We decided to take a break from the creative environmental fables springing forth in Minneapolis to hit yet another field where fact and fabrication have been scarily intertwined: autism and vaccines. The anti-vax celebrity movement is going strong—now they can add Lance Armstrong to their ranks—and more parents are jumping on the “screw public health, we don’t want autistic kids” bandwagon.
Meanwhile, the U.S. is already seeing a measles spike, while Canada is reporting a mumps epidemic and the U.K. is bracing itself for a possible measles outbreak. All while the actual research continues to show that there is absolutely no link between vaccines and autism, Crohn’s disease, colitis, asthma, teenage pregnancy, incurable foot odor, etc.
A stock anti-vax response to these facts? “So what? Who says the measles are so bad?”
Well, doctors, that’s who. As ABC News reports, the anti-vax movement isn’t just leaving an isolated number of unvaccinated children vulnerable—it’s putting entire regions in danger:
“When more than 10 percent of a community opts out of vaccinations, it leaves the entire community at risk because germs have a greater chance of causing an epidemic,” said Dr. Ari Brown, an Austin, Texas, pediatrician who represents the American Academy of Pediatrics.
The issue at hand is “herd immunity,” which works as a buffer: If enough people in a community are vaccinated, they protect those with weaker immune systems, or those whose vaccinations didn’t take, from catching the disease. The CDC estimates that some diseases, like mumps, can’t generally take hold in a population where as few as 75 percent of the people are vaccinated. But other, more virulent diseases, such as measles or the increasingly common whooping cough, need collective immunity of up to 94 percent to avoid infection.
So, in essence: Sure, your unvaccinated kid may live through the measles, or the mumps (though, as one doctor noted, cases in Canada have led to hospitalizations, deafness, meningitis, and sterility). But he’s also putting the other kids at risk.
As for the argument that children may suffer violent allergic reactions to vaccines? That one may soon kick the bucket entirely, now that a team of experts has discovered that with close monitoring and a few standard precautions, almost all children with known or suspected vaccine allergies (as determined by a pre-shots allergy test) can be safely immunized. One more reason to support scientific research.
September 4th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
I hope the wheels are finally coming off the anti-vax bus.
September 4th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
They love to offer the false choice. There is no choice of “measles or autism”. There is no good evicence that vaccines (especially the MMR, as we know from the results released yesterday) cause autism.
It’s the classic attempt to make people accept a false premise.
September 4th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Thank you, Melissa, for fighting the good fight. Nothing will ever dissuade the hard core anti-vaxers, but with your help we can limit their influence.
September 5th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Is it reasonable to assume that natural selection weeds out autism (and allergies) from the population? That would be a big YES, autistic individuals are at a distinct reproductive disadvantage. Is it reasonable to hold the premise that the incidence of autism has substantially increased over the past 30 years, YES. And is it therefore reasonable to assume some new environmental variable has been introduced within the past 30 years that is a primary cause for autism, YES. Are multiple vaccines one of many new variables introduced to the environment within the past 30 years, YES. Is it reasonable to assume there is a correlation between vaccines and rates of autism, YES. Has causative link been found, NO. Has the CDC, NIH, APA, etc ever conducted a study that comprehensively compares unvaccinated children with full schedule vaccinated children, NO. Would such a study at least be helpful in understanding the perimeters of the correlation, YES. Given all this is it unreasonable to see why some parents seek to reduce the number of variables that may cause autism and thus the risk? More radical in thinking, is autism as bad an out come as death? Does autism not rob a person of some of the most fundamental aspects of being human? Given that, is the motivation to reduce the number of possible causative variables of autism unreasonable or foolish?
September 5th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
@Jim:
Hey Jim, I’m sorry to inform you, but the vaccinations have nothing to do with Autism. You are correct in pointing out that autism rates have increased over the past 30-40 years.
Some “medical” doctors say this is due to better diagnosis and wider recognition of the symptoms of autism spectrum disorders, but we know the the true cause of Autism.
NASA.
Human spaceflight has increased drastically in the passed 30-40 years. It doesn’t take a genius to see the correlation between space flight and autism. After we stop spaceflight, then we can start working on stopping computers, rap music and the Superbowl, which by Jim’s logic all contribute to autism.