http://pediatrics.medscape.com/prometheus/SRAM/2001/v05.n01/sram0501.03.fried/sram0501.03.fried-01.html

 

Advertisement
FaceFacts.com

Site Map   Your Account   Support   About Us   Marketplace

Offerings:  Medscape.com   Charts   Mobile   Logician   CBSHealthwatch

 

From
The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine

Opposition To Immunization: A Pattern Of Deception

Edward R. Friedlander


Abstract

Several Internet Web sites opposing childhood immunizations are examined. Those sites that contain citations to scientific papers misrepresent their contents. [Scientific Review of Alt Med 5(1):18-23, 2001© 2001 Prometheus Books, Inc.]


Introduction

Thanks mostly to immunization, diseases such as measles, polio, diphtheria, tetanus, and rubella are rare in the developed world. Today's immunizations work by enhancing the body's own immunity. Because they are effective, simple, natural, and prevention-based interventions, we might expect "complementary medicine" theoreticians to embrace them. However, opposition to immunization is common within the "alternative medicine" community, with many practitioners of the various schools denying its safety or usefulness.[1] Such opposition has been a factor in leading many people to become more concerned about risks of immunization than the risk of developing diseases that are no longer part of everyday experience in developed nations.

Although many chiropractors oppose immunization, many others strongly encourage their patients to accept immunization.[2] The Faculty of Homeopathy in Great Britain has a formal statement acknowledging that homeopathic remedies do not affect antibodies, and hence it does not recommend that homeopathy be substituted for standard immunization. Unfortunately many homeopaths ignore this statement. Recent US surveys of naturopaths and homeopaths,[3] and of chiropractors[4] revealed that some of each recommend immunization, and others openly oppose immunization. But in each category, the majority either declined to answer or said they left the decision to the family. This may surprise readers who pay their own physicians to give them well-informed guidance. Perhaps federal policies that call for complete immunization have affected the approach of these practitioners, many of whom would like to be reimbursed as legitimate primary care providers.

 

continued...


Edward R Friedlander, MD, is Chairman, Department of Pathology, University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine, Kansas City, MO 64106.

  

Next Section

Section 1 of 7

 

 

INTERACT

interact printerPrintable version of this article.
clear pixel
interact envelopeEmail this article to a colleague.
clear pixel

 

RECOMMENDED LINKS

MEDSCAPE NETWORK

Nurses


RELATED SPECIALTIES

Family Medicine

Infectious Diseases

Pediatrics

Primary Care

Next Section


Advertisement
Click Here for Effexor XR!

Site Map   Your Account   Support   About Us   Marketplace


Medscape Search Options

Select a database to search, enter a search term, then click “go.”    Advanced Search Forms

All material on this website is protected by copyright. Copyright © 1994-2001 by Medscape Inc. All rights reserved. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties. Medscape requires 3.x browsers or better from Netscape or Microsoft.

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.