Vaccination and the Anti-Vaccinationists

This article explores some of the ideas behind anti-vaccination sentiments, and shares information about vaccination experiences in the United Kingdom (UK) and South Africa. Anti-vaccination movements are not a new phenomenon. Examples include the "Society of Anti-Vaccinationists" established in 1798 and the Anti-Vaccination League founded in London in 1853. The article states that while methods of spreading information may have changed radically since the 19th century, the basic concerns and the activities of these groups have changed little. With the visible disappearance of many vaccine-preventable diseases and the rise of "New Age" philosophies combined with the power of television and the internet, the views of the anti-vaccination lobby appear to be gaining in influence. According to the article, there is now a real concern that they could seriously threaten the remarkable gains made in controlling and eliminating many of the scourges which have beset mankind.

The article states that vaccines represent one of the most successful and effective interventions in medicine. A dramatic example is smallpox which in 1967 was the cause of 2 million deaths, and a decade later it was totally eradicated by a concerted global vaccination programme. The article uses examples of the South African experience, saying that "few doctors in South Africa have seen a case of diphtheria which, prior to the introduction of the vaccine, seriously affected one child every 15 minutes and killed one every 5 hours in the United Kingdom. Paralytic poliomyelitis the scourge of the 40's and 50's has not been seen in South Africa since 1989." The author argues that while these and other dramatic successes of vaccination are attributed by anti-vaccination groups to improved hygiene, sanitation, nutrition and living standards. this is not so. According to the article, where anti-vaccination sentiments have influenced public opinion the result has been immediate and dramatic. For example, in the United Kingdom a drop in vaccination against whooping cough in 1974 was followed by an epidemic of over 100,000 cases and 36 deaths in 1978. Outbreaks of vaccine preventable diseases occur periodically in communities refusing vaccination on religious grounds. For example, amongst members of the Dutch Orthodox Reformed church (about 2% of the population of the Netherlands), 2 outbreaks of paralytic poliomyelitis occurred in 1978 (110 cases) and in 1992 (71 cases) and measles in 1999/2000 (2961 cases and 3 deaths).

The article identifies three categories of objections:

General fears about the safety of vaccines

The author argues that safety standards for vaccines are extraordinary high and in South Africa, as elsewhere in the world, any possible side-effects attributed to a vaccine is monitored, recorded and vigorously investigated by a system known as VAERS (vaccine adverse events reporting system). Side-effects of vaccines do occur, but they are many orders of magnitude less frequent than the diseases they prevent and are mostly considerably milder. The risk of more serious side-effects is extremely low.

Misconceptions and myths about vaccines

Myths and misconceptions surface from time to time and are repeatedly used by anti-vaccinationists to "substantiate" the hazards or the irrelevance of vaccines. Often however, the assertions are made without any investigation. For example, false perceptions of the causal relationship between vaccines and common childhood illnesses that would normally occur at the same time as vaccines are administered. Similarly other myths that surface every now and again, such as that vaccines suppress the immune system or overload the immune system or contain toxic additives or adventitious agents, are all devoid of any scientific basis.

Philosophical and religious objections to vaccines.

Some parents refuse vaccination based on "New Age" and alternative health belief systems, sometimes in response to what is seen as scientific arrogance and sometimes called "scientific terrorism." The author argues that while parents and caregivers have an inalienable right to be clearly informed on all issues and arguments relating to vaccination, the media also does have a moral and ethical responsibility to provide information in a fair and balanced manner and to see beyond the short-term gains of sensationalistic reporting.

The article concludes that a "worryingly strong message is going out to parents to "play-it-safe" and avoid vaccination, " stating that many accounts of great pain allegedly due to vaccination are being purveyed by the electronic media (there are some 30 dedicated anti-vaccination sites on the web and an additional 300 sites who also lobby against vaccination) and in women's magazines. It argues that as moving as these experiences are, anecdotes are not proof, while "nothing could be more heart-rending than seeing a child severely damaged by a disease which could so easily have been prevented by a simple vaccine. "