I asked a group of 33 pediatricians what they would say to the question, “Do you believe in vaccines?” while standing in line for coffee. I asked for their help in thinking about an effective, 2 minute answer.
This is part 2 in a series. For detailed information behind the why, read part I (emotional responses) or watch the video explaining how this came to be. As I said, I’m not a believer in scripts. I’m not attempting to suggest there is one, 2 minute segment for every family that will help. Part of the reason I started this blog was that in practice, I realized when I told families what I knew and learned in training, they listened. When I told them what I did for my own children and how I felt, they made decisions. Telling my story seemed essential.
(This is going to sound familiar) I don’t want to increase the divide between those parents who are worried or skeptical of the possible harms of immunization, and those parents, doctors, and experts and who believe in the benefits. Rather, I want to regain our similarities.
Today I’ve included responses from pediatricians that mentioned things that I experienced as “evidenced.” But rather than talk to you about numbers, causality, rates of autism, and the absence of thimerisol in all childhood vaccines (except multi-dose flu shots), these comments focus on the evidence that helps physicians discuss immunizations with families. There was a paucity of numbers in the responses from these physicians.
Dr Gayle Smith (@MDPartner), a general pediatrician in Richmond, VA says it best:
I’d say how much I wished pediatricians were better ‘rock stars’ with our message of prevention so we could be more effective in the media limelight. I’d speak my own willingness to touch the hearts of the families I care for, to carry the bag of fear and worry for them, perhaps lessening their load a bit.
If you’re interested in reading studies about autism and vaccines, the safety of thimerisol, or neurologic outcomes after immunizations, look at “Examine the Evidence.” I often discuss the last study in this list with families. Lots and lots of evidence. But in my experience in the office, data is ultimately not very helpful for families who are fearful of vaccines. As Dr Arlo Miller suggested in comment #34 to Part I, stating how we feel may be much more valuable than stating what we learned in school.
Evidence:
Dr Ellen Lipstein, a general academic pediatrician at Cincinnati Children’s:
For me, and I hope for my patients, vaccines aren’t about beliefs, but about evidence. In all the decisions we make for the people we love we have to balance the evidence of risks with the evidence of benefits. For me there is no doubt that vaccines are highly beneficial for the person that receives them, their family members and the general community. They are not without risks, but the risks are very small, compared to the risks of not vaccinating.
Dr Flaura Winston (@SafetyMD), a pediatrician, Founder and Co- Scientific Director, Center for Injury Research and Prevention, The Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia:
I concur with the “motivational interviewing” approach for patient counseling. It is NOT one-size-fits-all persuasive discussions. Rather, it moves the patient/family to positive behavior change through a partnership. One of many recent reviews can be found in Archives of Pediatrics
Dr Ellen Lipstein again,
In working with families who are vaccine hesitant, I think a valuable option would be to take a page from the shared decision making literature. Specifically we need better resources that visually depict risks. Traditionally (perhaps not surprisingly, nearly all this work is in adult medicine) tools that help individuals determine their values and risk preferences have been limited to situations where there is nearly absolute clinical equipoise, two equally good (or bad) medical options. Think prostate and breast cancer screening and treatment. However, we know that individuals struggle with decisions that the medical community thinks are relatively straight-forward and not situations of equipoise. Taking the lessons from these other settings may help us design resources that facilitate parent understanding, clinical discussions and choices that everyone can live with.
Dr Doug Opel, a bioethicist and pediatrician:
Given that parents consistently report that their child’s provider is the most important influence in their immunization decision-making, we really should have a good idea of what we should say to parents. For instance, studies of doctor-parent communication since the 1960s have found that parents better adhere to recommended treatments and are more satisfied with their visit if they felt that their concerns were understood. A provider’s interpersonal sensitivity and empathy have also been linked to improved outcomes.
Dr Opel references this CDC handout as a great resource for pediatricians working on improving their skills in communicating about immunizations and adds,
We are currently conducting a study in which we are videotaping well-child visits to do just this. The hope is that by directly observing what providers actually say and how parents respond, and then link these provider communication behaviors over time to the child’s immunization status, we can know which communication techniques are linked with improved immunization. A start, I suppose.
Dr Denise Shushan, a pediatrician working in the ER:
I do spend some time with some families who are concerned about MMR/autism in particular detailing that the research of Dr. Wakefield has been thoroughly and repeatedly discredited, as well as informing families that his original intent was to discredit the existing MMR vaccine because he was hoping to sell his own version of the MMR. Most parents are quite receptive and surprised – I think it reminds those people who are intent on believing the “Big Pharma is fooling everyone just to make billions hawking their dangerous vaccines” meme that the supposed saint whose research linked autism and MMR vaccination was motivated by something far less altruistic than they might otherwise believe.
Dr Ari Brown (@Baby411) is a pediatrician and author of the book, Baby 411. She notes that: :
The percentage of cautious parents have risen and fallen depending on the news cycle. I would say the peak numbers were around 2008 with the Hannah Poling [case]. And, 2009 and 2010 with Omnibus proceedings and Wakefield’s starring role in his own Greek tragedy… has made the percentage of cautious parents drop quite a bit.
So, what do you say to the cautious parents? Much of it is not talking, but listening. Studies have shown in low concern settings, people look to the experts for advice. In high concern settings, people look to the empathetic listener, not the expert.
Dr Doug Diekema, a bioethicist and emergency room pediatrician:
First, I make people aware that they may be putting other children at risk by not vaccinating their own children—that almost every school has someone who has cancer or an immune deficiency and who would be placed at risk if they came in contact with an unvaccinated child who had pertussis or measles or chicken pox.
Second, I think we can recognize parent’s concerns about vaccines and share our own concerns about children who are unvaccinated. In the past 6 months, pertussis has killed two infants in Washington State and more than 10 in California. Those are real children killed by a real disease that can be prevented by vaccines. In just two states, 12 deaths in 6 months. Even the wildest scare tactics of the anti-vaccine crowd can’t match that in terms of devastation.
Dr Kronman, a pediatrician and infectious disease fellow:
Some people cannot be immunized, and immunizing your child will protect them, too. At times children are too young to receive vaccines, and others who have cancer or other immunocompromising conditions cannot be vaccinated. Vaccinating your child will protect her, but it will also protect your aging father on chemo. It is good for your child AND for society.
Life expectancy has risen over the last century by 20 years or more, and much of that is due to NOT CATCHING AND DYING FROM DISEASES PREVENTABLE BY VACCINES.
Dr Ari Brown is a pediatrician and author of the book, Baby 411. She points out :
One study in Pediatrics in 2006 categorized parents into 4 groups. Believers, relaxed, cautious, and unconvinced. The “cautious” group is the key group that we should focus our attention to. Believers and relaxed parents believe in vaccinations and they believe in their health care provider to head them in the right direction… Unconvinced parents will never change their minds about vaccinations no matter how much time and effort you spend talking and educating them.
Do I believe in vaccines? Absolutely. Are they completely risk free? No, but in reality nothing is really risk free. It essentially all comes down to the risk versus benefit ratio. The benefit of vaccines far outweighs any rare or perhaps theoretical risk associated with them. After all, [parents] only want to do what is right by their children and to not cause harm.
Dr Ed Marcuse, a pediatrician and Professor of Pediatrics:
I know full well that while science does not have all the answers, it is the best way to get reliable information. But I know there is good and bad science and can be hard to sort out.
Dr Paul Offit, an infectious disease and vaccine expert, author, and Director of the Vaccine Education Center at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia wrote:
Diseases like whooping cough, mumps and measles are again starting to rear their heads causing children to suffer and die. And although vaccines, like all medicines, can cause side effects, the ones you hear about (like autism, allergies, learning disorders, multiple sclerosis, diabetes among others) aren’t caused by vaccines. So the risks that most people fear aren’t real risks.
Dr Marcuse concludes by saying:
I refer [parents] to unbiased sources of good science-based information. At the top of my list is NNii because I can say it accepts no funds from vaccine manufacturers or the government and its only mission is to provide sound information to help parents make well informed choices.
That’s some evidence.
5 Places to go if you’re looking for more:
- www.nnii.org
- www.healthychildren.org : The AAP website designed for parents. It’s easy to read, has great information and backed by a force of 60,000 pediatricians making up the AAP.
- www.ecbt.org Foundation to help families understand the need for timely (up to date) immunizations. There are videos and resources on getting your child’s shots if you can’t pay for them.
- www.vaccine.chop.edu : Great resource for scientific information about shots.
- Examine the Evidence
Julia says
The comment in there about the social responsibility of vaccine is what worked best for me when I was on the fence about vaccinating my daughter for vericella. I told the nurse I was on the fence because chicken pox is not such a bad disease if you get it as a kid and she said, “Maybe not for your daughter, but she lives in the city, goes to school and goes to the park to play there is a good chance she could give it to an immune-compromised child and it could kill that child.” That was all I needed to hear and I said we were all for the vaccination!
I told that to a mom in our neighborhood who won’t get her child any vaccines and she just made a “hmmmph” noise and didn’t respond. She still won’t get her child vaccinated. That to me, is an amazing amount of denial (and cold-heartedness toward other children in the community).
Shannon Des Roches Rosa says
This is helpful, and I appreciate your call to “regain similarities.”
The “Unconvinced” parents Dr. Ari Brown mentioned often react badly to a direct approach, but they may respond to this kind of positive, persistent, and pervasive role modeling — speaking from personal experience as a former Unconvinced mom: https://thinkingautismguide.blogspot.com/2010/09/why-my-child-with-autism-is-fully.html.
The one exercise that finally changed my mind was sitting down and comparing my son’s videos and photos and my own journals with his immunization records — even though I it seemed to me that his autism symptoms appeared immediately after his 15 month immunizations, the evidence I already had on hand revealed a boy who was gradually, not suddenly, falling behind on his social and communication milestones. It was a shocking revelation, but ultimately allowed me to refocus my energies on positive supports for my son.
Wendy Sue Swanson, MD says
Shannon,
Thank you so much for your comment, the link you provided, and your story. I have been thinking about your comment over and over. And I am just so happy for you that you found ways to “refocus your energies on positive supports” for your son. We all need to do that, in various places and spaces and circumstances in our lives, and this is just a beautiful reminder that it can be done.
Your strength, insight, and patience with yourself to discover new ideas is impressive.
thanks, again and again…
A cautious unbeliever says
So posting multiple doctors’ OPINIONS, one of whom holds a patent on a vaccine and has made himself quite comfortable as a result…that’s EVIDENCE?
I started out as a sheep…just doing what my ped told me without a second thought. Then I became a cautious parent when my ped pushed a vax that my child already had. Alarm bells went off…why would he try to give my child something he/she didn’t need? The problem is, once you start asking those questions and digging deeper, you find enough damning EVIDENCE to at least suspend vaccinations until you know more.
I’m still researching, and still not comfortable with vaccinating my children. My pediatrician understands that I will wait until I know more. And he is not willing to answer my questions, so I have to find answers elsewhere.
Sorry…opinions do not equal evidence. There are not hard studies / evidence / proof listed here to back up any of the claims made about 1. herd immunity via artificial immunity 2. risk versus benefit ratio 3. millions of children’s lives have been saved due to vaccines or 4. that ONLY unvaccinated children catch infectious diseases. The bias is obvious. And it’s exactly that bias that puts me in the cautious/unbeliever category.
As for the 12 children dead in 6 months, where is the indepth discussion on that? How many were too young to be vaccinated? How many had underlying medical conditions? How many caught pertussis from an unvax’d person? Vax’d person? How many of those children died from pertussis at all (where are the lab results)? To insinuate that ONLY unvaccinated children catch pertussis, measles, mumps, chicken pox, etc… is insanity and untrue.
Wendy Sue Swanson, MD says
As I wrote, I experienced these quotations and opinions as “evidenced” about the discussion around vaccines. Precisely why I used quotation marks. This is not a post about research-driven evidence in favor of immunizing individuals and communities.
There is stack of research-driven evidence in the links I provided. But that wasn’t what I was writing about. And certainly not what you’re getting at, either.
I’m sorry to hear your pediatrician won’t answer your questions.
Take another look says
Cautious unbeliever:
I think the five links listed at the bottom of the post should provide you ample evidence. The quotes in this post provide you context and an insight into how pediatricians process, package, and deliver this evidence.
Melissa (Confessions of a Dr.Mom) says
I like where you say “to regain our similarities”. I believe this is where, we as pediatricians, can exact change. To listen, to understand different viewpoints, and to be a guide.
I also really like how Dr.Ari Brown put it: “In high concern settings, people look to the empathetic listener, not the expert.” Extremely well said.
Thanks for a fantastic ongoing discussion.
Chris Johnson says
Cautious unbeliever:
You can read Dr. Swanson’s links for details of the scientific evidence, but here’s a practical bit of evidence. Rubella, German measles, is now quite uncommon in this country. This infection causes a fairly mild disease in children — they recover just fine. However, if a woman early in her pregnancy contracts rubella, the results can be devastating to her unborn child: she has about a 20% chance of suffering a miscarriage, and her child has around a 25% chance of getting congenital rubella syndrome. The consequences of that are severe — deafness, heart defects, and brain damage. I recall such cases from early in my training.
We have a vaccine against rubella (it’s in the MMR shot). This vaccine causes the appearance in the bloodstream, several weeks to months later, of measurable antibodies that protect against the infection. We even know the quantity of antibody that needs to be present in the system to be protective. We screen all pregnant women to see if they have this antibody in their blood, and these days most do. Where did those protective antibodies come from? They are the result of being immunized — few, if any, women these days have had the natural infection.
When we give a small boy the vaccine, we are not really doing it to protect him. If he got rubella it would probably be no big deal for him. We vaccinate to protect the unborn children of pregnant women he comes in contact with — say, for example, the future children of your very best (and possibly pregnant) friend or neighbor, since women with small children typically have many women friends of child-bearing age. So we are protecting the future brothers and sisters of your child’s best friends, too.
When we give the vaccine to a small girl, we are doing more than protecting her from the discomfort of rubella: we are protecting her future family when she grows up and has children.
Congenital rubella syndrome is now vanishingly rare in this country. The vaccine is how we have nearly eliminated this scourge.
Viki says
cautious unbelievier,
I don’t think anyone made the claim that only unvaccinated people catch the disease. I live in King County (Seattle area) and the county dept of health statement is that vaccinated persons can get pertussis but will get a milder form of the disease if they do. A friend of a friend didn’t have updated booster for TDAP and neither did her teenage son. She got it, as did her son. Their pertussis was easily treatable and didn’t require hospitalization. Her younger children and husband, who had a booster more recently, didn’t get pertussis. I hear what you’re saying about artifical immunity versus ‘real’ immunity. I don’t doubt that having the full-on infection will produce legions of antibodies. I dont think vaccines are supposed to simulate the full-on infection. I think they’re supposed to prime your body to respond sooner and head off that infection before it can take hold when you are exposed to that pathogen.
As for underlying conditions, it’s hard to predict who will live and who will die. My sister (born premature and low birth weight) and my cousin got pertussis at the same time. My oldest sister remembers seeing the babies caugh until they passed out. My sister lived and my cousin died. Doesn’t make sense that the “healthier” baby died. This presented a concerning dilemma to me because my own kids had more than typical side-effects to DTAP in early infancy. Fundamentally, it came down to this: do I believe that, given enough time, my kids will get the disease? My answer was YES. We travel. I’m originally from a country where all these viruses are alive and well (clearly!). It isn’t far fetched AT ALL that my kids would eventually get it, and that they will share it with your kid one day when we’re both at the Children’s Museum. Then it was a choice of whether I wanted to manage the vaccine side-effects now or the disease at an unexpected time (probably when we finally took the kids abroad).
MamaDoc,
What Dr Lipstein said about equipoise is genius and a breakthrough (for me) about where the disconnect is with some Drs I’ve talked with. Most Drs I’ve met are great at explaining. Our Dr in particular is excellent at listening (agree w/ Dr Opel). But it seems that many Drs whether they are saying it or not seem to think that their job in a vaccine discussion is to ease the parents’ emotions. This is where it’s crucial for the parent to feel like the Dr isn’t talking about “risks in general” but risks for one’s specific child. (Also where the one-size-fits-all criticism comes from). Our Dr won major points from us when she called my son’s GI Dr at Children’s to confirm that rotavirus vaccine would be safe for him. Or double checked the report from the allergist for egg allergy. The affirmative “this all checks out for your kid” is great, just like you would for any medication.
Wendy Sue Swanson, MD says
Viki,
I agree. What Dr Lipstein said is smart and insightful. She works hard and always comes up with incredible perspectives and unique contributions.
I agree as well that we need to talk about risks for one specific child, not “risks in general.” Although for well children with an unremarkable family history, the risks in general do apply. But you’re right and this series and these comments have been a great reminder for me to discuss vaccine “individually” more as opposed to “generally” with families I help care for.
Gayle Schrier Smith, MD says
It is the thoughtful, willing listener physician who will respectfully offer truth as it is understood today who will ultimately prevail against the tide of worry and vaccine-hesitancy.
Nothing in life is fail-proof or without some risk. If pediatricians are always asking the hard questions about every aspect of our medical advice, we will remain deserving of the trust our patients and their families.
I believe it may be time to ask if the current vaccine schedule is as good as it can be. Is a four dose polio schedule as immunogenic as a two dose schedule started later in a child’s life when it is acknowledged that the risk of polio (in a North American child who does not travel outside the continent) is negligible.
Is it possible to approach vaccine research in novel new ways, to aggregate data in the same way that websites like PatientsLikeMe.com are changing what we know about medicine efficacy and side effects. Empowered open source platforms are ripe for ways to make meaningful change, and I can think of no more willing a participant than the vaccine-hesitant parent who chooses a variant vaccine schedule and the pediatrician who agrees to draw and submit antibody titers.
I’ll conclude my thoughts by admitting that my favorite Life’sGood t-shirt sports a TV with the words “Think Outside The Box”. I always have, and I always will. The time has come to think about vaccines in ways that will allow all parents to better appreciate their profound, life-saving value, but also to have researchers study ways in which we can have more for less (more protection for less risk and cost)
Respectfully,
Gayle Schrier Smith, MD
PartnersInPediatrics.info
Melissa (Confessions of a Dr.Mom) says
I have to say I really like what Dr. Gayle Smith said above. Very well said and I do believe we live in a different time. It’s always good to “think outside the box” and make sure the current recommendations are the best they could be.
Thank you Dr. Smith.
Liz Ditz says
Dr. Jen Gunter of the Preemie Primer has a good blog post on whooping cough & protecting preemies/infants:
https://www.preemieprimer.com/pertussis-vaccine-is-safe-for-preemies/
The link to the video is here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwI86C8Q6xk
It’s a 7-minute video so it violates the 2-minute rule but she covers a lot of issues and myths.
Katie says
Dr. Swanson, it was great to see you today. Our whole family is so lucky to have you as our pediatrician. We are so thankful.
This is a very interesting series and I especially love the commentary! Unfortunately, despite all of the good evidence (science based), opinion, and rhetoric, there are just some that will remain unconvinced. And that is why I vaccinate my children – to protect them against those who choose not to.
Lauren says
I will begin by saying I no longer allow my children to receive vaccines. It was a difficult decision made after months of reading information from both viewpoints (yes, I began with the CDC and AAP). I don’t have the energy or desire to get into a debate right now, since my husband and toddler are getting over a stomach bug, but I wanted to address this:
“I refer [parents] to unbiased sources of good science-based information. At the top of my list is NNii because I can say it accepts no funds from vaccine manufacturers or the government and its only mission is to provide sound information to help parents make well informed choices.”
I went to that site, and under funding, they state: “Neither NNii nor its sponsoring corporation, I4PH, accept any financial support from the pharmaceutical industry or the federal government.” Well, that seemed all well and good, until I looked at their list of affiliates. The AAP was listed…the same AAP who accepts large amounts of money from vaccine manufacturers like Wyeth, Merck, and Sanofi Aventis. Hmm! I found it unsettling that NNii did not list exactly WHICH affiliates contribute to them. Well, maybe it makes sense; after all, if I was being financially supported by someone, I suppose I’d say what they wanted me to if I wanted to keep the money coming in.
This is merely one example of why we non-vaxers feel we cannot trust many doctors and mainstream organizations! No one will care about my childs’ well-being more than I will, and I have found this three-part series on vaccines to be fairly arrogant and off-putting.
Would you mind answering a question? I’d like to hear WHY vaccine ingredients are supposedly safe. Maybe you should do a blog post about that!
Oh, and I’d also like to point out that vaccine-related herd immunity is actually a myth; it only applies to groups of people who contracted an illness naturally and thus retain life-long immunity.
Viki says
Lauren,
Please expound on “herd immunity is a myth.” I’ve heard this before and I’m fascinated. Certainly herd immunity depends on the vector. It doesn’t exist for tetanus since your tetanus shot only protects you individually from the bacteria in soil. Same for rabies, as we don’t seek our to vaccinate racooms, squireels and other wild animals. Or, say, West Nile virus, where the infection comes from musquitoes. But there is so much evidence of herd immunity for pertussis, measels, smallpox from many countries around the world that shows infection rates increase when vax rates decrease as well as a reversal of this curve as populations became vaccinated. Not to mention polio eradication. I DO believe that proper nutrition is vital, but I DO NOT believe that we’ve almost eradicated polio completely in Africa through proper nutrition and vitamin supplements. Sadly, vaccinated children in Africa may not contract polio but go to to die from malnutrition and disentery.
Does this mean you don’t believe that vaccines actually work? Last year 3 individuals in my office got H1N1 (2 on either side of my office and the 3rd across the hall). Why didn’t I get sick if we’re all in the same meetings and space each day?
Sophie says
In answer to your query about H1N1, your lack of infection does not prove that your vaccine was effective. I am from the UK and, as you will remember, H1N1 had taken hold long before there was an available vaccine.
Even taking into account the perceived special vulnerability of children and other specific demographics, one of the most noticable features of this “epidemic” was that when 1 member of a family was infected it did not follow that other family members would fall ill, despite being in close and daily proximity. So, unlike seasonal flu, H1N1 picked and chose.
Since none of these people had been vaccinated at the time I am afraid that I cannot regard your exposure to H1N1 and failure to catch it as proof of an effective vaccine.
Lauren says
Viki, have you heard of A.W. Hedrich?
Here:
https://www.vaccineriskawareness.com/The-Herd-Immunity-Theory-Treating-Our-Children-Like-Cattle
“The herd immunity theory was originally coined in 1933 by a researcher called Hedrich. He had been studying measles patterns in the US between 1900-1931 (years before any vaccine was ever invented for measles) and he observed that epidemics of the illness only occurred when less than 68% of children had developed a natural immunity to it. This was based upon the principle that children build their own immunity after suffering with or being exposed to the disease. So the herd immunity theory was, in fact, about natural disease processes and nothing to do with vaccination. If 68% of the population were allowed to build their own natural defences, there would be no raging epidemic.
Later on, vaccinologists adopted the phrase and increased the figure from 68% to 95% with no scientific justification as to why, and then stated that there had to be 95% vaccine coverage to achieve immunity. Essentially, they took Hedrich’s study and manipulated it to promote their vaccination programmes.
(MONTHLY ESTIMATES OF THE CHILD POPULATION ‘SUSCEPTIBLE’ TO MEASLES, 1900-1931, BALTIMORE, MD, AW HEDRICH, American Journal of Epidemiology, May 1933 – Oxford University Press).”
Dr. Russell Blaylock says:
https://www.thenhf.com/article.php?id=1975
“In the original description of herd immunity, the protection to the population at large occurred only if people contracted the infections naturally. The reason for this is that naturally-acquired immunity lasts for a lifetime. The vaccine proponents quickly latched onto this concept and applied it to vaccine-induced immunity. But, there was one major problem – vaccine-induced immunity lasted for only a relatively short period, from 2 to 10 years at most, and then this applies only to humoral immunity. This is why they began, silently, to suggest boosters for most vaccines, even the common childhood infections such as chickenpox, measles, mumps, and rubella.
Then they discovered an even greater problem, the boosters were lasting for only 2 years or less. This is why we are now seeing mandates that youth entering colleges have multiple vaccines, even those which they insisted gave lifelong immunity, such as the MMR. The same is being suggested for full-grown adults. Ironically, no one in the media or medical field is asking what is going on. They just accept that it must be done.
That vaccine-induced herd immunity is mostly myth can be proven quite simply. When I was in medical school, we were taught that all of the childhood vaccines lasted a lifetime. This thinking existed for over 70 years. It was not until relatively recently that it was discovered that most of these vaccines lost their effectiveness 2 to 10 years after being given. What this means is that at least half the population, that is the baby boomers, have had no vaccine-induced immunity against any of these diseases for which they had been vaccinated very early in life. In essence, at least 50% or more of the population was unprotected for decades.
If we listen to present-day wisdom, we are all at risk of resurgent massive epidemics should the vaccination rate fall below 95%. Yet, we have all lived for at least 30 to 40 years with 50% or less of the population having vaccine protection. That is, herd immunity has not existed in this country for many decades and no resurgent epidemics have occurred. Vaccine-induced herd immunity is a lie used to frighten doctors, public-health officials, other medical personnel, and the public into accepting vaccinations.
When we examine the scientific literature, we find that for many of the vaccines protective immunity was 30 to 40%, meaning that 70% to 60% of the public has been without vaccine protection. Again, this would mean that with a 30% to 40% vaccine-effectiveness rate combined with the fact that most people lost their immune protection within 2 to 10 year of being vaccinated, most of us were without the magical 95% number needed for herd immunity. This is why vaccine defenders insist the vaccines have 95% effectiveness rates.”
A short list of vaccine failures:
https://drtenpenny.com/vac_failures.aspx
If you’d like to talk about polio in Africa, we can discuss how the OPV being a live vaccine, sheds in the feces of vaccinated infants, and can/does infect caregivers. Since the clean water supply in many impoverished areas of Africa is a total joke, where do you think that feces goes? Into the water supply, where it not only causes illness from ingesting fecal material, but also passes polio around. Fantastic.
And are you really unaware how the pertussis bacterium keeps mutating and is now more and more ineffective??? I mean, whooping cough has recently been occurring in many vaccinated individuals and was all over the news: https://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/sep/07/whooping-cough-vaccine-working/
Your anecdote is simply that. Should I share how I was pregnant during the height of the H1N1 “pandemic,” and refused to even consider the shot? How my military husband had his since it was mandatory, along with a live-virus seasonal flu shot (contraindicated if immediate family members are immunosuppressed….like his pregnant wife), and he was the only one who got the flu? No, because it’s simply an anecdote. 😉
Darwy says
Neither Blaylock nor Tenpenny are reliable sources of information.
Blaylock has not published nor co-authored any science to support his allegations of harm from vaccines. He publishes a monthly newsletter; that is not science. He sells ‘brain power’ supplements and other items which are of dubious quality and there is no supporting evidence behind them for their use.
Tenpenny is no better. She has a ‘library’ of periodicals and studies which she ‘sells’ to folks who are on the fence about vaccinations – which is in violation of most copyright laws – since she’s essentially selling someone else’s work. She charges for email ‘consultations’ and displays a stunning lack of scientific knowledge when she attempts to ‘educate’ people about vaccinations.
You’re leery of ‘Big Pharma’ funding, yet see no conflict of interest from snake oil sellers who say, “Don’t Trust Them – BUY MY STUFF AND BE HEALTHY!”
Chris Johnson says
Lauren:
The mathematics of how herd immunity works was worked out decades ago, and the data clearly apply to vaccination rates. It’s so uncontroversial to scientists that you won’t find much in the way of internet links from them about whether it exists or not. I described one example upthread — that of rubella, or German measles. If you like, I could send you some examples from the medical literature. Few of these journals are available to parents, and most have pay walls on their web sites.
As Viki says above, polio in Africa is another example. But let’s consider the polio example in a bit more detail. Polio is an enterovirus, a member of an extremely common family of viruses. Children get enterovirus infections all the time — these are the “stomach flu” viruses. We have a vaccine against a single one of these enteroviruses — polio. If not for the vaccine effects, how could it be that the incidence of only one of these very common viruses has dropped essentially to zero in this country, while the incidence of other enteroviruses has stayed the same? Nothing else that affects how enteroviruses behave, such as sanitation or social changes in contacts between children, has changed — only polio vaccination.
Having said that, polio vaccine is a good example of how vaccines can cause injury. We have gone back to the killed polio vaccine (the Salk vaccine) because live virus vaccine, the Sabin vaccine, can cause disease in the tiny fraction of children who have abnormal immune systems. The risks of that are very, very low (on the order of 1 in a million or so), but they are not zero.
I think the best approach for a parent to take when discussing vaccine issues with their child’s doctor is the maxim of “trust, but verify.”
Viki says
Thanks for sharing, Lauren. No I really didn’t know that pertussis was mutating. But that’s easy, isn’t it? Prevnar was recently updated to include new strains. Many vaccines are if there are multiple strains in the wild. My former military husband had his titers checked for the most common vaccines when we consulted an immunologist before traveling to 3rd world Asia. He still showed the required levels of antibodies after 10 years. The doctor didn’t even both to check mine because it has been closer to 20 years. I just got all the shots again. I still show positive titers for TB after 30+ years but none for smallpox. Even the scar has faded. I don’t think I have the expectation that the immunity would last for ever and ever. I don’t mind getting the boosters and do so. I do think that if I get the disease, it will be mild and possibly go undiagnosed because there is some memory of those pathogens.
Which brings me to: can we define what we mean by immunity? The titers measure antibodies which is one measure. But we also rely on memory cells and those can’t be measured.
I can tell you as the parent of immuno-freaky kids, antibodies don’t tell the whole story. My allergist would have sworn on this mother’s grave that my kids weren’t allergic to anyting accord to scratch and blood tests. Then the oral challenge is a different story.
Last, we can do a simple study: look a the Rubella titers of every pregnant woman in America. (OK, every pregnant woman who receives responsible prenatal care.) And compare those values against the last Rubella vaccination? If women of childbearing age were showing compromised immunity by the droves, I think we’d be hearing about it from OBs and midwives. I’ve never heard of a mommy I know coming up under protected in that titer check. Most of my friends stick to the developed world for travel and don’t get MMR boosters.