http://www.observer.co.uk/leaders/story/0,6903,647865,00.html

 

Dogma on MMR does not work

Parents need information and choice

Leader
Sunday February 10, 2002
The Observer

The MMR debate goes to the heart of the relationship between the individual and society. This is an age in which people expect to exercise choice; but there are times when the collective good must prevail. The great programmes against cholera, polio and smallpox could never have taken place had they not been enforced. Yet here we have the makings of a public health disaster, with drift, fear and confusion. The unconfirmed findings of maverick scientists such as Dr Andrew Wakefield prey upon a public which has grown at once more consumerist and more sceptical of authority, with good reason after the BSE and foot and mouth fiascos.

The new risks are much greater than any arising from the use of the combination vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella. The overwhelming factual evidence is that there is no risk from the MMR vaccine itself. Dr Wakefield's unorthodox work has been confounded by more rigorous studies in Britain and elsewhere, which show there is no link between autism and MMR.

To prevent epidemics, 95 per cent of the population needs to be covered by inoculation. The proportion now covered by MMR has fallen to 86 per cent. Tony Blair must urgently square up to his responsibilities. His mulish refusal to disclose his own decision over baby Leo has compounded public doubt. He is, we accept, entitled to privacy but in this respect he is like any other parent who must expose his child to a negligible risk in the interests of a greater public good. On such matters privacy becomes more of a luxury than a right.

The Government must now launch a massive educational offensive. The campaign must not be patronising or needlessly frightening. It must avoid the lofty mandarin arrogance which so incensed the public when the scale of the BSE disaster became apparent. And it should address frankly the fears of people caught in doubt and dilemma, who are worried about the unexplained rise in the number of diagnosed cases of autism.

Perhaps, too, we can learn from the French who offer the alternative of single jabs. There are serious problems with this approach: when it was used for whooping cough in the 1970s, coverage collapsed and there were two epidemics with 100 avoidable deaths. Single jabs for measles, mumps and rubella require six acts of vaccination, and increase the risk of infection. Single vaccines imported to meet the current shortage have not been licensed or tested for toxicity. But there has been no row in France and little resistance to triple inoculation because the policy has been less dogmatic and allows a degree of choice while still putting a premium on the common good. The Government must regain control of this issue, and quickly.

The MMR debate
10.02.2002: Autism screening for all children to end MMR fears
10.02.2002: Focus: An issue of trust
10.02.2002: MMR: Your questions answered
10.02.2002: Jon Henley: 'This is just not an issue in France...'
10.02.2002: "I'm simply bemused": Observer writers on their MMR decisions
10.02.2002: Andrew Rawnsley: My MMR dilemma - who can we believe?
10.02.2002: Nick Hornby: Why parents are angry about autism
10.02.2002: Leader: Dogma on MMR does not work

Live online: MMR debate, Monday 11 February
The MMR debate: put questions to doctors from both sides
MMR talkboard: have your say here

Useful links
23.12.2001: To jab or not to jab? MMR explained
Downing Street: MMR advice
Department of Health: MMR advice
MMR evidence from Public Health Laboratory Service
How safe is MMR? BMJ debate
JABS: Support group for vaccine damaged children
Guardian Unlimited Weblog:More on MMR

Special reports
Special report: medicine and health
SocietyGuardian.co.uk: Public health special

From the archive: Blair MMR row, round one
23.12.2001: Focus: No 10's fear of needles
23.12.2001: Blair: we have never discussed our children's health
23.12.2001: Mary Riddell: Come clean, Mr Blair
23.12.2001: Rod Liddle: Privacy, or hiding the truth?


ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE.  THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.