At first I wasn't going to write this post since I believe that a film that appears to be (at least in part) based on thoroughly discredited, fear-mongering nonsense should get as little attention as possible.
Then after browsing several anti-vaccine and conspiracist websites I found as I suspected, that this has already exploded and whatever I write here won't make matters any worse.
The film 'Vaxxed' is directed by Mr Andrew Wakefield, a former physician who lost his medical license after research that he had authored, was found fraudulent (containing as I understand it, both methodological and ethical flaws).
Just watching the trailer for this film elevated my BP into dangerous territory. How is it that this man keeps promoting the same debunked data to this day? Hasn't it caused enough harm already?
It seems that anti-vaccine proponents span the entire spectrum from sadly misinformed to clearly unhinged. However, no matter what their individual motivation happens to be, they are in my opinion dangerous. We have fought a hard battle against diseases that today are vaccine-preventable. Millions of children have died in the past and some still do, to this day. We don't see much of it in first-world countries due to the success of vaccines. Anti-vaccine proponents seem to believe that the "olden days" were better. I think it's deeply worrisome.
In my escapades around the internet, I've found all sorts of scary blogs, clips and opinions relating to childhood vaccines.
This YouTube clip rather amusingly (in a sad way) has 90 likes and zero (!) dislikes (probably because no rational person would even click on it in the first place). (I'm not sure what this says about me)
Anyway this women thinks that nagalese (an enzyme) is added on purpose to vaccines in order to induce autism, cancer and type 2 diabetes in vaccine recipients. And the doctors who discovered this were subsequently murdered to cover this up. This vaccine tampering seems to be a part of some nefarious population control plot.
(It seems that alpha-N-acetylgalactoseaminidase (referred to as nagalese in the YouTube clip) can deglycosylate vitamin D binding protein (DBP) and DBP plays a role in the immune cascade response. So it seems that alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase can interfere with the immune response. While some cancer cells can release alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase, I've found no proof that injecting them into humans induces cancers, never mind autism and DMII. I will however admit that I didn't spend an inordinate amount of time researching her theory).
I admit that this last video is a bit extreme. But this woman and other "anti-vaxxers" have one thing on common. They are willing to accept something as true, even when there is no supporting evidence available.
Serious questions:
* Why are some people so vulnerable/susceptible to flawed logic and poor research?
* What can we as nurses/healthcare professionals do to ensure that our patients base their decisions on sound evidence-based facts or at least have the opportunity to do so? Or should we just reconcile ourselves with the fact that a portion of the population will base their decisions on questionable or outright false information, misconceptions and fear?
Here is the argument I have gotten. Perhaps you can enlighten me. An unvaccinated child contracts, say chickenpox, but goes to school before diagnosis. According to my classmates, that child is a danger to their classmates who were previously vaccinated. Why? Should not their vaccination give them immunity from chickenpox? Logically, it will affect the child, but only pass on minor effects, if any to the previously vaccinated children. Yet people I know say, "the should call defax, parents arrested, waivers made of no value," and other such things. Why
Because if a child who is not vaccinated and contracts chicken pox goes around children that are too young to be vaccinated, they can cause them to get sick. Young babies are especially at risk.
I'll repeat a point I made earlier. If a parent chooses to with hold vaccines, they need to understand there will be consequences. That unvaccinated child should be homeschooled so as not to put others at risk. Choosing not to immunize your child has repercussions that extend far beyond that one child. Choosing to put your own child at risk may be ok, but it is not ok to put others at risk. And one more time, there is no evidence that vaccines cause autism. None, nada, zip.
Macawake, I appreciate your post, but only because you clearly voiced your opinion (a freedom) out of concern for others' well-being (compassion--a good thing).
Thank you for that part :)
You're correct. My posts mostly stem from frustration with the inaccurate information about vaccines being spread by "anti-vaccine" groups. It pains me more than I can express to think of and see children suffer or even lose their lives, to vaccine-preventable diseases. It is compassion for these children that motivates me.
I personally believe in building up the immune system, accepting the body's natural ways of eliminating toxins and working WITH the body's natural ways.
If you look at the WHO stats that I linked in my previous post, it doesn't seem that the natural way was very successful when you compare the number of measles-related deaths before and after the implementation of widespread measles vaccinations.
I have never heard of this, but apparently there are many studies--some suggesting a link, others suggesting there is no link. Here are just a few from the top results of a "vaccines sudden infant death" Google Scholar search:
I have seen the result of vaccines in two patients - totally messed up, living in nursing homes, disabled, barely talking, no kind of real life - after vaccines.
So do we want to see the "results" of polio in our unvaccinated children if we lose herd immunity as a result of the anti-vaxxers' crusade? How about results of Pertussis, diptheria, etc.? The morbidity and mortality of infectious diseases will ALWAYS eclipse the morbidity and mortality of vaccinations, and by no small measure.
I had Measles Mumps and Rubella as a child. Chicken pox also... I did not die. There is also a very convincing study that babies that die from SID's actually died after receiving vaccines.
IF a vaccine is so great in protecting you, why worry about the unvaccinated chaild.... the "child that has vaccines are 'protected'.
That is such a straw man argument. Because NO ONE has EVER argued that vaccines are 100% effective, your argument falls completely flat. We don't ever know which child will not seroconvert after a vaccine, so any vaccinated child could be potentially at risk from exposure to a sick child. Additionally, some children are medically contraindicated from receiving certain vaccines. These children depend on herd immunity to protect them. The fact that one vaccine is only 90% effective in no way means that there is no point in getting it. That's an absurd argument.
Every once in a while, seatbelts don't protect the life of a child, and in some rare cases, end up CAUSING that child's death. So would you refuse to put seatbelts on your child because they are not 100% effective, and in a few cases, could actually cause your child's death?
If vaccines are not 100% effective, what is the use of getting them?
Do you wear seat belts and would you put your child into a seat belt? Why would you do that? They are not 100% effective, so what is the use of putting them on yourself or your precious child?
This topic just sends my blood pressure up. I have a certain family member who was being very 'vocal' on Facebook about anti-vax nonsense UNTIL another family member died from meningitis. (The 16 year old only got prevnar-7).
I cannot stress enough how important vaccines are.
I'm very sorry for their loss. It does, however bring up an excellent point (forgive me I haven't read down all the threads and someone may have mentioned it) that is, personal stories of preventable diseases causing death and serious disability have an effect on people more than facts. There is some research being conducted that is supporting this more and more.
Facts do not seem to challenge people who hold these beliefs. It appears that showing them the results of Timmy down the road getting mumps and seeing videos of parents telling their story of what it was like when their child had measles can have an impact. Then give them facts on top of that.
Calling people anti-vaxxers, crazy etc. puts us, as professionals, in a poor head space to approach and deal with their objections.
They won't adjust their approach. We need to.
Interestingly enough a similar approach helped me with people resistant to safer sex practice. Facts weren't enough. Seeing results of the disease process sharpens then mind sometimes.
My grandma died during surgery because of complications from COPD. They were trying to remove cancer. Risks vs benefits basically. Does her death mean we should stop removing cancer from COPD patients? Hell no.
If I'm allergic to a medication that could save my life, does that mean we should stop giving that med to EVERYONE? Hell no.
If a vaccine causes a reaction in a very small percentage of people, does that mean we should stop giving that vaccine and welcome horrible diseases back into our homes?
Even in the modern world some of us live in, Medicine is still practiced, YES Practiced, people want guarantees, perfection, every drug, every procedure, every vaccine, every day there are negative side effects to life. I remember in one of my pharmacology classes the professor pointed out that if aspirin had to go through the approval process today it would have a black box warning, and be strictly prescription, not OTC.
Look at the controversy around the new Hep C vaccines, big $$$$ companies are charging people that are going to be cured, Just wait for the HIV vaccine, people will complain that it will promote promiscuity, just look at birth control. Look at the lung cancer vaccine it will encourage people to smoke.
When the next pandemic comes around, and it will, then let's see people's attitudes about vaccines then, here's your choice, millions of people are dying and we have a cure that's 90% effective, your choice, do you want it or not?
People want perfection, every disease process has a VERY large genetic component, we are all different and that difference means outcomes are different. When we get to personal tailored medicine, matched to our personal DNA then the outcomes will be matched to each and everyone of us, Then people will complain about playing DOG. Because tailored medicine has all the medical ethics that come with that knowledge.
The practice of medicine is about patient care and revenue generation, greed and big business, it is not perfect, but it's better than the alternative
When these arguments/ discussions come up, the movie Gattaca comes to mind.
Genetics = job security, Heart disease, Diabetes, COPD, peoples personal choices, people not vaccinating their kids, = Job security
)
to cover this up. This vaccine tampering seems to be a part of some nefarious population control plot.
Lame
223 Posts
Because if a child who is not vaccinated and contracts chicken pox goes around children that are too young to be vaccinated, they can cause them to get sick. Young babies are especially at risk.