Although they are still very much in the minority, there is a growing group of people who reject the idea of vaccinating children. I will provide a few links to some anti-vaccination sites later in the diary. I cannot be objective about the topic, I am a health care provider and while I do not see modern medicine as impenetrable Deity that should not be challenged, I am intrigued by the fundamental anti-authoritarian attitude that pervades this rejection.
The essential arguments against vaccinations are that they do more harm than good, don't necessarily provide the immunity they are supposed to, and that there are links to the development of other disorders.
Some, not all who oppose vaccinations, adhere to a naturalistic/holistic approach that rejects common mainstream medical assumptions. An example of that philosophy follows along like this:that the germ theory of infection is simply not valid. If a child develops measles or whooping cough it is assumed that some other source either dietary or environmental is the causative agent. While it is foolish to rule out either dietary or environmental factors when discussing diseases, it is equally disturbing to me dismiss the idea that bacterias can cause infection. It is true that as of late many doctors are taking a more conservative approach to the treatment of certain common childhood aliments. Many doctors are not using antibiotics to treat ear infections, once a common practice because it isn't always clear whether the source is bacterial or viral. Improper use of antibiotics can lead to secondary more dangerous infections. It is fair to critique our reliance on antibiotics while being aware there are many instances in which they are necessary.
I am trying to imagine one of these practitioners explaining to
the parent of an immune suppressed child that a dietary factor caused their septic episode. If you don't have an immune system, you will become ill if exposed to certain things. If you have an immune system you can still get ill if exposed to certain things.
I am comfortably in the middle when it comes to the consideration of the usefulness of alternative medicine and homeopathic approaches for therapeutic use. I have seen instances in which it was useful an adjunct
not a supplemental approach. We once agreed at my place of work to use a hypnotist to help alleviate severe nausea when nothing else worked and it did bring relief.
In many ways, vaccinations are a victim of their own success. Does anybody remember polio? Right before vaccinations were developed, it affected 21,000 people in 1952. Prior to that there were multiple cycles of outbreaks often affecting 10,000 to 25,000 people, mainly children, a year. Paralyzed muscles from polio often left victims in an iron lung.
The last known polio case was in 1979. The polio vaccine was developed in 1955 and by 1965 there were only 61 reported cases.
Children no longer receive smallpox immunizations and they stopped giving routine shots for it in 1972, in the US. The last known outbreak was in known outbreak was in 1977 in Somalia. Smallpox, or Variola Virus, a deadly disease that cause death and disfigurement. It was smallpox that gave us the concept of vaccination, since it was discovered that having a mild case disease provided further immunity. It is now thought that 300 million people died from the disease in the 20th century. The pictures of smallpox victims can be very graphic, but here is an example. Small pox is now considered a potential weapon of terror.
Here are some anti-vaccination websites:
http://www.thinktwice.com/
http://www.vaclib.org/
http://www.whale.to/...
http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.co...
I am not going to try and refute everything, and since I have made it clear I am not an objective diarist when it comes to this particular topic, I think it is fair to provide some sample of those who disagree with me.
The themes that pervade these particular websites are clearly a distrust of government, traditional medicine, pharmaceutical companies and a general sense that individual liberties are being scrubbed away. There are also fairly blatant conspiracy tones. An example can be found in this incoherent article that suggests vaccines are given to people to harm them and then create a client base of chronically ill people. Another article attributes a wide range of mental deficiencies, personality disturbances, and lower IQ scores to vaccinations. Neither article provides much beyond statistics that are essentially made up and thematic conspiracy. There are countless articles on all of these websites that not only attack the concept and foundations of vaccinations but almost every other mainstream medical practice. Time and time again "truths" are revealed. I remain unconvinced.
However, the roots of the distrust toward pharmaceutical companies aren't simple myth making in action. Drugs do get pulled off the market. Zelnrom,
used for treating irritable bowel syndrome, was recently removed from the market due to cardiovascular problems. Vioxx was removed from the market by it's maker after it was revealed in testing that long term use could double the risk of hear attack and stroke. In the late 1990's Phen fen was removed from the market because of increased risk for heart valve problems. Reporting from the LA Times had an influence on Rezulin, a diabetes being removed after it was discovered it could be linked to increased liver problems that were linked to deaths. There is ample evidence that drugs do have harmful side effects which might fuel some of the disregard that those in the anti-vaccination movement have for the pharmaceutical industry.
One of the most controversial discussions to be had is the question of whether autism can be linked to components in vaccinations, specifically the MMR vaccine itself and other products containing thimerosal. Thimerrosal contains mercury. A Canadian study found no link between the MMR and autism. The sample of those studied was sufficiently large enough. Another study looked at thimerosal exposure during pregnancy and found no relationship between thimerosal and the subsequent autism diagnosis. Thimerosal has since been removed from vaccines. A Mayo Clinic study infers that the rise in autism can be attributed to improved diagnostic abilities not immunizations. Robert F Kennedy Jr provides a rebuttal in Rolling Stone Magazine.
In June, opening argument were heard in a test case, in Federal Court, to further explore the issue. Ironically enough, the plaintiff's lawyer conceded that immunization programs do in fact provide a great public benefit. This particular case focuses solely on links with autism as opposed to the generalized discussion about vaccinations. I imagine both pro-vaccination and anti-vaccination groups are watching the outcome closely. Parents of children with autism want answers, the incidence is rising and the theories are varied. A recent finding suggests some DNA evidence. Although loosely defined hyperactivity and autism are not the same there has been suggestion that certain food additives can provoke hyperactivity.
Part of the problem might be a simple one of communication. Traditional medicine tends to be rather contemptuous toward any challengers or detractors without considering the root of the protest. All medication have both common and rare side effects including vaccinations, this WHO piece offers a glimpse at risks of disease versus the side effects from vaccinations. One of the original arguments proposed in the 1990's about the relationship between MMR and autism by a scientist in Lancet, is now under scrutiny. Lancet magazine now admits the article should not have been published due to concerns about the author's relationship with autism litigators.
Parents are often subjected to contradictory and frightening information about child rearing. If there is a harder job in the word than just trying to be a good parent, I would love to know what it is. Skepticism is always healthy, so is dissent. I hate to admit it, but on this particular issue, I side with establishment, while fully recognizing we all have to draw our own conclusions.