Science and the Media
Many of the issues
described so far have, or will ultimately, come before the public either
directly as a ballot issue, or indirectly through voter decisions on candidates
for public office.
How does the ordinary citizen decide between conflicting claims, especially when those claims are based on complex scientific, technological, medical or economic arguments? Arguments aimed at influencing our opinions are inundating our lives through television and radio “talk shows,” and through millions of “pages” on internet sites. These media outlets have become increasingly influential in molding our opinions. The danger inherent in this situation cannot be minimized or ignored.
A case in point is the government-mandated vaccination of children against specific diseases, and the role that the media has played in perpetuating a scandalous hoax regarding the safety of the vaccine.
How does the ordinary citizen decide between conflicting claims, especially when those claims are based on complex scientific, technological, medical or economic arguments? Arguments aimed at influencing our opinions are inundating our lives through television and radio “talk shows,” and through millions of “pages” on internet sites. These media outlets have become increasingly influential in molding our opinions. The danger inherent in this situation cannot be minimized or ignored.
A case in point is the government-mandated vaccination of children against specific diseases, and the role that the media has played in perpetuating a scandalous hoax regarding the safety of the vaccine.
The MMR vaccine is safe and effective.
Until recently, children in the United States were routinely vaccinated against mumps, measles and rubella (German measles). Today people are being told that the MMR vaccine causes autism.
Many parents are refusing to have their children vaccinated because of false information presented by self-proclaimed "experts." These parents, understandably frightened by a possible threat to the health of their children, are in fact endangering the lives of their own children, and the lives of the children with whom their children come in contact.
The MMR vaccine is safe and effective.
Until recently, children in the United States were routinely vaccinated against mumps, measles and rubella (German measles). Today people are being told that the MMR vaccine causes autism.
Many parents are refusing to have their children vaccinated because of false information presented by self-proclaimed "experts." These parents, understandably frightened by a possible threat to the health of their children, are in fact endangering the lives of their own children, and the lives of the children with whom their children come in contact.
Many parents are refusing to have their children vaccinated because of false information presented by self-proclaimed "experts." These parents, understandably frightened by a possible threat to the health of their children, are in fact endangering the lives of their own children, and the lives of the children with whom their children come in contact.
The so-called MMR
vaccine is an immunization shot against measles, mumps and rubella that was first developed in the late 1960s. The vaccine is a
mixture of three live attenuated
viruses, administered via
injection. The shot is generally given to children around the age of one year,
with a second dose before starting school (i.e. age 4/5). The second dose is
not a booster; it is a dose to produce immunity in the small number
of persons (2–5%) who fail to develop measles immunity after the first dose. In
the United States, the vaccine was licensed in 1971 and the second dose was
introduced in 1989.
Today, the incidence of measles has
fallen to less than 1% of people under the age of 30 in countries with routine childhood
vaccination. In the United States, reported cases of measles fell from hundreds
of thousands to tens of thousands per year following introduction of the
vaccine in 1963. Increasing uptake of the vaccine following outbreaks in 1971
and 1977 brought this down to thousands of cases per year in the 1980s. An
outbreak of almost 30,000 cases in 1990 led to a renewed push for vaccination
and the addition of a second vaccine to the recommended schedule. Fewer than
200 cases have been reported each year since 1997, and the disease is no longer
considered endemic.
The history of this controversy began in Britain 20 years ago.
In 1994, the vaccine
was mandated for all school age children in Britain. In 1998, a British
gastroenterologist, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, published a paper in The Lancet, a respected British medical
journal, suggesting a possible
association between the MMR vaccine and autism. The initial press coverage of
this suggestion was modest.
Following Wakefield's claims in 1998, multiple large epidemiological studies were undertaken. Reviews of the evidence by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Institute of Medicine of the US National Academy of Sciences, as well as the UK National Health Service, all found no link between the vaccine and autism.
Despite the medical evidence, a significant controversy began to gain momentum in 2001 and 2002 after Wakefield published subsequent papers that suggested that the MMR immunization program was not safe.
These included a review paper with no new evidence, published in a minor journal, and two papers on laboratory work that Wakefield claimed showed that measles virus had been found in tissue samples taken from children who had autism and bowel problems.
What followed was widespread media coverage that included distressing anecdotal evidence from parents, and political coverage attacking the British health service and government, including demands that Prime minister Tony Blair reveal whether his infant son Leo had been given the vaccine. It was the biggest science story of 2002 in Britain, with over a thousand articles written mostly by non-expert commentators.
More of these articles dealt with the question about whether the Blair's son had received the vaccine, than with the then existing and overwhelming medical evidence that MMR is safe.
(I can find no evidence that the Blair's son Leo is autistic. Bringing the child into the controversy seems to be part of the "scare tactics" typical of this type of controversy. There is the implication that if the British Prime Minister refuses to state whether his son received the vaccine, then there is something to hide. People fear any hint of government "cover-up." )
Let's get back to the source of the vaccine scare: Dr. Andrew Wakefield.
Despite the medical evidence, a significant controversy began to gain momentum in 2001 and 2002 after Wakefield published subsequent papers that suggested that the MMR immunization program was not safe.
These included a review paper with no new evidence, published in a minor journal, and two papers on laboratory work that Wakefield claimed showed that measles virus had been found in tissue samples taken from children who had autism and bowel problems.
What followed was widespread media coverage that included distressing anecdotal evidence from parents, and political coverage attacking the British health service and government, including demands that Prime minister Tony Blair reveal whether his infant son Leo had been given the vaccine. It was the biggest science story of 2002 in Britain, with over a thousand articles written mostly by non-expert commentators.
More of these articles dealt with the question about whether the Blair's son had received the vaccine, than with the then existing and overwhelming medical evidence that MMR is safe.
(I can find no evidence that the Blair's son Leo is autistic. Bringing the child into the controversy seems to be part of the "scare tactics" typical of this type of controversy. There is the implication that if the British Prime Minister refuses to state whether his son received the vaccine, then there is something to hide. People fear any hint of government "cover-up." )
Let's get back to the source of the vaccine scare: Dr. Andrew Wakefield.
Investigation by (London)
Sunday Times journalist Brian Deer discovered
that Wakefield had multiple undeclared conflicts of interest,
had manipulated the medical evidence and had broken other ethical codes.
Wakefield's Lancet paper was retracted, and in May 2010 Wakefield was found guilty by the British General Medical Council of serious professional misconduct and was struck off the Medical Register, meaning he could no longer practice as a doctor in the UK.
Wakefield's Lancet paper was retracted, and in May 2010 Wakefield was found guilty by the British General Medical Council of serious professional misconduct and was struck off the Medical Register, meaning he could no longer practice as a doctor in the UK.
Prior to that finding of guilt, Dr. Andrew Wakefield had
moved to The United States where he helped establish and served as the
executive director of Thoughtful House Center for Children, in Austin, Texas, a center
for the study of autism where, according to The Times he "continued to promote the theory of a link
between the MMR vaccine and autism, despite admitting it was not proved."
He subsequently resigned from Thoughtful House in 2010 after the British General Medical Council found that he had been "dishonest and irresponsible" in conducting his earlier autism research in England.
Not only is Wakefield no longer licensed in the UK as a physician, he is not licensed in the US either.
As of January 2011, he still lives in the US where he has a following including celebrities like Jenny McCarthy of the autism advocacy group, Generation Rescue, who wrote the foreword for Wakefield's autobiography, “Callous Disregard,” and believes her son's autism is due to vaccines.
He subsequently resigned from Thoughtful House in 2010 after the British General Medical Council found that he had been "dishonest and irresponsible" in conducting his earlier autism research in England.
Not only is Wakefield no longer licensed in the UK as a physician, he is not licensed in the US either.
As of January 2011, he still lives in the US where he has a following including celebrities like Jenny McCarthy of the autism advocacy group, Generation Rescue, who wrote the foreword for Wakefield's autobiography, “Callous Disregard,” and believes her son's autism is due to vaccines.
More on the influence of McCarthy’s opinion, and its spread
throughout the United States via the Oprah Winfrey Show, will be presented
later. But for now, who is she?
Jennifer Ann "Jenny" McCarthy is an American model, comedian, actress, author and—in the minds of some critics—public health menace.
She began her career as a Playboy magazine model in 1993, before launching a television and film acting career. Most recently, she has written books about parenting, and has become an activist promoting claims—not supported by medical evidence—that vaccines cause autism and chelation therapy helps cure it.
Jennifer Ann "Jenny" McCarthy is an American model, comedian, actress, author and—in the minds of some critics—public health menace.
She began her career as a Playboy magazine model in 1993, before launching a television and film acting career. Most recently, she has written books about parenting, and has become an activist promoting claims—not supported by medical evidence—that vaccines cause autism and chelation therapy helps cure it.
In 2006, Brian Deer reported
in The Sunday Times that Wakefield
had been paid £435,643, plus expenses, by British trial lawyers attempting to
prove that the vaccine was dangerous, with the undisclosed payments beginning
two years before the Lancet
paper's publication. This funding came from the UK Legal Aid Fund, a fund
intended to provide legal services to the poor.
In January 2011, an
article by Brian Deer and its accompanying editorial in BMJ (British Medical Journal) declared Wakefield's work
to be an "elaborate fraud.”
In a follow-up article Deer said that Wakefield had planned to launch a venture on the back of an MMR vaccination scare that would profit from new medical tests and "litigation driven testing."
By that time, Wakefield's study and public recommendations against the use of the combined MMR vaccine were linked to a steep decline in vaccination rates in the United Kingdom and a corresponding rise in measles cases, resulting in serious illness and several fatalities.
Wakefield has continued to defend his research and conclusions, saying there was no fraud, hoax or profit motive.
In a follow-up article Deer said that Wakefield had planned to launch a venture on the back of an MMR vaccination scare that would profit from new medical tests and "litigation driven testing."
By that time, Wakefield's study and public recommendations against the use of the combined MMR vaccine were linked to a steep decline in vaccination rates in the United Kingdom and a corresponding rise in measles cases, resulting in serious illness and several fatalities.
Wakefield has continued to defend his research and conclusions, saying there was no fraud, hoax or profit motive.
The scientific consensus is that no evidence links the vaccine to the development of autism, and that the vaccine's benefits greatly outweigh any risks.
The most recent (April 2015) summary of this issue can be found at this link.
On the surface, Wakefield appears to bear the blame for the harm done by his publication of fraudulent medical research.
But is the blame only Wakefield's?
See the next post.
But is the blame only Wakefield's?
See the next post.
No comments:
Post a Comment