For the past few days, my twitter feed has been filled up with a debate about vaccinations. Leaving children unvaccinated has led to a measles outbreak in the western part of the country. The White House, the vast majority of doctors, and most pundits are criticizing the anti-vaxers while Rand Paul and Chris Christie seem to be saying that parents should have more choice.
The broader issue, though, is a society that’s confused about science and people across the political spectrum picking and choosing their science to justify their positions. Conservatives have denied climate change and evolution. Lefties have rejected genetically modified food. The anti-vaxers come from two positions: libertarians who don’t believe government should be telling them what to do about their children and skeptics, mainly from the left, who erroneously believe that the vaccinations cause autism and other disorders.
An NBC News story attributes the debate to “1) Misinformation on the internet… 2) A decline in trust in political leaders and institutions… 3) The overall politicization of science.” But there’s another reason, related to the second point. When it comes to recommendations about our health and the safety of products, science has been sometimes wrong–and in some very high profile ways.
In the 1950s, DDT was a widely used pesticide that the government assured us was safe. Turns out DDT causes cancer, miscarriages, infertility and other problems and was banned in 1972. From World War II to 1980, asbestos was used widely in construction until it was found to cause cancer. In the early 1980s, we found that a commonly used tampon could lead to a deadly bacterial infection that came to be known as toxic shock syndrome. More recently, BPA, a chemical common in plastic containers including water bottles, has been linked to cancer, heart disease and other health problems.
On the flip side, I grew up eating margarine because we were told it was better for us than butter. Now, we can find evidence to the contrary. And we were told that coffee might cause heart disease or even cancer. Now, the Mayo Clinic says “the health benefits outweigh the risks.”
Personally, I believe that vaccinations are a social responsibility and should be required. I’m confident that climate change is a serious threat caused by industrialization and that governments should intervene to mitigate the impact. And I think politicians who exploit people’s ignorance of these issues for political gain should be defeated.
However, science is often changing as much as it is settled. What is safe today might not be tomorrow. What is considered dangerous now might turnout to be safe later. Before we bash people for being stupid for taking one view or another, we should at least understand their skepticism, even if it’s wrong.
What does the science say about hand-washing and the transmission of pathogens? Just askin’……………………..
Agree anti-vax is on both sides of the political spectrum. While Christie and Paul are getting bashed for their recent statements, lets not forget that just a couple years ago both Obama & Hillary made similar – if not stronger – anti-vax statements as they seemed to side with the “vaccines cause autism” fanatics.
Over the years I’ve known personally of four different families whose happy and alert children suddenly came down with neurological and autistic symptoms right after vaccinations. These parents now have the burden of taking care of their sick children for the rest of their lives.
It’s easy to play the blame game and point fingers at people who have made educated choices about vaccination issues. I guess people will only pay attention to matters that have hit them directly in a bad way.
Funny you should mention BPA. It is controversial for numerous reasons, some not well known to the general public. The National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences believes it’s a serious threat to public health while the Food and Drug Administration has refused to ban it because there is a lack of credible evidence that it is harmful as claimed. The reason for this intra-governmental disagreement is that the FDA uses disinterested government scientists while NIEHS funds academic researchers who have a vested interest in pushing outlandish claims of dire harm from BPA to continuously secure more taxpayer-funded grant money.
Seems strange to spend most of a blog post pointing out example after example of conventional scientific wisdom being proved wrong by further study, then to turn around and say that despite that, you believe that current conventional wisdom regarding vaccines should be forced on people by the government, and that you’re convinced that your opinion regarding climate change is fact.
Normally that kind of rock-solid faith is the province of the religious, but I guess you can choose to believe in anything if you try hard enough.
When I grew up, measles were a regular occurrence. I had them and so did my brothers. We also had chicken pox, mumps and German measles. Those diseases can kill people, particularly young children. Vaccines have made them rare. If there were serious problems with vaccines, after forty years, we would see far more problems than we’ve seen. As for climate change, that’s a bit more faith and believing the science but since it is an existential threat, I’d rather err of the side of reducing carbon emission than find out we were wrong later.
It’s not just 40 years. Vaccines have been around since 1796 – with the first vaccine being for smallpox. Also, due to that vaccine, nearly 200 years later smallpox was eradicated. Within the first 100 years of vaccination, humanity developed vaccines against several of our historical scourges – plague, typhus, rabies, tetanus and cholera. Those who are against vaccination are turning their back on what may literally be the safest and most effective medical technology ever developed. It’s only potential challenger for #1 would be antibiotics.
It is because of the wild success of vaccines that people are able to doubt their effectiveness or safety.
With all due respect, smallpox is one disease; measles, another. In Sunday’s NY Times Editorial Page, Frank Bruni describes the anti-vaccination position as “lunacy”. Such is the polarization over this issue and without deeper reflection, I would side with Mr. Bruni. However, in his editorial he makes a couple of self-defeating statements, one of which is: “…In 2014 there were 644 cases of measles. And while none of those patients died, measles can kill….Before…1963, millions of Americans were infected annually, and 400 to 500 died each year.” What is that mortality rate? Again, measles is not smallpox. With such a low mortality rate, I believe that the other side, the anti-vaccination side, has to be quantified. What are the rates of vaccine related encephalities, for instance, and what are the consequences to the unfortunate child that, as was the case with me, comes to the Emergency Room with a high fever and a shrill scream shortly after receiving his vaccination? I was innocently and naively reassuring to the parents of that child many years back, but such is the case with so many of us trained in medicine: we tend to believe what we are taught. If such misplaced belief is the case with medical professionals, I would suggest that lay people, who may not have that shrill scream in their memories and are not inclined to question authority, give further thought to round out their position on vaccines: for what diseases are they appropriate and are the innocents, the “collateral damage” well quantified.
Excellent point. Vaccinations for ebola and malaria probably would make more sense as a public health investment because of the risk/benefit equation. I think what is lost in this overheated and nasty debate is that vaccines are just one tool, and not all of them are equally effective, equally safe or even equally necessary.
For your info, in the last ten years, a total of 109 people have died from the MMR vaccination, but ZERO people have died from getting the measles infection. As a matter of fact, outbreaks tend to occur in vaccinated populations (just look at recent outbreaks of influenza, measles and whooping cough.)
Getting the measles infection naturally will confer lifelong immunity and seldom results in death if a person’s natural immune system is healthy and strong. Vaccines can only confer short-term immunity (therefore the constant need for boosters) and risks and injuries due to vaccines are very real.
Mabel that is not true.
http://www.newsweek.com/look-anti-vaxxers-monstrously-bad-measles-math-304078
The statistics refers to USA : ZERO deaths due to measles and 131 deaths due to measles vaccine (I checked CDC VAERS database). Vaccines carry serious risks including death. To impose a risky procedure like vaccination on healthy individuals when the risks far outweigh any perceived benefits does not sound like medical prudence.
Natural infection with the measles virus usually runs its course and does not normally cause death in healthy individuals. This is true for other infectious agents like whooping cough and flu. Mortality rates arising from infections tend to occur in developing nations and is largely due to unhygienic living conditions and malnutrition.
Mabel, what is your source on this information? If you log into the government website that tracks this stuff, the number of deaths in people who had recently been vaccinated for the measles was actually closer to 300. However, it is ANY deaths, not necessarily because of the vaccine. Cancer, emphysema, genetic disorders, etc. are the cause of the overwhelming majority of those deaths, NOT the vaccine.
You can make numbers say whatever you want if you play around with them a bit, but that doesn’t make it a valid argument. I have never seen the number 109 anywhere, and I’ve been doing extensive research on the subject because I teach science, including AP Biology, and we frequently discuss current trends, as well as valid scientific arguments.
Not one death has thus far been DIRECTLY attributed to the vaccine. Correlation does not imply causation. The biggest danger of these unvaccinated children are to other people that cannot get the vaccine due to certain health conditions, and if they are exposed to the measles, their risk of death from the disease is much higher than to the average citizen. Children are at less risk of death due to measles than adults, for instance. So any unvaccinated adult is at higher risk if exposed to someone with the measles. In our society, herd immunity protects us all, and the dangers of the actual vaccine are close enough to zero to be statistically zero. Until someone PROVES otherwise, this anti-vax trend is dangerous.
Eilene,
I did check the VAERS database and confirm that there’s 131 cases of death resulting from the measles vaccine. It’s hard to prove direct causation, but it’s safe to say that there’s a link between death and the measles vaccine in these numbers, not any other adverse events.
For your information, disease outbreaks tend to occur in vaccinated populations; for instance a recent measles outbreak in Beijing. (In China everyone has to be vaccinated, it’s a government mandate, no vaccine exemptions). Does this not indicate that the measles vaccine is not protective at all?
In case you’re not aware, if you are an adult over three decades in age, chances are that you’ve lost all immunity that are supposedly conferred by vaccines you’ve taken during childhood. This is because immunity arising from vaccines are short-lived; therefore the constant need for booster shots. As an adult you are as vulnerable to any infection as any other unvaccinated person. One can only rely on a healthy, strong and functional immune system to ward off infections, not vaccines.
I know too many parents whose healthy and happy children suddenly develop neurological and autistic symptoms after a vaccination episode. Could all this really be co-incidental? The parents’ lives have been turned upside down having to take care of chronically ill children. I suppose people will start waking up and questioning only when bad things suddenly happen to them.
Mabel, if you check out the disclaimer on the VAERS site, it flat out tells you that they do not record cause of death, only that the death occurs. It could have been from the measles vaccine, or they could have been hit by a bus. You are throwing out causal links that have in no way, shape, or form been proven scientifically. If I get hit by a bus today, I am not going to blame it on my measles vaccine.
Do I know for 100% fact that the vaccine is not dangerous? NO. But in all the years they have been giving that vaccine, there have not been scientifically validated deaths attributable solely to the vaccine.
Also, this is a passive reporting system. Anyone can go on there and say that they or a loved one or a neighbor had an adverse effect. So, in theory, an anti-vaxxer could go on there and self-report, even if it wasn’t true. Do I think they do that? Probably not… who has that kind of time, but as it is totally possible, and the reports are not collected in a single, scientifically calculated manner, the results become less trustworthy automatically.
I think that any scientist would want to show that the vaccines are dangerous if they truly are…. they could be the hero for saving lives. The fact that no credible scientist has yet come forth with anything like that speaks volumes about how scientifcally accurate some “sources” like the esteemed scientist, Jenny McCarthy, are. You might be right, Mabel… who knows. But you’re going to have to find a peer-reviewed, credible scientific study if you want me to believe it.
Read the disclaimer: https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/index