think injecting disease into you is badbadkillyourkidsbad.
Yup, that served society, thanks media.