Monday, April 13, 2009
On pages 231 to 232 Carroll states several methods used to discredit vaccinations. Find and describe other methods that radical scientists have used to attempt to discredit vaccines and other established medical practices. Evaluate the methods based on both their truthfulness and their effectiveness.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Those opposed to vaccination often claim that vaccines actually do more harm than good. A common argument supporting this attempts to be one of common sense but not scientific research; that all the vaccines we give out kids are weakening their immune systems due to “vaccine overload” and leading to easier acquisition of diseases such as autism in children. Though a valiant attempt at an argument, it fails as studies in countries all over the world show that there is no difference in autism development in vaccinated children as opposed to unvaccinated children and because in our understanding of the immune system, we can safely say that vaccines do not overwhelm the immune system. Vaccines, introduction of dead, inert, or otherwise denatured pathogens into the immune system, introduce the B and T cells to the antigens of the pathogen, resulting in memory B cell production allowing for a quicker and more powerful response to future pathogen exposure, provide little more exposure than a child normal experiences. The average child is infected by 4-6 viruses every year (real, live, full strength viruses unlike those from vaccines), and the occasional vaccine is not much to be taken care of by their immune systems. This argument is further flawed in the fact that autism is not even an immune-related disorder but rather a nervous system one. Despite this argument, the science behind vaccines prevails in showing that vaccines do help and not harm.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/596476?cookieSet=1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_controversy
There’s a long running debate in medicine: whether or not vaccines actually work. As Art has said, there have been several biologically improbable methods, such as the vaccine overload theory, that have made parents wary of vaccines. Newest to the scene is the theory that vaccines only increase the risk of autism, or symptoms on the autism spectrum in young children. This theory has taken off in recent years, and although its done nothing but spark worry in the overly-protective parent, there has been no definite conclusion, leading the scientific community to come to the consensus that the link does not exist at all. This had stemmed from thiomersal, an organic mercury used in child vaccines, but in 2003 the Center for Disease Control denied a link between thiomersal and autism. However, the controversy had shifted to the MMR vaccine, a vaccine administered in UK, and had apparently affected 12 children with autism-like symptoms, according to Wakefield et. all, in what was later dubbed an erroneous report. However, Wakefield, being a radical, insisted if the vaccine, used to immunize a child against measles, mumps, and rubella, was given in three shots instead of one shot, then the threat of autism would be nullified. However, several of his peers quickly dismissed his work, finding no correlation between the MMR and the autism, and furthermore, Wakefield had taken money from the prosecutors in order to conjure up some scientific “evidence” to take down the MMR vaccine producer in court, as well as the parents quoted being litigants in the court case. Furthermore, Wakefield himself had developed a rival to the MMR vaccine, and lost out, after certifying that there was no autism risk. As soon as this information leaked, the paper’s co-authors flipped, and only left Wakefield and another trying to save a sinking ship.
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/mmr_vaccine_controversy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/mmr_vaccine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/vaccine_controversy
http://briandeer.com/mmr/lancet-paper.htm
On page 231, Carroll talks about his own beliefs toward vaccination and others take on the issue. He targets chiropractors and talks about their general dislike for vaccinations. One major argument when speaking against vaccines is that there’s another reason for the decline of the disease rather than the vaccine.
ReplyDeleteA Danish doctor wrote in his medical journal that he traveled to Greenland to spread vaccines to the children there. However, after some research, he realized that there was a natural decline in the rate of the disease before the vaccine was even largely administered. This could happen for many reasons. One is better nutrition and living conditions that could strengthen the immune system to fight off infections. Another is passive immunity that is transferred to a baby from a mother. This could happen over time. If a mom becomes immune to a disease from exposure or other reasons, she could pass the antibodies onto her children to help them fight off the infection if they were ever exposed to the disease.
Another common argument against vaccines is their negative effect on the immune system. In one case studied by a doctor giving out vaccinations, a child would fall ill every time she was given a vaccine. The doctor tried many things to sooth her symptoms until he finally tried to give her vaccine nosode. This immediately had her well until her next vaccine, when she fell ill again. This proved the doctors thoughts that she was a victim of immuno-deficiency caused by the vaccines she was given.
A major argument against vaccination is its effects on the natural process of evolution. By artificially injecting unharmful forms of a disease, we may be messing with natural immunity and selective advantage. It is a selective advantage to be naturally immune to a disease or infection, but making someone artificially immune may be considered messing with nature.
There have been many cases where the amount of disease has decreased. Most of these cases have been attributed to vaccines. However, data considering when the vaccines were given out and when the disease rates decreased don’t add up. Diseases often decreased significantly before the vaccine was even widely distributed, therefore leading many scientists to believe that there were other causes, besides artificial vaccines, that made the disease rate decrease.
http://www.vaccinetruth.org/doctors_against_vaccines.htm
http://100777.com/node/217
http://www.alaskawellness.com/jul-aug01/evidence.htm
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSome radical scientists are skeptical of vaccines because of their chemical content, which includes formaldehyde, thiomersal, a derivative of mercury, aluminum phosphate, phenol, alum, and acetone.
ReplyDeleteAnother argument is that vaccines can be ineffective. One article describes an outbreak of chicken pox at an elementary school among 20 children who had all been vaccinated for chicken pox. Another talks about a batch of Polio vaccine that actually caused type 1 polio. Cases of ineffective or unreliable vaccines however unlikely can scare people into not getting them.
Another more subtle discredit to vaccinations is the internet itself. More and more people are using the internet as a credible source for information, when it reality it just feeds suspicion. When I went to look up criticisms of vaccines, the first website referred to anyone who wants to vaccinate your child as ‘the bureaucrats.’ Dr. Richard K. Zimmerman performs a study to analyze the influence of vaccine criticisms on the web. He found that a significant number of already protective parents refused to give their children vaccinations out of fear for adverse reactions such as multiple sclerosis, autism, and diabetes based off of information they read off the internet.
http://www.vaccinetruth.org/vaccine_mistakes1.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_controversy
Monday, April 13, 2009
ReplyDeleteOn pages 231 to 232 Carroll states several methods used to discredit vaccinations. Find and describe other methods that radical scientists have used to attempt to discredit vaccines and other established medical practices. Evaluate the methods based on both their truthfulness and their effectiveness.
Posted by Mark Lee at 5:24 PM
Answer:
Carroll states his belief towards vaccination and how they can actually have a negative effect on your body and cause harm to you. A common side effect of vaccinations is encephalitis, acute inflammation of the brain, but there are many more problems vaccines can cause that are much more dangerous and fatal.
There have been many cases of people affected negatively by vaccinations. In one case, a 2 year old girl named Elisa was vaccinated but constantly had recurring coughs and fever. She was given homeopathic remedy, calc-p C 200 that helped her stay well for a while but then she fell sick. Then the doctor finally realized that Elisa could be the victim of an immune-deficiency caused by vaccines. His theory was correct and she stayed well until given another vaccine. Every time a vaccine was given, she would fall sick. This is a great danger of vaccines that can cause sicknesses or even deaths in people.
Another case is of a girl named Carina who was healthy and given only some of the vaccinations stipulated for her age. But she could not speak/understand language. She was 3 and couldn’t even say one word. This problem was caused by vaccines. She was given a vaccine nosode and in two days she was able to say 4 understandable words and in 6 months was caught up to the other kids her age. Her personality changed completely. It is incredible how vaccines caused a lack of language.
A common argument against vaccinations is the suppression of immune systems. Doctors are disputing over the effectiveness and safety of vaccinations. Some doctors believe that benefits of preventing suffering and death of infectious diseases outweigh rare adverse effects of immunization. However, opponents argue that vaccines do not work effectively. I can not agree that vaccines do not wok because of the enormous amount of evidence that say they do. For example, vaccinations almost single handedly eradicated polio. Chemicals have been found in vaccines that are very damaging to help. For example, the organic mercury content of thiomersal in child vaccines is said to have contributed to autism. In July of 1999, the Centers for Disease Control asked vaccine makers to remove thiomersal from vaccines as quickly as possible. The first one that gets a lot of press, is that the additives and preservatives that are injected with the inoculant are quite toxic. aluminum, commonly in the form of aluminum hydroxide or aluminum phosphate, has been increasingly phased in, and some studies have linked aluminum to autism as well. Aluminum is neurotoxic even in very small quantities, and can build up in the blood, brain and bones. Babies with compromised kidney function may accumulate enough aluminum to be toxic to the nervous system and bones at 4-5mcg per kg of body weight, meaning that a 6.5 pound (3 kg) baby exposed to 12-15mcg of aluminum may already be at toxic levels (“The Vaccine Controversy”). There is also evidence that schizophrenia is associated with prenatal exposure to rubella, influenza and toxoplasmosis infectious. Vaccinations of these diseases during pregnancy are very dangerous and may lead to sickness or even death. As the incidence of autoimmune diseases in our children rise to epidemic levels, concerned people see a credible correlation to vaccine history and want the independently researched scientific data that verifies both safety and efficacy of these medical products and procedures. Vaccine proponents, while they admit there are some risks, keep assuring us that vaccines are safe and vaccination saves lives. Those who question, they say, forget or are unaware of how devastating diseases were before the advent of vaccines.
http://www.vaccinetruth.org/doctors_against_vaccines.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encephalitis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_controversy
http://www.know-vaccines.org/controversy.html
http://trusted.md/blog/vreni_gurd/2009/02/14/the_vaccine_controversy