May 19 2003
 

by Madeleine Brindley, The Western Mail

HALF of all parents wrongly believe that scientists are split over the safety of the MMR vaccine, a report finds today.

A media "feeding frenzy" has wrongly convinced people that medics are divided over the triple combined jab when in fact as many as three-quarters of them support it.

The findings from Cardiff University could reignite the debate about the way the media has handled the MMR row.

Since Dr Andrew Wakefield first raised concerns about adverse reactions to MMR in children, including autism, in 1998, take-up of the vaccine has steadily declined.

In Wales, 78.8% of children have had MMR, although many parents, particularly in the Swansea area where the rate is even lower, have opted for single-jab alternatives provided by many private clinics.

Parts of Wales have started to see a resurgence in measles infection in unvaccinated children - more than 30 were affected in two outbreaks in Cardiff and Pontypool this year.

The research by the Cardiff School of Journalism, Media and Cultural Studies, found that at the height of media coverage about the MMR jab 53% of those asked believed that because both sides of the debate received equal coverage, there must be equal evidence for each.

Wakefield's claims stand almost alone in a scientific field dominated by research reporting that MMR is safe, it found. The Government and the medical field also maintain that the triple-jab is the safest way to protect children against measles, mumps and rubella.

Despite the weight of evidence against Wakefield, 23% of the population who absorbed the media coverage of the debate knew of its existence, the researchers said.

The amount of time and space dedicated to covering the MMR issue has been vigorously defended by the media in its role of legitimately informing the public about a vaccine that is routinely offered to every child.

But the Cardiff researchers claim almost half the British public disagree with the media's right to publish such information. They found 48% felt that on matters of public health, journalists should wait until other studies had confirmed findings before reporting such "alarming" research.

But 34% said research such as Wakefield's was newsworthy and should be reported.

"The survey confirms that the news media play a key role in informing the way people understand issues such as the controversy around MMR," said research author Professor Justin Lewis.

"While Wakefield's claims are of legitimate public interest our report shows that research questioning the safety of something that is widely used should be approached with caution, both by scientists and journalists.

"This is especially the case where any decline in confidence can have serious consequences for public health."

But although Wakefield may be a lone voice in the science world, there is a growing group of parents convinced of a link between MMR and autism who are campaigning for studies on their children to be done.

The Western Mail has reported Julie Loch's conviction that her six-year-old son Oliver developed a form of regressive autism after receiving the MMR jab. And we have also followed her campaign for new research. She lives near Newport, and has "no doubt" he was damaged.

Natalie Bowden, a Swansea mother-of-three who has campaigned for parents to be given the choice between MMR and single vaccines on the NHS,

said it was nonsense to suggest parents were not choosing MMR simply because of the media. She called on the Government to commission an independent study into the issue, and predicted studies in the United States would push forward the debate here.