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?
Why don't more nurses accept that perhaps with that covered up research, more studies might have been initiated, more paths of research could have already been forged so that choices related to delaying vaccines/changing the timeline of vaccinating at the very least would be considered?
I suspect that is because most of us think scientifically and practice evidence-based medicine. There are ongoing studies and have been for decades; they are all consistent in their results. Studies will continue to be done as we move forward as this is the scientific way.
Similarly, there is no evidence to suggest a delayed schedule is of benefit to the patient, so most here will not recommend it, though patients are free to "consider it" and most providers will work with patients that want to do that. It's just not recommended.
Remember, the way we debate here is not the way we would engage patients on the topic.
Everyone affected by Autism is not a radical, emotionally-charged idjit who cares nothing for the rest of the human race
I don't think anyone here is calling anyone an idiot, or at least I hope not. Rather I think of patient with ASD as a human not as a disease that needs to be cured, and likewise parents that don't need to feel guilt for something "they did" because most did do their best for their children.
I hope and pray there are scientists, and evidence-based practitioners interested in studying the issue who go forward with continued work which will soon provide answers. And I stand up for families who are living with this life-changing disorder, extending them compassion as they search for anything which will provide answers.
I feel like the vast majority of HCPs fit this description, it's just the evidence-based practice is not what you want them to tell you because the evidence right now doesn't support it.
Our son did have immediate detrimental reaction to his 15 month series appointment. We have documented evidence of 'normal' developmental progression until the 48 hours after his MMR booster. We have medical records, we have video's, we have family journaling of activities and milestones until that fateful week. He was our sunny, water-loving, toddling all-over the place, really happy 14 month-old. Then everything changed. Extended fever, prolonged crying, lost progression walking/even crawling, no further eye contact, loss of his budding vocabulary, reacting as if in severe pain whenever water touched him, wide variations in appetite and sleeping patterns...the list is long.
I am sorry to hear what your son and your family has gone through, regardless of the cause, and my heart goes out to you. I have have some medically scary moments with my child and I know how that feels. I hope that there are more answers for you someday, regressive autisim is a very difficult diagnosis for parents for obvious reasons.
Just look at comments on the original article and how many people are saying vaccines are safe without the disclaimer. That happens in real life too. What makes one think that people researching vaccine safety won't find this discussion?
How many people are aware that formaldehyde added to vaccines (like DTaP)? So what does one tell a parent about the safety of formaldehyde?
Again, vaccines are safe. I think taking an aspirin is safe. I think cars are safe. I think airplanes are safe. I think crossing the street is safe. I think breathing air is safe. None of these things are 100% safe and all can result in fatality even. It is a false flag argument.
How many people are aware that formaldehyde is a normal byproduct of cellular metabolism? Or a normal part of our diet?
Formaldyhyde is used to inactivate viruses in vaccines. The amount of formaldehyde naturally occurring in a 6-8lb. newborn is 50-70 times higher than what is administered in a single vaccine or over the course of the childhood vaccine series.
Without formaldehyde you would die, with a big enough dose you would die. This is true of many things, like water for example. The EPA publishes data on a "no observable adverse effect level" for such things. But unless we want to start really micromanage both our intake and our metabolism, I think it is relative safe to consider looking at the historical data we have, which has demonstrated safety and efficacy of vaccines containing trace levels of formaldehyde as historically very safe. If vaccinations are done by the recommended schedule, the most a child would receive is less than 400 micrograms, which is 160 times less than your body produces on average, and slightly more than an apple.
Thank you for your post BostonFNP; very considerate and erudite.
As to the middle part where you said, "it's just the evidence-based practice is not what you want them to tell you..."
I disagree since I do not want to really have an innate need to be told this. I hope to hear whatever the truth is wherein evidence-based practice is included and which can guide professionals and families to make the best decisions regarding this issue.
It is true we feel a bit beat-up that the general masses do not support parents making this medical decision yet uphold parents on other medical decisions made for their children. I try to find reasonable statements to describe my stance and I diligently follow-up on many articles and resources which address the vaccination issue. I sincerely want an answer for my now-teen children (*all of whom completed the entire suggested vaccination series), so that they will have a solid core of information available to them about even choosing to have children. Focusing on genetics is really, really important.
I support responsibility in making medical decisions, and I know there are ramifications and consequences. A lesser part of those actually is the way I am treated by persons who are very passionately 'pro-vaccine' as a matter of fact.
I am glad we live in a country where we do have the right to exercise medical choice. I too see the repercussions which could occur if a large percentage of the U.S. population declines all vaccinations. But I do think the right to make proactive decisions in medical choices is super important. The virtual toilet-papering of an online poster's opposition stance or comments on an issue, as has occurred in parts of this thread is disrespectful and distasteful. I'm glad for moderation on our forums also; thank you.
I am no propagandist, and I'm not a poster-waving anti-vax screamer marching up and down in front of medical clinics who provide basic vaccinations free-of-charge. I am a devoted mom taking a quiet, firm stance and trying my absolute best to make the good decisions.
I do admit to an ever-growing *bookmark/favorites list of online and hard-copy vaccination articles, studies and resources, both pro and con. I hope to share that information with my own family about decisions they need to make in their future, not to ever dis-inform others or use heavy-handed techniques to convince them. I think it is a grave issue, not one to be taken lightly nor to simply check off a selection box on, and go on merrily about one's life.
I am a devoted mom taking a quiet, firm stance and trying my absolute best to make the good decisions.
I think we can all see and understand that.
I am a staunch supporter of vaccines from a global perspective, but I do also understand that not all patients/parents feel that way. As I have done here, I share my thoughts on the matter, but at the end of the day every person needs to make their own decision. With those decisions come ramifications but we are all free (in this country) to do that.
I am also a parent. I would love to think that if my child had a major event temporally-related to a vaccine such as a febrile seizure and then went on to be diagnosed with regressive autisim that I would remain a staunch supporter of the vaccince based on the extant research, but as a parent, I understand that this would be near impossible. Human nature propels us to connect those events.
Hang in there and I hope we have answers some day.
A basic premise of science is that there is always more knowledge to be gained, so what we say we "know" in science really just refers to a balance of data strongly in favor of a certain conclusion. We pretty sure the world isn't flat, but who knows, maybe there's some sort of dimensional physics we just don't understand yet, but based on what we know a reasonable conclusion that we things on is that the world is not flat. Prior to Wakefield's 'research', there had already been a fair amount of research into the side effects of vaccines, but as a result of his supposed findings there was a wave of intensive investigation into whether there was an MMR-autism link, and none was found, and no subsequent research has shown any link (despite the mischaracterizations, there has been no "CDC coverup" of data that shows a link between the two.
So we can't say with absolute certainly that the world isn't flat, but we're pretty sure, just like we can reasonably say we're pretty sure there's no MMR-autism link.
Whether a vaccine or medication is "safe" is based on whether the benefits clearly outweigh the risks. All "safe" medications carry risks, and relatively speaking the risks of vaccines compared to the benefits are extremely low. What's dangerous isn't telling people that vaccines are "safe", it's telling people or even just hinting to people we're better off not having vaccines.
I agree with Boston and Muno. We strive to make the best decisions based on the evidence at hand. We look at research methodology and decide whether the conclusions reached or not reached are valid. Unfortunately, Wakefield did not do himself or the world any favors with the mess he made.
Autymnfyres, your post was thoughtful and deliberate. I appreciated hearing another view without the drama and kneejerk responses. I am sorry for what you have been through. As Boston said, I do hope we have answers someday. I just don't think vaccines are the smoking gun.
I was just looking at Facebook. My conspiracy theory friend posted an article that shaken baby syndrome is actually caused by vaccines, NOT parents. Then the poor parents get falsely accused by an ignorant and corrupt child welfare system.
I agree with Boston and Muno. We strive to make the best decisions based on the evidence at hand. We look at research methodology and decide whether the conclusions reached or not reached are valid. Unfortunately, Wakefield did not do himself or the world any favors with the mess he made.
Autymnfyres, your post was thoughtful and deliberate. I appreciated hearing another view without the drama and kneejerk responses. I am sorry for what you have been through. As Boston said, I do hope we have answers someday. I just don't think vaccines are the smoking gun.
)
to cover this up. This vaccine tampering seems to be a part of some nefarious population control plot.
BostonFNP, APRN
2 Articles; 5,584 Posts
I suspect that is because most of us think scientifically and practice evidence-based medicine. There are ongoing studies and have been for decades; they are all consistent in their results. Studies will continue to be done as we move forward as this is the scientific way.
Similarly, there is no evidence to suggest a delayed schedule is of benefit to the patient, so most here will not recommend it, though patients are free to "consider it" and most providers will work with patients that want to do that. It's just not recommended.
Remember, the way we debate here is not the way we would engage patients on the topic.
I don't think anyone here is calling anyone an idiot, or at least I hope not. Rather I think of patient with ASD as a human not as a disease that needs to be cured, and likewise parents that don't need to feel guilt for something "they did" because most did do their best for their children.
I feel like the vast majority of HCPs fit this description, it's just the evidence-based practice is not what you want them to tell you because the evidence right now doesn't support it.
I am sorry to hear what your son and your family has gone through, regardless of the cause, and my heart goes out to you. I have have some medically scary moments with my child and I know how that feels. I hope that there are more answers for you someday, regressive autisim is a very difficult diagnosis for parents for obvious reasons.