It angers me when people make bad
decisions that threaten the health and
safety of other people. Whether you're
driving drunk, parading loaded firearms
in public, or choosing to not vaccinate
your child (exceptions for children with
health conditions that contraindicate
vaccinations), you are a danger to your
own health and to the health of others
-- and I am fed up with the ignorance
and arrogance behind these decisions.
To be fair, I have to briefly clarify my
frustration with drunk driving. Knowing
what we now know about the
interactions between genetics,
neurobiology and the social variables of
alcoholism and substance abuse, I can
wrap a little compassion around those
drunk drivers who are struggling with
addiction. By no means will I condone
or pardon drunk driving, but there is
some tiny fragment of that
phenomenon that eventually warrants
patience and understanding.
Anti-vaxxers, on the other hand, are no
longer deserving of my patience and
compassion. People who purposely
choose not to vaccinate themselves or
their children against diseases like
measles, whooping cough, rubella, and
so on are endangering the lives of
others. In the current measles
outbreak
that started in Disneyland,
All
of these babies are younger than 1 year
old, which is the age at which the first
MMR (measles-mumps-rubella)
vaccine
is done. These infants were counting on
us, their herd, to provide them with
community immunity until they were
old enough to get vaccinated. It is not
science's fault that these children, our
fellow Americans, caught the measles.
It is not their parents' fault. It is the
fault of the anti-vaxxers, the vaccine
cynics.
Let's all stop calling anti-vaxxers
"vaccine skeptics" because it is unfair
to genuine skepticism. As a
pediatrician, I have seen the difference
between skeptical parents and cynical
parents. Skeptics are driven by
curiosity, and they make it clear that
health care providers have to earn
their trust -- but it can be earned. As a
health care provider, I do not assume
anyone's trust and appreciate the
opportunity to earn and maintain the
trust of my patients and their families.
Whether we are talking about
vaccinations, medications, imaging
studies, or surgical procedures, the
skeptical parents of my patients want to
have their concerns acknowledged and
their questions answered. I am happy
to oblige. My conversations with them
are informative and even enjoyable
because these are transparent
exchanges about what priorities shape
our perspectives, where we get our
information, and how to contend with
risk. Genuine skepticism can transform
the doctor-patient relationship from
patriarchy to partnership, and we ne
ed this now more than ever in modern
medicine.
Anti-vaxxers are mostly cynics, and
they are a whole other phenomenon. I
am fortunate to have only experienced
cynical parents outside of my direct
clinical work. Cynics are not driven by curiosity but by an ugly mix of
ignorance and arrogance. After
dumpster diving on the Internet for
pseudo-science, anti-vaxxers have
decided that their contempt for public
health guidelines and their distrust of
modern medicine somehow makes them
more "informed."
As a pediatrician and public health
policy wonk, the cynical anti-vaxxers
frustrate me on several levels. First,
there is no amount of expensive
scientific research that will assure anti-
vaxxers about the safety, efficacy and
necessity of vaccines. Where genuine
skeptics ask questions in order to
learn, cynics ask questions in order to
scorn. Presenting legitimate peer-
reviewed scientific data to anti-vaxxers
does not persuade them because they
already reached a verdict based on their
fears and contempt. The scientific
community has diverted so much
funding and resources towards
disproving any causal relationship
between vaccines and autism, but to
what end? Those who get vaccinated
don't really need the additional proof,
and anti-vaxxers don't really care
about the real work of the scientific
method. As a result, millions of dollars
that could have been used to research
the real causes of autism or to study
the real toxins in our environment are
wasted proving what has already been
proven repeatedly: Vaccines are safe,
effective, and necessary for public
health.
It frustrates me that anti-vaxxers
benefit from herd immunity but refuse
to contribute to it. Those of us who get
vaccines are improving our own
individual lives as well as those around
us because vaccinated bodies do not
give dangerous viruses and bacteria
opportunities to start an infection,
reproduce, and pass on to others. This
is exactly how the United States
declared itself free of measles 15 years
ago. Regardless of whether the anti-
vaxxers admit it or not, they benefit
from herd immunity. But anti-vaxxers
are not the ones for whom herd
immunity is intended. As a pediatrician, I see infants who are too young to
receive certain vaccines. I see patients
whose immune systems are impaired
because they have organ transplants
or
they are undergoing treatments for
cancer. All of these children are part of
our herd, our community, and they are
depending on the rest of us who are
healthy enough to get vaccines to do
our part in maintaining our collective
immunity.
Getting vaccinated involves an element
of social responsibility. The strength of
our public health is reliant on a web of
mutuality. When we drive sober and at
the speed limit, or when we ban
smoking in public places, we are doing
the basic but important work of keeping
each other safe and healthy.
Vaccinations are an integral part of that
process, and no one should have to
suffer from preventable diseases. As
much as anti-vaxxers may think they
are exercising their right to choose,
they do not have the right to put others
at risk. It took tough laws against drunk
driving to keep people safe, and there
has been a slow but welcome cultural
shift against driving under the
influence. Similarly, we must urge anti-
vaxxers to look beyond their egos and
show some responsibility toward public
health.
AND A BIG HEAR, HEAR FROM THIS
BLOGGER!!!!
No comments:
Post a Comment