I have said this before, and I will say it again many times in the future: antivaxxers are potentially the Number One health hazard in America.
These are people who (very incorrectly) think that vaccines are linked to autism. It has been shown, conclusively, that no such link exists. Every time an antivaxxer is shown this data, they move the goalposts, claiming it’s some other vaccine feature causing autism, or cite outdated and flawed studies. The problem (for them) is, you can show that the number of autism cases diagnosed is totally unrelated to vaccines. They deny this, they spin, they distract, but in the end this simple fact proves them wrong.
We need vaccines. We have stopped smallpox cold with vaccines. Rubella, measles, and pertussis can be stopped. Where antivaxxers have sown distrust in vaccines, these diseases have been making a comeback, and kids have died.
Let me repeat that: children have died because they haven’t been vaccinated. And when a large enough segment of the population doesn’t get vaccinated, we lose our herd immunity, and more people die. This type of antiscience thinking is getting people killed.
Yet on they go. There is a push to vaccinate babies being sponsored by the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the antivaxxers, led by Jenny McCarthy, planned to protest the press conference. Amanda Peet — who, in my mind, is a hero — was there, as well as other people who have an actual grasp on reality. I hope they’re ready for the vicious lies some of these antivaxxers will spread. Ms. Peet has already had a taste of it.
The Science Based Medicine blog has more on another line of attack by antiscience people including antivaxxers. This time, it’s a mainstream medical news site that has been infiltrated by this nonsense, printing already-disproven claims attacking Gardasil, the vaccine that can prevent cervical cancer in millions of women.
If you think this is a harmless group of cranks, think again. Cervical cancer kills thousands of women every year, and with vaccination it is almost entirely preventable (the vaccine protects against Human Papilloma Virus, or HPV, which is responsible for the cancer).
Antivaxxers claim they care about people, especially, children — and I am very sure they do. But by being blinded by antiscience their effect is exactly the opposite. Antiscience kills. Educate yourself.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:46 am
I understand that many of those opposing vaccinating against HPV are doing it on “moral” grounds, since HPV is a sexually transmitted disease. The rationalization is that if they aren’t vaccinated they will abstain.
History shows: fat chance.
–
Shane
August 6th, 2008 at 8:47 am
The Science Based Medicine blog is currently experiencing technical difficulties (angry critics, perhaps?) so here’s a Google cache: http://tinyurl.com/hpvmisinfo
August 6th, 2008 at 8:47 am
NJ is dealing with a active group attempting to get Vaccination Choice into the election:
http://njvaccinationchoice.org/
The major problem with the movement (for us) is it sounds good. You actually have to have knowledge about the subject to see how serious this is.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Phil, you may want to include a link to a source citing the death of children as a direct result of not being vaccinated. I’m sure someone is going to bring it up at some point in the thread.
Also, a couple points of clarification: first, many of the anti-vax crowd claim that they are not against vaccines, but just against the current schedule of vaccines. That’s fine, in my book, but the way that they go about spreading their message (suggesting that the current schedule shoots too many vaccines into a kid at once, thereby leading to autism or other injuries) can have the effect that people will avoid vaccinating their kids altogether. So, they can lobby to get the schedule changed all they want, but they need to be extremely careful in how they do it.
Second, on Gardasil. If I recall correctly, it protects against just one strain of HPV. Not the most spectacular performance, but, I think, better than nothing at all.
Keep up the good work, Phil. I appreciate these posts that show up bad science.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:51 am
@ShaneC
Agreed regarding the moral objection stance. The funny thing is, though, quite apart from whether people abstain or not, is that once they get married, shouldn’t they still benefit from the protection offered?
I know, this argument will be countered with the statement that adult women should feel free to get the vaccine, but it shouldn’t be given to teenage or younger girls.
August 6th, 2008 at 8:52 am
While antivaxxers are certainly a concern, I think it is a massive overstatement to say that they’re “the Number One health hazard in America”. Seriously, aren’t smoking, obesity, and drug/alcohol abuse all far bigger issues?
Nobody likes to see children die from illnesses that could be prevented by routine vaccination, but the numbers are (relatively) small. I think we need to tackle the big fish first.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:00 am
“Seriously, aren’t smoking, obesity, and drug/alcohol abuse all far bigger issues?”
In terms of absolute numbers perhaps, but they are far more localized effects, only hurting one or a few people in each individual case. Vaccination affects everybody via the protection that herd immunity confers — or fails to, if the numbers aren’t there.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:00 am
Ken: “Seriously, aren’t smoking, obesity, and drug/alcohol abuse all far bigger issues?”
If you smoke, you’re only killing yourself. If you don’t vaccinate your child, it puts my child at risk. I think the issue here is that other people can make their own choices regarding their health, but when it starts to affect my health or my families health, we have a problem.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:02 am
I say they are Number 1 because of the potential of what they are trying to do. If they are totally successful, and vaccines are stopped in their entirety, how many people will die from that? The reason the number of deaths from non-vaccination is small is because most people get vaccinated. If no one does, the numbers will increase. Smallpox killed hundreds of millions of people, and from what I’ve seen was the number one killer of humans in the 20th century, more than wars, more than smoking, more than anything else.
Those other factors — smoking, drinking, and so on — kill a lot of people now, but we have education programs, advertising, and so on to counter them. No matter what, people will die from these factors. But if the antivax movement gains strength, the number of deaths will increase.
It’s possible that this is a repeat of something like the Salem witch hunts, and will die on its on in a few years. But it may also turn into something far more deadly, which is why we must stop it now.
However, I added the word “potentially” to the first sentence, to make this clearer.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:05 am
Phil and Todd:
If I remember correctly, the Guardasil vaccine protects against a few strains of HPV (but not all). Cervical cancer can also occur in women who have not been exposed to HPV. However, the strains of HPV Guardasil is effective against are responsible for something like 80% of cervical cancers.
Protection against 80% of one of the largest cancer killers of women is indeed pretty spectacular performance.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Thanks for this timely post Phil. I am currently researching the cervical cancer vaccine that will be offered to my own daughter in a couple of years (along with all other twelve year old girls) Unlike the antivaxers I like to have facts and not the hearsay and scaremongering which they seem to deal in.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:15 am
Oh, and before any anti-vax people show up saying “Well, if you get your kid vaccinated, it shouldn’t matter whether I vaccinate my child or not.”
Well, actually, yes it does. See, some people have preexisting conditions that prevent them from receiving certain vaccines. If you don’t vaccinate your kid, it puts these people at risk.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:22 am
In Ontario, Gardasil has been offered to Grade 8 girls, free of charge, with parental consent (if I wanted to get it, it would cost me about $600). It does not protect everyone, and not all strains, as previously mentioned (HPV types 16 & 18 only).
What is needed is better sex-ed also, since HPV affects sexually active women AND men.
In terms of vaccinations, I usually try to make an informed choice, but usually trust my MD’s recommendations. There was a recent measles outbreak in downtown Toronto for example, and pubic health was informing folks that we needed to check our immunity, to prevent being sent home from work. I had the blood work done, and am fine. But would have had the measles shot if I needed to. Last year, I did NOT get the flu shot, since after doing some research, found the the strain of flu going around was not covered by the flu shot.
I still haven’t made up my mind about Gardasil, to be honest. Merck only did about 4 years of testing on this drug apparently (long term effects?), and the mass advertising that I see for this drug makes me slightly cynical.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:27 am
@ Phil: I think that is an important point. The reason that tobacco, obesity, and drug-alcohol abuse are such serious problems today is because we have become so effective at combating infectious diseases that they have been losing their prominent place as killers. Instead things like heart disease and cancer, problems that are generally internal rather than external, are what we are seeing. People are living longer so diseases that previously did not have as much of a chance to manifest are becoming common.
Second, on Gardasil. If I recall correctly, it protects against just one strain of HPV. Not the most spectacular performance, but, I think, better than nothing at all.
It guards against several strains, two of which account for about 70% of cervical cancer cases. There are other strains that cause cervical cancer, and other causes of cervical cancer, but the vaccine reduces the numbers substantially. It also is highly effective against a number of other diseases caused by HPV.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:28 am
The delusionment of the Antivaxxers is frustrating and sad. I think the only way to combat their ignorance and their protests is with what Phil is doing here.
And Amanda Peet is my new favorite actress!
August 6th, 2008 at 9:35 am
@TheBlackCat
Thanks for the clarification.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:35 am
Another difference between the people not vaccinating their children and things like smoking and drinking alcohol is that when you smoke or drink, you’re making the decision for yourself (I’m not talking about people who then choose to drive drunk). When you don’t vaccinate your children, you’re making the decision for someone else.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:37 am
Amanda Peet does, indeed, rock the party that rocks the party.
As a child I suffered from pertussis. It was harrowing. There is no reason for a child to go through that now. The suffering is enough to warrant the vaccines, not to MENTION the risk of death.
I understand that having a child with autism is an incredible heartache, and if I were in that situation, I would be searching for answers, too. It’s very sad, however, that this anti-vax movement has taken such a hold in the popular culture (I hear people discussing it in public places as if it were fact) because it takes resources away from legitimate research that might find the true cause and ultimately some kind of cure.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Antivaxxers = yet another example of the sorry state of education in this country. Who would have thought there would be such a divide among the population? Now, in addition to the have/have-not abyss that’s growing ever wider, we have the know/know-not chasm. And worse: the know/know-not and don’t care bottomless pit!
August 6th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Ignorance can be a crime sometimes. If your child dies from smallpox because you didn’t vaccine him, HOW is that not a crime?!
August 6th, 2008 at 9:49 am
[…] Read the rest of this entry at the “Bad Astronomy” blog. […]
August 6th, 2008 at 10:05 am
So the idea, regarding the anti-vax-HPV people, is that if a girl is so “evil and immoral” to have sex then, well, she deserves to get cancer? True Christian Values (TM) there for ya. And why the hell is anyone taking Jenny McCarthy seriously? What a pathetic society that we actually care what a celebrity thinks and damned the evidence. These people need their heads checked. She’s simply another tool with good intentions and no ability to think/reason/learn.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:08 am
@Richard Wolford
Jenny McCarthy is a celebrity who has a child with autism. Appeal to Authority fallacy.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Oooh, you were doing so well until Gardasil.
Diseases which are air/moisture borne are essential to guard against. Polio, measles, etc. are perfect examples of vaccines which are proven to work and have very low risk.
However, new vaccines aren’t necessarily something everyone should jump on right away. For instance, we vaccinated our older daughter against chicken pox (recommended by her pediatrician), but now we find out the vaccine might not last very long, so she might get chicken pox at an older age, which is more dangerous. Schools push this vaccine just because they don’t want the kids out for a week so they don’t lose the ADA (average daily attendence). They don’t care about the health of the kids.
As for HPV, it is very controllable — keep it in your pants. Give people time to think about the risks and consequences before jumping in to satisfy Merck’s bottom line.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:12 am
There may not be a simple dividing line such as know/know not. Anna Pearce and her colleagues recently reported on the results of their analysis of the factors affecting the take up of MMR vaccine in the UK. One of the most surprising and unsettling findings was that:
There was an association between higher levels of education and choosing not to vaccinate.
Pearce A, Law C, Elliman D, Cole TJ, Bedford H; Millennium Cohort Study Child Health Group. Factors associated with uptake of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine (MMR) and use of single antigen vaccines in a contemporary UK cohort: prospective cohort study. BMJ. 2008 Apr 5;336(7647):754-7
August 6th, 2008 at 10:13 am
Smoking, obesity, drugs/alcohol abuse BECAME the biggest health issues BECAUSE vaccination eliminated the previous number 1 - infectious diseases of children.
The health issues related to smoking and obesity are primarily problems of middle and later age (unfortunately becoming less so for obesity). And as a major health problem, they increased in importance because more people were living to such age, thanks at least in part to the fact that fewer of them were dying as children from infectious diseases.
So if vaccination were completely stopped, and infection and death rates climb back up to anything approachig what they were pre-vaccine (it would probably be a little less, because of other advances in the care of infectious diseases over the years), the number of life-years lost, and only considering economic factors with regards to individuals’ lost potential contributions to society, not even adding in the emotional issues around young children dying, would be astronomical. It would easily outstrip any health issue of older people. Probably even all of them combined.
Now this is a worse case scenario, and unlikely to happen. If there is only a partial reduction of herd immunity then perhaps the damage will be less. But as Phil has said, this issue is 100% preventable, whereas the issues involving smoking, drugs, alcohol and obesity are less so. (Ameliorable, yes, but completely preventable? No.)
Also, for young adults I would humbly suggest that preventable trauma is a bigger health issue than drug/alcohol abuse, though of course the one contributes significantly to the other, and vice versa.
Of all the major advances in public health, in terms of lives saved and benefits derived, the only thing that has done more good than vaccines is sanitation. If some group out there was using ignorance and pseudoscience to turn back the clock on public sanitation, it would be a more egregious offense than what the anti-vaxxers are doing now. But I can think of nothing else.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:15 am
Steven Novella of the excellent podcast “Skeptic’s Guide to the Universe” has an excellent post up concerning how difficult it can be to counter the arguments of the antivax crowd: http://www.theskepticsguide.org/sgublog/?p=295#more-295
It’s below the bit about Gish (but that’s a good read, too).
August 6th, 2008 at 10:22 am
@MarkP
“Diseases which are air/moisture borne are essential to guard against.”
This is not a valid argument against Gardasil, as it breaks down when you consider the tetanus vaccine. Tetanus is a serious, often deadly disease that is not transmitted by air or moisture.
Second, some HPV cases can be controlled by abstaining. But, what about married couples? What about rape victims? I’m not saying people should run out and get the vaccine, but your argument seems flawed to me, when considering these other aspects.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:26 am
>>Jenny McCarthy is a celebrity who has a child with autism. Appeal to Authority fallacy.
And, of course, Jenny McCarthy’s life of porn and drugs prior to becoming a C-list mainstream celebrity had no impact whatsoever on her having an autistic child. Had to be the vaccinations.
I agree with the commenter above… how is it that ANYONE can take JM seriously about anything scientific or health-related?
August 6th, 2008 at 10:28 am
@Todd W.
Yeah, I was being snarky
I’m just still amazed. I feel so bad for her having an autistic child, but she’s not an expert on autism. I have a nice car in the garage, but I’m not a mechanic. If she would just listen and learn then she could devote her time and celebrity status towards funding for real research into the causes. Hell, maybe there is a potential vaccine against autism? (Crap! forgot to tell everyone to shut down the irony meter before I said that!).
August 6th, 2008 at 10:33 am
My wife worked on the information/marketing info that Merck was sending to the doctors about Gardasil. She saw all of Merck’s research data.
We got our daughters vaccinated as soon as it was available to the gen’l public.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:33 am
On a side note, I heard on the news recently that tuberous sclerosis may play a role in autism. However, the research is still in infancy, I think, so we can’t really jump to any conclusions yet.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:36 am
@Daryl Cobranchi
Merck doesn’t happen to be looking for entry-level Regulatory Affairs people, are they?
August 6th, 2008 at 10:39 am
I don’t know how much I agree that antivaxxers are as unholy as many people would have you believe. 1- They have succeeded in getting thimerasol out of most vaccines. 2- They are putting pressure on manufacturers and the government to make vax’s safer. 3- I haven’t reviewed all of the studies, but I would take each individual study with a grain of salt, as I read “Doubt is their product” this summer and now place much higher scrutiny on posthoc epidemelogical studies. The collective body of research does not suggest a correlation between vaccines and autism or other diseases, but that does not mean any correlation does not exist. If there is one, it is not strong enough to be detected by these studies, or the studies may have not have the proper the design to detect a correlation.
On the other hand, the situation now is much for the worse, as we have essentially two camps - the antivaxxers and the “trust us because we’re professionals.” For instance, our pediatrician’s office is littered with a photocopied article proclaiming that there is no threat of autism from vaccines, and we have the impression, with some of those in the office, that we’d be labeled bad parents for even asking about it. Conversely, our first pediatrician was much more open to discussing the matter with us during our interview of her, and recognizing our concerns and informing us on her take of the sci data and that she will not use any vax with Hg. What I am trying to get at is the community that labels the antivaxxers as loonies may be doing just as much harm by trying to silence the other group, as they polarize the issue to a much greater extent. This polarization leaves concerned parents in a bind as they may not feel comfortable speaking with their ped about the issue, lest they be considered ‘unfit’. My wife is fearful of the label every time the dr prescribes an antibiotic that we won’t use until our kids have been sick for five days or have an unresponding high fever. I know there is essentially no risk to a vax, and the little risk there may be is far outweighed by the benefits. But the medical community in our current city really has a problem with talking down to patients, and my fear is that people who have a propensity for not trusting science would be more likely to make a poor decision to not vax, when they should be able to engage their dr in a conversation regarding the issue, so that the dr can have a change to persuade the parent to vax.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:44 am
@HolfordWatch
Good point. Maybe I should have snarked about the THINK/THINK NOT crowd??
August 6th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Just out of curiosity, how many of the people who believe the antivaxxers are complete loons have had to actually vaccinate their infants in the last few years. And how many have spent a significant amount of time with an Autistic child. For new parents the prospect of Autism is frightening, and when people are frightened they don’t always take the rational path. When you are a new parent and you hear someone telling you how their child was perfectly normal until the day they got vaccinated, suddenly they spike a fever and become autistic. That is scary as hell. And if that happened to any of you, how sure would you be that it was mere coincidence. You add that to the fact that pharmaceutical companies have not always had the best track record with regulating the safety of their products, nor for presenting fair an unbiased test results. That the Government, FDA and CDC has made there fair share of safety flubs over there years. It is also natural to wonder how forthcoming anyone would truly be if it was only a small causal connection i.e. if it causes thousands of cases of autism but saves millions of lives. It is only natural that people wouldn’t want there children to end up being in the scarified for betterment of the whole pile. When we took our child for his vaccinations last year, we researched and discussed it with our pediatrician. He said the same thing we found in the research, there is no statistical evidence of an Autism MMR link. And I kept remembering the phrase statistics don’t apply to individuals. While we never would have opted out of the vaccine, we did elect the split up the MMR into its three separate vaccinations. Did that actually do anything other then give us the illusion of control, probably not, but I certainly don’t regret the choice nor would I consider myself to be anti-vacination.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:56 am
A note about Gardasil: Testing has not yet determined the frequency of booster shots necessary for Gardasil to maintain efficacy over a woman’s life. And Merck does nothing in its advertising to dissuade the implication “Three shots and you’re vaccinated for life.”
August 6th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Corey, Anti-vaxxers are not complete loons, they are scared. They have Dr’s (from the research I have seen its DC (Chiropractors) with Dr’s in from of their names) telling them that vaccines are deadly and they believe them because they don’t want to harm their kids. The problem is, if one in a handful of parents choose this, then soon (and very soon by the looks of it) we are going to have outbreaks, and kids are going to die. There is no link between Autism and Vaccines, period, and that has to be stressed. No one is going to hurt their child by doing this. The parents are not loons, but people like Jenny McCartney are. If you actually look deeply into the people who are propagating these myths, and not the parents, you are looking at people who are reality challenged; conspiracy theorists or energy medicine practitioners.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:04 am
Is it bad of me to like this to some extent? The stupid ones die off, natural selection, right? Seems perfectly OK to me. I just hope Ben Stein doesn’t read this comment…
August 6th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Professor Margaret Stanley recently reported these findings for the UK and measles:
So, there have been some drastic consequences in the UK as a result of the vaccination uptake falling below the necessary levels.
Implausibly, the Daily Mail is infamous for its antagonism to MMR but recently published a good article that explored the costs of biomedical interventions: The great autism rip-off … How a huge industry feeds on parents desperate to cure their children.
I still haven’t recovered from learning how fabulously wealthy biomed had made DAN! doctor Kalpana Patel.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Mark P,
I know virgins who on their first pre sex pap tested positive for HPV. It is not exclusively a STD. Virus has ways to get around without sex.
More ignorance to think all you have to do is keep it in your pants.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:23 am
@Copache
(Warning: Un-PC comment ahead) Well, we could take a cue from Stein and “Expel” the anti-vaxers from the society of the vaccinated. “Intelligent culling”.
On a serious note, though, I agree that a lot of the people in the anti-vax crowd are scared, frustrated and angry. They have been affected very deeply by some rare adverse effect from a vaccine or by autism. They want to place the blame somewhere, and they don’t want what happened to them to happen to others. I can respect that. However, before making claims like “Thimerosal causes autism,” “MMR causes autism,” or “Something in the vaccines causes autism,” they need to really do their homework to find multiple, valid, well-conducted studies to support their position. And even then, they must deliver their message carefully, lest people only only hear “Vaccines cause autism.”
August 6th, 2008 at 11:27 am
My two month old daughter is getting her first round of Vax shots today. We have a friend who doesn’t vax her kids because “if everyone else does it, we don’t need to.” I shake my head at that logic.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Steve H:
“1- They have succeeded in getting thimerasol out of most vaccines”
Yeah, thanks to them, vaccines now have a shorter shelf life, while thimerasol has *never* been linked to autism. Thanks a lot, anti-vaxxers. Thanks a *ton*.
“2- They are putting pressure on manufacturers and the government to make vax’s safer.”
And they’re doing it through lies and misinformation. Thanks, but no thanks.
“The collective body of research does not suggest a correlation between vaccines and autism or other diseases, but that does not mean any correlation does not exist.”
Umm… if there’s no correlation in the “collective body of research”, then there is *no* link (correlation is not a sufficient condition for causation, but it *is* necessary), unless your argument is that all existing studies are flawed. So, in reality, all anti-vaxers have done is increase distrust in the scientific community. Once again, thanks a lot anti-vaxers… because of you, AGW deniers, and the rest of quack science, now have more doubts and fears to play upon.
As for the rest, 1) doctors shouldn’t talk down to their patients. That’s plain and simply true. That said, doctors should make the research clear, and *strongly* encourage parents to vaccinate. Why? Because all current research shows there *is no “issue”*.
In short, the scientific community should become better at communicating. Doctors shouldn’t be condescending jerks. And anti-vaxers have done *far* more harm than good.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:33 am
@Darth Curt
If you feel up to it, you might want to mention the effect that has on people that aren’t able to get vaccinated.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:35 am
@Protesilaus Changing the schedule of the MMR or splitting it up is not going to lead to a world wide epidemic. Most antivaxxers aren’t anti-vaccination, just suggesting there may be safety and scheduling issues.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:40 am
@Corey
There’s no problem with them calling for changes in the schedule or calling for the multi-vaccines to be split up. However, they need to use valid arguments to support it, rather than preying on fears or suggesting links where the evidence just doesn’t support it.
In the anti-vax community (including those who aren’t really anti-vaccination, but rather against the current schedule or multi-vaxes), what is the reason that is typically used to support a change in the schedule or to split up the multi-vaxes? “Because it causes autism.” When that is refuted, the argument becomes, “Well, it can’t be good to overload such a tiny, developing body.” Neither of these arguments is supported by valid research.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:48 am
@Corey
I wasn’t claiming that splitting up the MMR schedule will lead to an epidemic. I was talking more about the whole “to loony or not to loony” thing that had come up.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:52 am
Corey - “Most antivaxxers aren’t anti-vaccination, just suggesting there may be safety and scheduling issues.”
But those suggestions must be backed up by evidence, which, as I understand it, they do not have. Just because it’s a mere “suggestion” does not mean it’s at all rational.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:58 am
@Brett Are you suggesting blind trust in the scientific community? The community that said Thalidomide was safe. The community that said Viox was safe. The community that thought smoking was beneficial. The community who thought radiation was harmless. Or the community that said oral administration of the Polo vaccination was safe. And when you say scientific community, do you mean the pharmaceutical companies that sponsor many of the studies. Or do you mean the Government Scientists that never cave or pander to political pressure and/or lobbyists, and who often eventually end up working for pharmaceutical companies.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:00 pm
There is another thing that I think is related to this issue and that is what seems to be a deteriorating relationship between doctors and patients. For a multitude of different reasons, patients trust and like their doctors less and less. Complaints range from not spending time with them to arrogance. There was just a round of news stories about this. One factor that can help with vaccination education (and other topics) is improvement in this area. Perhaps improved training for doctors, nurses and other healthcare providers can help improve patient confidence and education. Pediatricians and their staff really are the contact people for most parents. They have their work cut out for them.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
The problem is this shouldn’t be looked at as an all or nothing issue. There is evidence that not all vaccinations and schedules are made equal. Ignoring this is just as dangerous as going to opposite direction.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
@Corey
A couple points:
1) The scientific community also questioned Thalidomide. It was an FDA employee who called into question its safety in pregnant women and ultimately kept it from being approved in the U.S.
2) Vioxx has risks, but, depending on the individual (e.g., those with severe pain, who are not at risk for high blood pressure/heart disease, and who will not use it long-term), it is a useful drug and should be considered. I just finished a class that looked at Vioxx as one of the case studies, so I’ve seen both sides of the argument. Definitely something that should be used with care, and the maker should have handled it way differently, but I think it was a mistake to remove it from the market completely.
The system has its faults, and conflict of interest is a really big issue that faces nearly every endeavor in the medical arena. But I think you go a bit too far in your accusations of pharma companies, the FDA and other researchers. Many of the people who work for pharma companies, believe it or not, actually want to make a positive difference in people’s lives.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
I am not an anti-vaxxer by any means. I am a biologist and an advocate of science-based medicine. And my son was vaccinated with all the appropriate things at all the recommended times. That said, however, I have some issues about the Gardisil vaccine. I find that it is being pushed onto the public as a routine childhood vaccine without the public being given the complete story.
First of all, there are about 130 strains of HPV. Gardasil immunizes against only the two strains most likely to contribute to cervical cancer. It has a minimal effect on a few other strains. These two strains of HPV are linked to 70% of cervical cancer cases. (You can look up HPV on Wikipedia to verify my numbers.) But a woman can get cervical cancer without ever having HPV. And a woman can have HPV without ever getting cervical cancer. The truth is Gardasil is neither a complete vaccine against HPV nor cervical cancer. Calling it either one is a lie of omission. Gardasil guards against certain human papillomaviruses that contribute to many cases of cervical cancer. That is a significant truth, but its limitations should not be hidden.
Secondly, HPV is a sexually transmitted disease and is primarily a concern for those who engage in sexual behavior with multiple partners. It is not a childhood disease that is spread by casual contact as with measles, mumps, rubella, etc; or even tetanus which exists in the environment at large. Individuals who are conservative about their sexual behavior, that is monogamous, are at minimal risk for HPV. You are primarily at risk for HPV under circumstances you can control. I understand the argument that you can never be entirely sure of your partner, that you not only sleep with him/her but everyone else who came before. But that is a straw man argument. Monogamous couples are, and always have been, at low risk for sexually transmitted diseases. Children and non-sexually active teens and adults are at zero risk for this disease.
Thirdly, Gardasil is recommended only for girls, thereby clearly ignoring one half of the population that contributes to the spread of the disease!
Fourth and finally, when considering the efficacy of preemptive medicine, one has to take into account something called the NNT, the Number Needed to Treat, to prevent one case of the disease. I do not have that number at hand, but all things considered, I would expect that number to be high. When NNT is high and cost is high, and Gardasil is expensive, the logic of making this vaccine a matter of public policy is low. (I cannot subscribe to the belief that preventing even one case of a disease is worth all costs involved. There are always costs of adverse reactions to consider as well as cost in dollars. Though Gardasil has shown to be quite safe.)
Eradicating all instances of HPV is like eradicating all instances of the flu. It is just not in our power to do that, yet. But like the flu vaccine, it makes sense to vaccinate those who are most at risk. I am not arguing against the Gardasil vaccine as such. I am arguing against making it mandatory for all school aged children.
So what have I told my son who is fifteen? We have discussed the same points as above. We have discussed the riskiness of promiscuous sexual behavior, that it is a lot like playing Russian roulette with your health. We have discussed that when he becomes sexually active, I want him to take all the precautions he is able. And if he finds himself at risk for HPV then I would want him to get the Gardasil vaccine. If I had a daughter, I would tell her the same.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Andeberg, Chevalier and Wadsworth recently put up a lengthy but absorbing analysis: Anatomy of a Health Scare: Education, Income and the MMR Controversy in the UK (ftp and pdf warning).
Among many interesting observations, they highlighted the 2000 Pareek and Pattison study: The two-dose measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) immunisation schedule: factors affecting maternal intention to vaccinate. They revealed that:
TV is disproportionately powerful in propagating health scares and exaggerating the risks.
This is a reasonable response to the science has been wrong before gambit.
Pareek M, Pattison HM. The two-dose measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) immunisation schedule: factors affecting maternal intention to vaccinate. Br J Gen Pract. 2000 Dec;50(461):969-71.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
There you go again, Phil, citing a report that “mercury/thiemerosal does not cause autism” and conflating that into “vaccines do not cause autism”. Every time this topic comes up you do the same thing. You even did it with that post that superimposed the rate of autism with the use of thiemerosal. Does anyone have a graph that compares vaccine rates to autism rates? I haven’t seen one, but I bet it will be a lot more interesting than the thiemerosal vs. autism graph.
There are regularly scheduled “well visits” nowadays for months-old infants where they want to cram no less than FIVE vaccines in all at once. It’s just the “normal” thing to do and if you’re a typical new parent its easy to be intimidated or pressured into going along with whatever the pediatrician or nurse says. Often they don’t even ask, they just hand you a paper and say “sign this” and then go and jam god-know-what-else cocktails into your tiny baby.
And why are hours-old infants routinely given a vax for an STD? Because it’s just faster/easier to give it to everyone that way rather than screening the mother or waiting until later.
I am not an “antivaxxer”, but I know and respect many people who are. I’m a skeptic, however, and hardcore Vaccine Fanboys like yourself worry me just as much as the hardcore Antivaxxers do. Mix in my developed cynicism of Government and the Pharmaceuticals and the whole issue really disturbs me. Where is the middle ground? We need more people like Corey I think
August 6th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Todd W. wrote:
Ooh, good point. Tetanus shots guard against accidental contact which can happen in childhood. Adults rarely keep their tetanus shots up to date. The key point is to protect children who are likely to accidentally be exposed.
Rape victims make the most compelling argument IMO. Married couples can be tested to see if either are carrying a strain that can be protected against. However, that’s a reasonable decision adults can make for themselves, and it’s silly (and unscientific IMO) to lump the HPV vaccine in with, say, measles.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
@Corey
Corey, what is your argument, that the research doesn’t exist or that it cannot be trusted? If you are arguing that the research cannot be trusted, then what will convince you, since obviously we are not there now. There will always be noise in any research paper, and there will always be anti-vaxxers, nothing will convince everyone. You are stating that this is not black and white, but are throwing information at us as if they are black and white, (Thank you Todd for pointing out the gray). I understand not wanting to trust the government, and I can understand apprehension if the research is new, but not when it is old, and there are thousands of studies showing safety and efficacy.
As you stated above:
“Did that actually do anything other then give us the illusion of control, probably not…”
but you seem to be convinced that it was safer, and not an illusion, what is convincing you of this?
August 6th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Seems to me that the very emotional nature of this whole issue, and the parental decision making that it necessarily affects, is one more reason to be disturbed by the lack of interest that huge numbers of our population seem to show in rational thought processes.
Celebrity experts, fear-based reactions, not bothering to get the facts – and the idiotic pandering of the media that leverages off all this to sell more sensationalist bunk – is a sign of a society that is not educating its population in the basics of how to think.
One doesn’t have to hold an advanced degree in science, or anything, to know how to use your brain. Are critical thinking skills even taught anymore? What happens when one uncritical generation raises another?
August 6th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
6 hours after my daughter’s 4 vaccinations there was blood in her diaper. Blood. Her intestines were bleeding. My understanding is that the vaccine she had the reaction to was the Dtap. I believe in education before vaccination. When your doctor tells you they have taken the mercury/thimerosal out of the vaccines they are half right. Of course they are referring to the legal term removal. THis means that thimerosal/mercury can be (and often is) used in the production process of your child’s vaccine. It is to be filtered out. My questrion is how do you filter out a vaccine filler/preservative that is half its weight in mercury? HOW?
I believe the legal term that they are trying for now is Elimentated.
And for the second part of my question -why do the doctors act as if it was a law to remove the mercury. It was only a recommendation.
I also think of this fact : China is number one in the world for producing vaccines- Do you know where your vaccine orginated?
I just had to put my two cents worth in this discussion. I saw vaccine injury first hand. I watched my 8mth old baby girl convulse, vomit, and lay lifeless on the gurney in the e.r. room. All because I wanted her to be
“SAFE”.
Angela : you can find me on myspace. Myspace.com/preventvaccineinjury
On a last note : I do not believe all autism is caused by a vaccine injury. Autism was the last of my worries that cold Febuary day-I only wanted my daughter to survive her vaccinations. Autism that was nothing compared to it.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
@Kunhnigget
I think it relates to the whole, Santa Claus was fake honey, but God is real, disconnect that the majority is faced with. We have to make a media push to get this way of thinking out to the public as well as educating children on this, and I am happy that Phil is now the president of an organization which will have the power to do just that, and I will take this time to congratulate Phil on that.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Corey - is there really that evidence though (regarding vax schedules)? If so, I’m certainly interested, and I’m sure millions of doctors, researchers, and parents are as well.
And in any case, the word “antivaccination” and its derivatives cannot be assumed to be applied to someone who expresses doubts about vax schedules. You’re very correct to point out the difference (IMO), but you’re incorrect to assume that Phil, or anyone else railing against anti-vaxxers, is casting that wide of a net.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
First things first: I sometimes joke that stuff like is this is proof that ID/creationism is wrong; after all, would an omnipotent and omniscient god be capable of making so many stupid people? I know some folks will laugh at that; but actually, it’s also pretty sad to be able to say it.
As a child I was diagnosed with mild autism at the age of three; naturally, I was interested when the whole spiel started up. But I also know what I am looking at: the number of cases is rising NOW, while the mercury was removed from the vaccines years ago. If there ever was a link, it was only for a short while, and can’t be said to continue today.
The problem with these people is they are “believers.” Just like with creationists, you can argue with them until you run out of breath, and it won’t even register on their radar screen.
Want to know what a lack of vaccinations can do? I live in New Mexico, and we are probably dead last in vaccinations. The reasons why aren’t so much related to the whole autism thing; actually, it’s a lack of health coverage, plus a lot of illegal immigrants from Mexico don’t vaccinate their kids because vaccination requirements in Mexico are nowhere near the U.S. (please try and understand that I’m not trying to push any stereotypes here, just throwing out some facts), and the result? We still have our share of autism cases, but we also have (every year) a few cases of measles and mumps and whatnot. Sometimes the kids die from it. Sometimes adults do too. But autism hasn’t exactly been “stopped cold” in our state. Must be why the antivaxxers don’t use our under-vaccinated state as an example.
As for HPV, that purely a case of a pack of fools. Remember when AIDS first hit the scene, and the Religious Right tried to say that we should not develop treatments for it because AIDS is “god’s death sentence on gays?” Then we found out it came from Africa and a bunch of racists said it was god’s punishment on blacks and mixed couples? Remember also, the same Religious Right who cares Oh-So-Deeply about fetuses cares nothing about kids once they are born? (i.e., Bush vetoing children’s health care coverage, opposition to increased food stamps and minimum wage increases, calling universal health care “socialist” and “communist”) I don’t know; maybe it’s time we as a people stop listening to folks who wave a bible and then forget to care about their fellow man…
August 6th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
@Nyx
“Children and non-sexually active teens and adults are at zero risk for this disease.”
Careful about absolutes like this. Unless, by some miracle, child-molestation/rape suddenly ceases completely the world over, there is always a >0% risk.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
@Todd W. I am not arguing against medicine, science, vaccinations or any specific vaccinations and/or schedule. And I agree, many people get into research to do the right thing, and many do do the right thing. But I don’t think I am going too far in my questioning the fact that blind trust in a community that has well documented cases of conflict of interest, leading to bad science, can be dangerous. Portraying people as lunatics because they are not confident in the current scientific data, doesn’t help anyone case. There are plenty of intelligent, well educated rational, people that have concerns with the science. You don’t have to be a conspiracy nut to see the mistakes that have happened in terns of medical safety, nor the problems arising out of conflicts of interest.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Also Corey, I just noticed this: “Most antivaxxers aren’t anti-vaccination…”
You’ve contradicted yourself here. If someone’s not actually against vaccination, then by definition, they cannot be labelled an “anti-vaxxer”.
August 6th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
@SourBlaze
Heh heh. The true believers are over on the UFO thread…
August 6th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Corey said:
“…The [scientific] community that thought smoking was beneficial. The community who thought radiation was harmless…”
Can you provide references for these claims?
August 6th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
@jtradke Are you asking if there is evidence that there are different safely levels for different vaccinations? Which is what I said, then yes then it is very widely known and accepted that not all vaccinations are equally safe.
@Protesilaus yes I used the word illusion purposefully. I am not saying there is a causal connection between vax and vax schedules with Autism. Simply that when it comes not my own child, I was not going to accept research with a know bias, blindly. By spreading out the out the injections, I added no real risk to my child, but did help easy my very normal fears. And yes, I think there are major issues with medical research today, and they should be questioned.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Mark P. - As for HPV, it is very controllable — keep it in your pants. Give people time to think about the risks and consequences before jumping in to satisfy Merck’s bottom line.
Ah, there’s a health solution for you - moralizing and finger wagging. The same one I hear for abstinence only sex ed. Frankly, I wouldn’t be willing to risk the lives of teenagers based on their ability to refrain from having sex. Sometimes, and I know this is a big shock to you, teenagers do irresponsible things . And I don’t believe sex is a crime that merits a preventable death.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
@Corey
I don’t think you will find anyone here that says that vaccines are completely without risk, or that all vaccines have the same risk profile. The question, I think, was regarding whether there is proof to support questioning the schedule of the vaccines. As far as I’ve seen so far, the argument is based more on a lack of knowledge, rather than any specific, valid research that the current schedule presents unreasonable risks.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
Well, it’s true. The danger is completely controlled by behavior. You don’t “accidentally” have sexual contact (except in the case of rape, addressed above).
And yes, sexual mores are indeed in the scope of morals. Parents need to decide which morals to teach their children, and moralizing and fingerwagging by you isn’t going to change anyone’s mind. Give people the information and let them decide.
This is what I mean when I talk about James Randi’s style. I’ve never seen him dismiss someone’s morals or beliefs. He simply shows how some thinking is falsified.
In the case of the HPV vaccine, no one is saying that it doesn’t work. It’s a different issue from the anti-vaxxers who say all vaccines are dangerous, etc. It’s informed people making choices about how to apply their knowledge. This leaves the realm of skepticism and enters the realm of morals, ethics, etc.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
@ Mark P.
Give people the information and let them decide.
Isn’t that what “sex ed” is for? Giving teens the information so that can decide (fully informed)?
Oh riiiiiiiiight, but that’s not what you meant, is it? You meant “tell parents that there’s a drug company out there making vaccines so that teens can have sex all day every day” so they can go t their churches and feel persecuted…
Like I said… people like that are proof god does not exist.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
@MarkP
Regarding the moral means of controlling HPV infection as an argument against mandatory vaccination with Gardasil, as I understand it, the argument runs something like this: If an adolescent is vaccinated, they will more likely have sex because of the reduced risk of HPV infection.
Before this argument can be accepted as a sound one, evidence must be produced that shows a clear, causal link that getting the vaccine does, indeed, lead to higher rates of sexual behavior.
I’m not trying to discount your statement that “keeping it in your pants” will help control infection in a lot of cases, but rather that it is not necessarily a rational reason for avoiding the vaccination.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Even if there were a real link between vaccines and risk of autism, the risk-benefit ratio still favors vaccination. By a long, long, long, long shot.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
@ Todd: shouldn’t we question everything until we’re satisfied with the answers? Why should we hold something above questioning until such time as someone “proves” it is valid to question it? Isn’t that totally backwards? How could anyone prove that its valid to question something without having questioned it first and discovered an unsatisfactory answer? I’m confused
August 6th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
@MarkP
I take offence at your earlier comment about schools not caring about childrens health. Not every school board, district, … , relies on Daily Attendance to qualify their role in society. I work at a school, albeit a highschool, but health concerns, immunizations, and the like, are driven by best choices for the individual, not keeping kids in class for monetary reasons.
Keeping kids in class will definitely be a benefit through better education and better class strucutre and dynamic flow, but I would never suggest thta I want my kids to show up each day because the school board needs their attendance.
August 6th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
“my naturopath told me the vaccine was bad for my kids”
…most common defence I hear when I get into these discussions…and I DO get into them a lot!!
August 6th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
@infidel
I’m confused. Where did I say that we should not question things?
August 6th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
MarkP: “The danger is completely controlled by behavior.”
Except it isn’t. Previous commenters have pointed out that there’s at least some members of the population who have contracted HPV via means besides sexual conduct. To ignore that fact is, well, ignorant.
“Parents need to decide which morals to teach their children”
Parents can teach their children morals until they’re blue in the face, but (I can’t believe I need to point this out) children will still do whatever they want. It’s called rebellion, and it’s a standard feature of every child. Additionally, given their lack of experience, children/teens are notoriously bad at risk-assessment. So, give them all the information you want, moralize, finger-wag, but they’re still going to make bad decisions.
The question then becomes, how do we prevent transmission of HPV when, despite your best efforts, they went ahead and fornicated anyway? This vaccination is one answer.
August 6th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Angela, I’m sorry this happened to your daughter, but what evidence do you have that the vaccine caused this? How often does this sort of reaction happen, and how often does it happen without a vaccine?
Just because an event follows another does not mean one caused the other. And even if it did, no one has said vaccines are 100% safe. But the incidence of reactions is extremely low, and on average the benefits far outweigh the risks.
August 6th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Argh, all the anti-Gardasil crap makes me madder than anything. All it takes is one sexual partner, who may have only had just one before, who only had one before you. Even when being as conservative as that, you can be hit without warning. Also, you cannot just get tested for HPV like you would for HIV or other STDs. You only find out when you (or your girlfriend) goes for a pap smear that comes up troublesome. According to the CDC, “The HPV test on the market is only used as part of cervical cancer screening. There is no general test for men or women to check one’s overall ‘HPV status.’ ” And even that test is recent.
And for those parents who honestly think that keeping their children away from the vaccine will encourage abstinence. Just wait until they are 17 and hopelessly in love and think that condoms will protect them against anything harmful. The CDC will tell you that “50% of sexually active men and women acquire genital HPV infection at some point in their lives.” Good, moral, monogamous people. Guess what, ladies and gentlemen, we don’t all enter into marriage without any sexual contact, and that doesn’t make us all the whores of Babylon. You can be all wonderfully monogamous until you and “The One” break up, and you need to start all over again.
If you can prevent 80% of cervical cancers, then why not? If your little darling still has a 50% chance of contracting HPV in their adult lives, wouldn’t you want them to be informed and protected?
Inform yourselves: http://www.cdc.gov/STD/HPV/STDFact-HPV.htm
Of course that’s not the only resource, but study after and study and webpage after webpage will concur on many of these facts. Get informed before you get up on your moral high horse.
Ugh. /rant
August 6th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
This is going to sound diabolically cold, but I just plain don’t see the problem.
The ones who DO get vaccinated will live. And if not… well diseases will mutate anyway. Anti-Vaxxers or not. There are ALOT of people on the planet, in fact there’s some six to twelve times to many. So there’s ample opportunity for ANY disease to adapt to us. And they will, thats how nature works. It’ll eventually succeed somehow at culling our numbers anyway. Thats what happens with overpopulation and medical science and cleanliness helps, but it doesn’t completely STOP things to begin with. Life is resilient… and that includes lifeforms that cause diseases. Even the Black Plague seems to be making a comeback here and there. and thats been centuries.
Sides, anti-vaxxers are often fundies or near fundies, and fundies and the like are often not very bright. Why stop them from weeding themselves and their offspring out of the genepool on a planet that is both overpopulated, and where stupid people already outbreed smart people? I’d say by killing themselves off their doing us all a favour. And they DO have a choice you know. Their doing it to themselves.
Its not like someone is all meanly killing them, they are stupidly killing themselves. I say let the idiots choke on their own stupidity. Saving people from injustice is a good thing (And even then only when its actually our business. Iraq for example was not. And lo, it was a great disaster. Of course when it IS our business we don’t do it… New Orleans and all…), But saving people from their own idiocy seems more counterproductive then anything else to me. Those kids who died? Far more likely to have grown up as creationists then scientists you know. Seriously, I’ve dealt with anti-vaxxers, not much lost on them.
Sooo, I guess I can’t really care. If kids die the smart people will start vaxxing. And the rest, no loss there. All those idiots are the ones who actually are behind things like Iraq. Less of them around consuming resources and voting? I’m all for it.
August 6th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Sorry Monkey, but from what I’ve seen here in CA, the school as a whole doesn’t give a damn about the children. Individual teachers, etc.: yes. The system as a whole: no.
August 6th, 2008 at 4:04 pm
I see one claim about someone about virgins. Are you claiming that HPV is air- or water-borne?
August 6th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
@Angela
I am very sorry for your loss and for what happened. Maybe I can answer part of your question:
FDA mandated that all single-use vaccines in the U.S. (with the exception of flu vaccine and I think one other that escapes me at the moment) be supplied without thimerosal due to public concern and research that at the time was inconclusive as to whether there was an increased risk of injury or not.
Past research on thimerosal has shown that it is safe for use as a preservative, though those studies, I believe, did not examine the accumulation, elimination from the body, or effects of thimerosal when multiple drugs were delivered in a short span of time. Quotes comparing the levels of mercury from thimerosal-containing vaccines and EPA guidelines for mercury levels are comparing apples and oranges: methylmercury (the EPA guidelines) and ethylmercury (in thimerosal), which the body handles in different ways. Because of this, going by the EPA guidelines is misleading and inaccurate.
And a note on preservatives in drugs. They prevent the growth of bacteria and some other sources of contamination in the drugs. This helps to keep the drug safe for use and extends the usable life of the drug.
August 6th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
This link talks about methods of HPV transmission other than through sexual contact:
http://www.health-science-report.com/alotek/topics1/article51/
August 6th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
“It has been shown, conclusively, that no such link exists.”
Jee whiz, so it is possible to prove a negative after all. Bugger, bugger, bugger, and I’ve believed all these years that it’s impossible.
That’s progress I suppose.
August 6th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
wondeffulforhissage, there is no evidence — none — for a link between vaccines and autism. You can’t prove the nonexistance of something, but you can falsify a claim showing no correlation.
August 6th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
wonderfulforhisage:
There are no absolutes in science (or anything else of consequence in the real world), but we are dealing in risk ratios here. As the negative evidence accumulates the risk goes ever lower, until it reaches a point where we can say, for practical purposes, that we may as well act as if were a proven negative, because the risk that it actually is positive is so low that it is no longer of practical concern.
Now when we consider something like vaccination, with a well proven (and enormous) benefit, this ever diminishing risk only has to become lower than the known benefit (a proven positive) before it is no longer of any practical value to investigate it any further. The practical question, ie to vaccinate or not to vaccinate, has already been answered in the affirmative.
And as I previously posted, even in the hypothetical situation where there is a real causative association with autism that turns out to be 100% real, the net benefit of vaccination still far outweighs that risk of harm.
And for anyone tempted to say “you don’t know what it’s like to have a child with autism” and argue that somehow a risk for autism is a greater danger than a risk for childhood death from infection, because of the suffering involved, I would suggest to them to go read up on the infections children are vaccinated against: measles, mumps, rubella, diptheria, tetanus, polio, N. meningitidis, etc, and do a search on their neurological sequelae. Then come back and we can debate if those are or are not worse than autism.
August 6th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
[…] light of this discussion, consider statement from Bad Astronomy (a blog for Discover Magazine): …….antivaxxers are potentially the Number One health […]
August 6th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
[…] kudos to Phil for also providing another great criticism of the anti-vaccine movement along with a link to some of the evidence that proves how demonstrably wrong they […]
August 6th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
This post and some comments seem to suggest that we should not do any research on our own about the contents of vaccines and trust the government and medical establishment that they have the perfect vaccine schedule. I thought this was a skeptic site?
I have 2 month old twins and I fully intend to get all recommended vaccines except at a different schedule, why am I doing this? Because I educated myself by reading The Vaccine Book by Robert Sears, M.D. F.A.A.P who on pages 199-202 specifically says that the amount of aluminum that is toxic to an infant is 30 micrograms and some combination vaccines put over 100 micrograms of aluminum in the body at once. Albeit not all of that is absorbed into the blood all at once, but he says there have been NO STUDIES regarding the absorption rate and subsequent expulsion via urination of aluminum done on infants. So I am following a different schedule that gives them all needed vaccines but spread out ones that have aluminum in them (a schedule from his book).
Also, if I hadn’t educated myself I wouldn’t have known that there are some brands of vaccines that don’t have aluminum in them and you can request those brands.
There really is no harm in educated yourself about the contents of vaccines and acting accordingly.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:11 pm
Phil, I’ve been waging the war against antiscience since way back in highschool days. I thought you might enjoy some good news from the front lines.
I used to work with a fellow, nice guy. He was the opposite of me though. He bought into just about everything. He was a young earth creationist, believed in astrology, angels, etc. I did my best to show him the beauty of science. It was a long road, and we eventually went different directions.
He never abandoned his Christian faith (hey, we don’t want to take away the knitting needles, right?) but I left the seed of critical thinking. I recently ran into him, and his new baby girl. After some brief catching up, he recounted the stories of all the anti-vaxxer stuff he ran into. Well, something must have rubbed off, because he went and did [u]real[/u] research. At the end of his quest, he concluded that the facts lent strength to the pro-vaccine crowd, and decided to get his daughter fully vaccinated.
Just one story like that makes all the work worth while. Thanks for keeping it up on the top, and I promise Ill keep working from the bottom.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:21 pm
can anybody explain why my comments aren’t posting. i’ve tried like a dozen times. Has my IP somehow been blocked.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
oh so of course that one goes through. Well let’s try my real post. Perhaps it was too long? I’ll break it into two parts:
I know I’m coming into this discussion late but hopefully you haven’t gotten weary of beating each other over the head yet.
When I made the decision to not vaccinate my kids, Autism was quite seriously at the bottom of my list of worries. (I’ve said before that I think the anti-vax camp has gotten in its own way with this whole autism thing.) And from doing my research, I knew Mercury wasn’t really an issue either. I can’t speak for the entire anti-vax camp, but I can only assure you that I was NOT one of those people who kept changing what I thought was bad about vaccines as studies came out showing no links between one suspected toxin and Autism or whatever.
For me, the concern has always been over just the idea that we are shoving so much crap ALL AT ONCE into babies. I’m not talking about mercury, aluminum, formaldehyde or any of that stuff. I’m talking about the actual DISEASES in the vaccines themselves. It just seems to me that that has to be an absolute shock to a baby’s system getting that many contagions all at once, and that has GOT to have some kind of side-effects - both short and long term. I don’t know if there have been any studies on the negative immunological impacts of vaccines. All the reports I find seem to always focus on Autism.
I have recently started re-examining my decision to not vaccinate my kids thanks in part to a recent lively discussion on this very blog. I feel like I’m starting from scratch again, but with the added burden of once again not knowing WHO to believe. Because while the anti-vax info out there IS coming largely from a standpoint of fear, it seems like the medical community is coming from a standpoint of its own infallibility without conflicts of interest. And if you live in this country and don’t believe EVERY controversial issue has a spin to it, you’re crazy.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
And part 2:
Some questions I still have about vaccines:
1. Since none of these vaccines provide lifelong immunity aren’t we setting ourselves up for trouble down the line? We give kids chicken pox vaccines now. But when we were kids, didn’t our parents WANT us to get chicken pox as soon as possible so that we DIDN’T get it as an adult. What are our kids to do when they turn 25 and their CP immunity wears off? As George Carlin once said, an immune system needs a lot of practice. And if you rob it of practice by vaccinating against everything what are you going to do when some super virus comes along and turns your vital organ into liquid s—? (just a whimsical illustration, I’m not considering George an authority here, so lay off
)
2. The anti-vax camp tells us that the only documented cases of polio in the last 20 years or so have been as a direct result of the vaccine. Basically the only people who got the disease were kids who had just gotten the vaccine or younger children in the same house had not yet been immunized against it.
3. As always the stats can be used to confuse. The anti-vax camp will whip out graphs showing how the rate of DEATHS from these diseases was already declining BEFORE the vaccines were introduced. The pro-vax people will show you graphs indicating that the number of CASES of these diseases only dropped AFTER the vaccines were introduced. In retaliation, the anti-vax people say that the number of cases didn’t really drop but that the diseases were just “re-labeled.” Somewhere between these polar opposites in thought the truth must lie. Because a “case” just means anybody who got it, whether it really affected their health drastically or not. Are there graphs out there showing the decline of DEBILITATING CASES of these diseases in comparison to when the vaccines came out? Seriously, which stats are the more true?
4. And as I said before, has anyone examined the possibility that vaccines in the immense volume that they are administered actually wreak havoc with the growing immune system.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
@M: [i]This is going to sound diabolically cold, but I just plain don’t see the problem.[/i]
If only it was a simple as stupid people being harmed by stupid decisions.
The main problem here is that our kids are not born with immunity. The schedule for vaccines is such that they are at risk until they have completed their vaccinations. For instance: Pertussis (Whooping Cough) vaccines start at 2 months, but do not confer their full effect until the final dose at 4 months.
Until these vaccinations are complete children are placed in jeopardy because of the actions of every parent who refuses to vaccinate.
August 6th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
This changes the tone of this discussion a bit, but I think one of our major responsibilities as scientists in arguing the pro-vaccination side of this issue is to avoid ad hominem arguments. I realize this is extremely difficult, because antivaxxer propaganda specializes in extensive ad hominem put-downs of established scientists. (Witness the current attempt to discredit Dr. Paul Offit.) Nevertheless, I think the ideal is to stick to science when explaining these issues.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Ah the (largely) irreducible complexity of the human body! I’d hate to be a professional skeptic in this area. Astronomy is so much simpler.
August 6th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Let’s put this in a nice blunt way.
Complications of measles: Blindness, encephalitis (a dangerous infection of the brain causing inflammation), severe diarrhea, ear infections and severe respiratory infections such as pneumonia, fatality rate generally in the range of >1% to 5%, but may be as high as 25% in populations with compromised immune systems.
Complications of pertussis: Seizures, encephalopathy, severe ear infection, anorexia (severe restriction of food intake), dehydration, pneumonia is the most common complication and cause of infant pertussis-related deaths. In adolescents and adults, whooping cough can cause severe coughing that can make it hard to breathe, eat, or sleep, and can result in cracked ribs, pneumonia, or hospitalization.
Complications of polio: Paralytic polio can lead to temporary or permanent muscle paralysis, disability, and deformities of the hips, ankles and feet. Other complications pulmonary edema (fluid in the lungs), pneumonia, urinary tract infections, kidney stones, intestinal obstruction, myocarditis (inflamation of the heart).
Complications of diptheria: Diptheria toxin can cause permanent damage the heart, lungs, kidneys, and nervous system.
I could keep going but just those four should give a good idea of the risks here. Autism is terrible but not life-threatening.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:01 pm
@ Brian Hodges,
The number of “DEBILITATING CASES” of smallpox was reduced to zero, zilch, nada, by the intensive efforts of a group of individuals who realised that the answer was universal vaccinations.
Polio? Only still extant in the wild because of, set your irony meter to it’s least sensitive level, groups spreading fear of vaccination!
August 6th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
As someone who has had a lot of experience with autism I am utterly appalled by the amount of bozos who spout this BS. It sickens me because these people spend their time, energy, and resources on blaming vaccines for autism instead of supporting research for better treatments and earlier diagnosis. These people are spawned from the same sort of thinking that is taking science out of our science classes. It is disgusting to me.
In response to Noadi, I know we are on the same page here, but having a child with Autism is just as devastating as having a child with a Polio. I know you weren’t trying to minimize autism, just saying.
August 6th, 2008 at 11:29 pm
phil,
anti-science is now a label you put on those who don’t want forced immunization?
anti-science eh?
with you throwing around lame terms like “herd immunity” .. I think you’re doing a find job of presenting the “anti-science” aspect…
stick to what you know phil, when you venture out into the unknown, you start looking more and more foolish … and MUCH less “scientific”…
and I suppose it never dawned on you, that if you and your family, friends, etc.. are immunized, then what does it matter to you (or anyone else for that matter) if “other people” aren’t immunized?
Spreading “fear” when the “science” isn’t fully in on the subject… i.e. 10 or more years of hard core scientific studies, papers etc…
From what I’ve seen … there is AT BEST about 3-4 years of studies… most of which were paid for by the drug companies themselves.
The few “independent” studies surely aren’t enough to base a “scientific” conclusion upon…
lol… “herd immunity” …
astronomers… *sheesh… they think they know everything about everything!
August 7th, 2008 at 12:03 am
The “antivaxxers” give me a sort of strange respect for people like Christian Scientists, who at least admit that they are leaving their children in the hands of God, instead of coming up with a bunch of pseudo-scientific non-explanations for their decisions.
August 7th, 2008 at 12:11 am
@Brian Hodges
I’m no vaccine expert, but AFAIK the biggest risk for most vaccines (MMR, etc.) is high fever, and that risk is very low. The polio vaccine IIRC is a dead vaccine, which means that the virus isn’t actually alive, yet your body develops immunity anyway.
The traditional vaccines Noadi lists have been in production for decades. Comparing the risks against the possible infections brings me down on the side of vaccinations. I’m a bit angry about the chicken pox vaccine because it seems to be short-lived and the disease itself isn’t life-threatening when young anyway.
August 7th, 2008 at 3:24 am
If only the anti-vaxxers could experience some of the nastyness of i.e measels up close and personal.
When I was 3 I got the measels. That put me in intensive care for 2 weeks. I had double-sided pneumonia and a fever of 41C (that’s 106F for the metrically challenged). My parents were told that I might not survive.
Why anyone would risk their child getting the measels is incomprehensible.
When I get kids they’re getting their shots.
August 7th, 2008 at 4:57 am
[…] Phil Plait of Bad Astronomy has written on provocative piece on how “antivaxxers are potentially the Number One health hazard in America”: Antivaxxers and the media. […]
August 7th, 2008 at 7:11 am
@erlando
you said (When I was 3 I got the measels. That put me in intensive care for 2 weeks. I had double-sided pneumonia and a fever of 41C (that’s 106F for the metrically challenged). My parents were told that I might not survive.)
Just playing devil’s advocate here, but isn’t this just the same kind of “fear mongering” story that the anti-vaxxers try to do with the horror stories of kids who were fine until they got their vaccines? As I understand measels, your case was an extremely rare one. Most people who get the measles are bedridden for a few days and then they’re fine. Looking at the scenarios that Noadi talked about, my impression is that those are the WORST case scenarios if you catch the disease but that most people don’t get that bad. I suppose the question could arise, “well why would you even take that small risk,” but as you know that would be answered by “well why would you take even a small risk by giving your kid a shot when there is so much anecdotal evidence that something could go wrong.”
It’s enough to make my head spin. I really do hear both sides, but it just seems like there’s always a “yeah but.”
August 7th, 2008 at 7:23 am
@Michael Parmeley
This post and some comments seem to suggest that we should not do any research on our own about the contents of vaccines and trust the government and medical establishment that they have the perfect vaccine schedule.
How do you get that? The post simply states that misinformation about vaccines has the potential to cause a health crisis. It doesn’t say or imply anything about scheduling, or blindly trusting the government.
August 7th, 2008 at 7:23 am
A good resource for people with misconceptions about childhood vaccines:
http://www.vaccinateyourbaby.org
It is a new media campaign by the nonprofit Every Child By Two.
(Kevin - I think similar to you - I have always felt like the only people with a rational basis for refusing vaccination are the ones who argue that it gets in the way of natural selection. Chilling, but rational.)
August 7th, 2008 at 7:24 am
@jtradke There is no contradiction, that was my point. If you actually read both sides of the argument you will find most people labeled as antivaxxers aren’t actually anti vaccination
@hyperdeath The Tobacco industry long relationship with the AMA is pretty well documented. It wasn’t until Fishbein was ousted as head of the AMA that JAMA first began to publish damning studies about tobacco use.
August 7th, 2008 at 7:29 am
I can’t help but smile when I see so called skeptics drinking the Kool-Aid. I used to believe everything doctors told me, and figured they always knew best. They don’t. Vaccines aren’t the medical wonder everyone here seems to be kneeing and offering thanks to.
There are side effects. Bad side effects. Kids die. I believed in them till my child was damaged by them, then I started my own research. Too late for my son, but if I can save one child and set of parents from the hell I’ve been through it will be worth it. There are wackos on both sides of the issue and blanket statements either way show ignorance. Vaccines can be helpful, but there are MANY that are simply acting as a cash cow for pharmaceutical companies. See, I’m a reborn skeptic and anything I hear from them, the FDA, the CDC I look at and see who profits, who’s ass gets covered, and how any studies were conducted.
The current vaccine schedule is fed more from greed than concern.
<