June 24, 2003
By Barry Schoub
Anti-vaccination movements are not a new phenomenon. The "Society of
Anti-Vaccinationists" was established in 1798, two years after
Edward Jenner demonstrated that cowpox material was effective in
preventing smallpox.
In 1853 the Anti-Vaccination League was founded in London to provide
a nucleus for anti-vaccination groups to oppose the compulsory
vaccinations acts of Great Britain instituted between 1840 and 1853.
While methods of propagating information may have changed radically
since the 19th century, the basic concerns and the activities of
these groups have changed little since then
|
The views of those against vaccination appear
to be gaining in influence
|
. With the visible disappearance of
many vaccine-preventable diseases and the rise of "New Age"
philosophies combined with the power of the media, the views of the
anti-vaccination lobby appear to be gaining in influence. There is
now a real concern that they could seriously threaten the remarkable
gains made in controlling and eliminating many of the scourges which
have beset mankind.
Vaccines represent one of the most successful and effective
interventions in medicine. A dramatic example is smallpox, which was
responsible for some of the most formidable epidemics of humankind.
In 1967 it was the cause of 2-million deaths; a decade later it was
totally eradicated from the planet by a concerted global vaccination
programme. This and other dramatic successes of vaccinations are
still being attributed by anti-vaccination groups to improved
hygiene, sanitation, nutrition and living standards. This is simply
not so.
Universal vaccination against Haemophilus influenzae, Hib, (a major
cause of meningitis and pneumonia in infants) was introduced only in
1990 in the United States when living standards were hardly
different to the present and this rapidly resulted in a precipitous
drop in the number of cases and is now close to being eliminated in
that country.
Where anti-vaccination sentiments have unfortunately influenced
public opinion the result has been immediate and dramatic. For
example, in the UK a drop in vaccination against whooping cough in
1974 was followed by an epidemic of over 100 000 cases and 36 deaths
in 1978.
Outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases occur periodically in
communities refusing vaccination on religious grounds. Among members
of the Dutch Orthodox Reformed church (about 2% of the population of
the Netherlands), two outbreaks of paralytic poliomyelitis occurred
in 1978 (110 cases) and in 1992 (71 cases) and measles in 1999-2000
(2 961 cases, 3 deaths).
There are some 30 dedicated anti-vaccination sites on the web and an
additional 300 sites also lobby against vaccination. What moves the
anti-vaccination groups? Broadly speaking, objections to vaccines
can be grouped into three categories. Firstly, general fears about
safety; secondly, misconceptions and myths; and thirdly,
philosophical and religious objections.
Safety is an issue in the development and manufacture of vaccines,
because vaccines are generally administered to healthy people,
mainly children, to protect against diseases which the recipient may
only potentially be exposed to.
Globally, safety standards for vaccines are extraordinary high and
in South Africa, as elsewhere in the world, any possible
side-effects are monitored, recorded and investigated by a system
known as VAERS (vaccine adverse events reporting system).
The second category of vaccine objection is based on myths and
misconceptions which surface from time to time and are repeatedly
used by anti-vaccinationists to "substantiate" the hazards or the
irrelevance of vaccines. An example is the supposed association
between the MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) vaccine and autism and
chronic bowel disease. In nearly all cases they are products of the
logical fallacy of post-ergo propter hoc ("after this, therefore
because of this") which mistakes association for causation. However,
despite the overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary,
objections to vaccination persist.
With some parents there may be an intuitive perception that
injecting a foreign material into a child is a cruel and unloving
act. The refusal of vaccination is often born from a New Age value
system which supersedes rational analysis and reasoning. More basic
are those objectors which fall into the "free-loading" category "as
long as everyone else gets the vaccine there is no reason my child
should get it". In an industrialised country such as the US, those
choosing exemption from statutorily compulsory vaccination were 35
times more likely to contract measles than vaccinated persons
In response to what is often seen as scientific arrogance and
sometimes called "scientific terrorism", New Age and Mother Earth
thinking and related alternative health practices have flourished
under the guise of promoting "informed choice".
Parents want the best for their children. Unfortunately a worryingly
strong message is going out to parents to "play-it-safe" and avoid
vaccination. On the other hand for a parent nothing could be more
heart-rending than seeing a child severely damaged by a disease
which could so easily have been prevented by a simple vaccine.
nThe Star's Contributing Editor Professor Barry D Schoub is
executive director of the National Institute for Communicable
Diseases. A bibliography of the relevant scientific literature can
be found on the National Institute for Communicable Diseases'
website http://www.niv.ac.za
|