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?
IT's not exactly overstepping bounds to try to keep up property values of neighbors by making everyone toe a certain line.
It actually had nothing to do with property values. It was a fire hazard. My mother lived in high risk fire country, and the dry, out of control weeds posed a risk to the entire community.
This isn't anecdotal information, it's an analogy. There's a similar point. Certain rules have to be in place for the greater good. We as nurses are taught to look at the big picture. From a community health and safety standpoint, it's about protecting not just little Johnny, but little Johnny's classmates, his friend at the playground, that friends sister who is too young to be vaccinated, the grandmother who has cancer, the aunt who had a stem cell transplant, and on and on.
The same as keeping the backyard fire safe, we have to keep the community safe.
Well I believe in the Sasquatch people, and Roswell did have an alien craft crash, cause I have read interviews by people who were there. Nurses are supposed to not accept statements at face value, so I don't. I look beneath the surface, I became a reiki master, I use essential oils. I began nursing school 1971 and am grateful to my teachers who taught us critical thinking for all aspects of living.
The controversy is not about Dr. Andrew Wakefield, nor his retracted 1998 Lancet retrospective case series analysis. Rather, a senior CDC vaccine scientist Dr. William Thompson lawyered up and issued the following public statement on August 27, 2014. Thompson is ardently provaccine, and his statement shows that; it also says:
My name is William Thompson. I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control andPrevention, where I have worked since 1998.
I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed."
Since than, Drs. DeStefano, Boyle, and Wharton (co-authors on the 2004 Pediatrics article) have disputed Thompson's allegations; Thompson has not retracted his allegations.
Since the CDC misled about: Agent Orange; and lead in water; and Merck lied about Vioxx: and the MMR shot is already in federal court over the allegations of falsification of data about the efficacy; it would seem that a group of registered nurses would reserve judgement before condemning the messenger because they don't like the message.
Can you explain Dr. Thompson's statement, leaving Wakefield out?
The producer of the film Vaxxed is Del Bigtree. Suggest you look up his cv.
This is nothing more than the mythical 'CDC Whistleblower' hoopla that antivaccination cult came up with. There actually was no whistle to blow.
The problem is when they claim to have "researched" when all they have done is read and believed pseudoscience. How can anyone consider that they have a valid argument when they base their ideas on pseudoscience and fiction is beyond me.
One thing I have to say, that reading through the replies to this thread, it is disheartening to see that there are nurse and midwives out there who buy into the anti vaccination, pseudoscience and conspiracy theory fear mongering. We are a profession that utilises science and scientific evidence. We are meant to utilise well researched and grounded evidence for our practice ad for our patients quality of care and safety. Yet there appear to many who will dive into pseudoscience and quackery as well as conspiracy theories. How many of you have actually had to watch a cold or adult die from a vaccine preventable disease. How many of you have had the misfortune to have been left with a disability from a vaccine preventable diseases complication? I have. I have a severe bi lateral sensorineural hearing loss thanks to measles and its mate encephalitis. I don't recommend this to anyone.
Pseudoscience and quackery. That is terribly disappointing for nursing and midwifery.
It is heartening though to see that there are many who do understand this and who do use science and evidence in their practice.
if your child was vaccinated against measles how would coming in contact with a person with measles affect your vaccinated child?( unless the vaccine doesn't give immunity.) so why would you take away someones freedom of choice. if you feel your child needs to get vaccinated then do it ....if you are against it don't. parents should decide not a state mandate.
I agree with freedom of choice. But, there are some things that need to be done for public safety.
I have a choice to drink alcohol. I can choose to drive. But, if I hurt someone, shouldn't I be held responsible? Or should I write a letter to state legislature that I have a right to choose to drink and drive, so they should repeal that law?
Now for my flaming remark - Let the parents choose to not vaccinate their children. But, if their child is found to be patient zero of an epidemic, or their child dies from the preventable disease, send the parents to jail for involuntary manslaughter.
I agree with freedom of choice. But, there are some things that need to be done for public safety.
I have a choice to drink alcohol. I can choose to drive. But, if I hurt someone, shouldn't I be held responsible? Or should I write a letter to state legislature that I have a right to choose to drink and drive, so they should repeal that law?
Now for my flaming remark - Let the parents choose to not vaccinate their children. But, if their child is found to be patient zero of an epidemic, or their child dies from the preventable disease, send the parents to jail for involuntary manslaughter.
As extreme as your stance can be to others, I think when people exercise freedom of choice, one needs to remember not only personal freedoms but personal RESPONSIBILITY...people love to parrot "my rights" but with rights, are responsibilities related to exercising said rights.
)
to cover this up. This vaccine tampering seems to be a part of some nefarious population control plot.
BD-RN, BSN, RN
173 Posts
It actually had nothing to do with property values. It was a fire hazard. My mother lived in high risk fire country, and the dry, out of control weeds posed a risk to the entire community.
This isn't anecdotal information, it's an analogy. There's a similar point. Certain rules have to be in place for the greater good. We as nurses are taught to look at the big picture. From a community health and safety standpoint, it's about protecting not just little Johnny, but little Johnny's classmates, his friend at the playground, that friends sister who is too young to be vaccinated, the grandmother who has cancer, the aunt who had a stem cell transplant, and on and on.
The same as keeping the backyard fire safe, we have to keep the community safe.