Vaccines safe - Parents dangerous?

[Guest guest]

Excellent article!! Probably worth more than 2 exclamation points!!

From: Maracuja <howdurdago@...>

Subject: [OT4VAX] Vaccines safe - Parents dangerous?

OT4VAX

Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 5:16 AM

http://insidevaccines.com/wordpress/2008/12/15/vaccines-safe-parents-dangerous/

Lately I’ve been noticing an increasing number of journal articles,

blog articles and opinion pieces on a terrible problem: Parents have

questions about vaccines.

You would have to look far and wide to find anyone who thinks that

these questions are valid and should be taken seriously. Common

explanations are:

1) It is all about the parents who think they are really smart.

2) It is all about the parents who are very stupid and read stuff on the

Internet.

3) It is all about the bad stuff on the Internet which is deceiving the

parents who aren’t very smart and who think they are smarter than

doctors. And infinite variations on this theme, which is really one

argument…and the real argument is (drum roll)…vaccines are perfect and

parents are the problem.

Being called stupid dupes hasn’t worked to shut up the parents with questions.

Perhaps this is not a good strategy?

I’m sure you’ve noticed that many articles and blogs offer comment

options to the public. If you are following the vaccine related

discussions you’ll have noticed that there is a coterie of passionate

vaccine defenders who pop up in every such public discussion. These

vaccine defenders are fighting for the good of the vaccine program with

everything they’ve got.

Oddly, however, the number of parents with questions seems to be

increasing. Perhaps the vaccine defenders need to reconsider their

approach.

Here are some suggestions, kindly meant, from an admirer of their

efforts. These guys have put a lot of sweat equity into defending

vaccines and they ought to be getting better results.

One argument which comes up over and over again is herd immunity. 

Any time a parent asks if they could perhaps delay or skip one vaccine

or another, someone is sure to come out with this mantra: “If we stop

vaccinating measles and polio will return and children will die!” But

if a parent is wondering about the chickenpox vaccine, or the hepatitis

B vaccine or Prevnar, or perhaps about the vaccine for hepatitis A,

this isn’t actually a useful argument. They may start wondering, quite

reasonably, why questions about an ever-expanding vaccine schedule are

answered with rants about vaccines which were added to the schedule in

the 1950s (polio) and the 1960s (measles). Does this mean that we don’t

really need all of these new vaccines, they ask?

So, my first suggestion to the vaccine defenders is to customize

their response to the concerns being raised. Parents have specific

questions. The vaccine defense needs to have specific answers.

When it comes to herd immunity every vaccine is different. It turned

out, for example, that the mumps vaccine provides excellent herd

immunity in the absence of mumps…

In addition to the defenders acting as though all vaccines are

identical in their efficacy, safety and relevance, they also tend to

act as though all vaccine questioners are identical. Anyone who has a

question, is, in the defenders view, anti-vaccine. And people who are

anti-vaccine are bad people. As a result the defenders respond with

sarcasm, rudeness and repetition.

My second suggestion to the vaccine defenders…is to customize their

response to the concerns being raised. (I know, I already said that!)

Some parents who raise concerns are just raising concerns. They haven’t

gone over to the dark side. But with enough rudeness and sarcasm from

the vaccine defenders they will definitely be moving in that direction.

Which leads me to the next problem. It is not, absolutely not, all

about autism and vaccines. Parents who have questions about vaccines

find all sorts of things to worry about in addition to or instead of

autism.

I’m afraid my third suggestion is to customize their response to the

concerns being raised. It really isn’t just autism. Parents are also

worried about allergies, asthma, learning disabilities and generalized

poor health. You need to have the research at your fingertips to answer

all of these different concerns. If the research exists at all…if the

research that exists supports the mantra “it isn’t the vaccines”…well

good luck, anyway.

Honestly, at this point many people are concerned or on the fence

about vaccines. The sarcasm and meanness pushes people away. It is not

a convincing approach. Try being polite and sympathetic. I know this is

tough and doesn’t come naturally, but it is absolutely essential if the

vaccine defenders want to get anywhere in this battle. The articles on

this blog provide good models for a sympathetic, thoughtful and

scientifically oriented approach.

A few more points:

Vaccine defenders need to deal with the science. Saying that the

science is all on the vaccine side, without actually presenting said

science is a hollow argument. The defenders need to dig in, find the

citations, seriously address the questions. And start tackling the

increasing number of blogs and organizations which are tackling the

science from the other side. Just calling them anti-vaccine and

ignoring them isn’t working.

A sub-point on science: the scandals about faked science in medical

journals are undermining people’s faith in doctors and science in

general. If Merck did some bad stuff with Vioxx, is it unreasonable to

have questions about their trustworthiness when it comes to Gardasil?

The defenders need to be able to explain why vaccines are an exception

to dirty dealing from the pharmaceutical companies. I’m wondering about

this one myself and look forward to seeing what the vaccine defenders

come up with.

Calling people anti-vaccine isn’t actually an argument. If someone

says: “I didn’t vaccinate my child for chickenpox because I researched

the illness and decided that the vaccine wasn’t worth it.” they aren’t

necessarily anti-vaccine. They thought about a particular vaccine and

decided against it. They probably thought about some other vaccines and

decided those were okay. Looking at their position objectively, they

are pro-vaccine but opposed to the CDC’s schedule recommendations.

Defenders of vaccines have to figure out a way to respond to selective

and delayed vaccinators which doesn’t include insulting them.

Selective and delayed vaccinators are potential allies who will

fight for vaccines, but currently the vaccine defenders want nothing to

do with them.  Some of these parents are quite knowledgeable and have

done extensive research into vaccines. They know more of the science

than the defenders, frankly. But defenders want nothing to do with

them, because in a black and white world you are either with us or

against us and there is no middle ground. Pushing away allies is dumb.

Now comes a truly tough one: The vaccine defenders should be

strongly, passionately, in favor of a philosophical exemption to

vaccines. Why? Because it would increase the vaccine rates and provide

accurate statistics about who is getting which vaccines. It would also

increase trust in vaccines. The current system, in states without a

philosophical exemption, forces parents to do all the vaccines or none

of the vaccines or else to lie about their choices. Obviously, for

parents with a really serious concern about a particular vaccine, being

forced to do all or nothing is not a good option. It makes them feel

bullied, harassed and victimized. It makes them think that the current

system is all about power and control and not about the well-being of

children. It makes them think that the government wants to invade their

parenting choices. If the real concern about vaccines is herd immunity

against polio and measles, then a philosophical exemption would,

without a doubt, increase the number of children visibly vaccinated for

polio and measles.

Favoring choice about vaccines is probably too much for the pro-vax

team to stomach. It would require admitting that parents aren’t stupid,

for one thing. And that they have a right to make decisions about their

own children’s health care needs. No, I guess we’ll have to keep

guessing about vaccine rates…

You know that old saying about dissatisfied customers making a lot

of noise and happy customers making very little noise? It is especially

true when it comes to vaccine injuries. A baby who dies or is seriously

injured or even just spends a couple of weeks being very sick after

receiving a set of vaccines will be all too visible. Parents, family,

friends, coworkers, acquaintances–every person around will hear about

the problems. This phenomena is increasing as vaccine concerns rise.

Parent’s are less and less willing to consider a problem which occurs

following vaccination as just a coincidence.

Now, listen carefully, because this is the most important point of

all. Defenders should stop denying vaccine damage. When a parent

testifies that their child was damaged by a vaccine they should fall

all over themselves to acknowledge what happened, to agree that

vaccines can, indeed cause injuries, to encourage the parent to report

what happened to VAERS, to sympathize if they say the doctor denied the

incident and refused to report it. I’ve only seen two responses to

vaccine damage reports in these online debates from the pro-vaccine

side: sometimes it is just ignored as though the parent hadn’t said

anything, the rest of the time it is denied in one way or another.

“Anecdotal evidence” is a popular response, for example.

Comment pages are widely read, which is why this coterie posts on

comment pages to defend vaccines. Many people read (lurk) without ever

posting. Each time a vaccine defender denies the existence of vaccine

damage there is a pretty good chance that someone with direct

experience of such damage is lurking and reading the denial. And

feeling angry and disgusted.

But things get worse. Parents are concerned about the possibility of

vaccine damage. They read stories about children who were damaged (true

or not). They hear that the doctors denied that vaccines caused the

problems. They see vaccine defenders either attacking or ignoring the

parents of sick children. They even see, as I recently did, a vaccine

defender proclaiming gleefully that the VAERS system is useless and

cannot be used as a source of information about the risks of vaccines.

What sort of message are vaccine defenders sending out to the public?

Clear enough, unfortunately. If a parent is trusting enough to have

their child vaccinated and something goes wrong they will have no

recourse. The doctor will deny it. The system which is supposed to

monitor vaccine injuries is useless and happily announced as useless.

People who admire and support vaccines are so dedicated to their faith

that they will attack the parents of chronically ill children. Ouch!

The official pro-vaccine position is that vaccines are safe. If this

is true, a good system for tracking vaccine damage would confirm that

safety. If vaccine defenders really believe that vaccines are

completely safe and effective they should be fighting passionately for

a system that tries to collect every vaccine reaction, no matter how

minor. The current system obviously allows many thousands of reactions

to pass unrecorded, perhaps, as the anti-vaccine critics claim, many

millions. The only way to sort this out is to replace an ineffective

system with an effective one. To replace bad statistics with good

statistics. If pro-vaccine folks really, honestly, wholeheartedly

believe in the safety of vaccines they should be fighting, hard, for an

effective system of monitoring vaccine damage. We all need to end the

confusion.

On the same note, a good study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated

populations will obviously prove that vaccines are safe, right? So why

don’t the vaccine defenders fight for such a study? Vaccines make

children healthier and the evidence should be easy enough to find. Yes?

I think vaccine defenders need some help because they are not

convincing people and I think they know they are not convincing people.

I’ve shared these thoughts in an attempt to save the vaccine

defenders from wasting their time and energy. Think about it. Start

persuading and stop ranting.

Are they really fighting to defend vaccines or are they just out

there to tell everyone how smart they are? Some of us are wondering.