I love science. I love Steemit. I am very interested in medicine.
Yesterday I had an unpleasant conversation with someone who advocated against vaccination. While I support everyone´s right to share their opinion, I was aggravated by the way that person dealt with critique and evidence suggesting that this person may be wrong. While I kept my argument factual and not personal, I was flagged. That person even sabotaged the account of a new member on Steemit because that member disagreed with the anti-vaccine advocate. Even when a PhD toxologist argued for vaccine safety, that person would accuse him of being a government agent.
This is a very emotional topic for some reason that I do not understand. However, I realized that I was somewhat emotional about it myself and so I decided to look into this topic further.
I admit that I am pro-vaccination. Probably because my mum got me vaccinated according to the recommended schedule. She always told me that vaccinations are necessary. I believed her, because she is my mother, and because she is a nurse with 20+ years of experience in internal medicine. Maybe I was also influenced by my dad´s friend, who studied medicine at Harvard and University College London on fullrides, who now is a world-renowned specialist in Parkinson´s and epilepsy, travelling around the world giving presentations. So, in order for this to be according to the norm, I am disclosing this potential bias.
What I want to do is to stimulate a discussion. I will dive into material and I will try to argue for both sides, using legitimate sources (peer reviewed, published and legitimate research articles). At some point I will reference questionable, extremist websites in order to convey the current public opinion (websites from both sides of the spectrum).
I want to apologize in advance is somebody feels offended. It is not my aim to hurt anybody, or portray them as bad or stupid people. I will reference every source I am using, so you can read my sources yourself. There will be no flagging from my side - unless you become personal. But if you do decide to contribute, please stay factual. If you are stating what you perceive as a fact, please cite your source, and please do not feel attacked if somebody has a differing opinion.
If you agree withw hat I have written above, please proceed. If you do not like above, please just do not continue.
I am not sponsored by big pharma. Sadly I have to say this.
The Cons of Vaccination
Let me begin by talking about the cons of vaccination. According to a recent research article, vaccinations can be contaminated by metals, such as aluminum. The researchers mentioned that the amounts of aluminum found may have adversive effects. It is noteworthy though, that such a statement is merely a hypothesis and needs actual research to be confirmed or denied.
On this website the CDC states that a common vaccination (vaccination against varicella, or chickenpox) can cause side effects. There is a range from mild side effects (soreness, swelling, fever) to severe effects (pneumonis). I would recommend checking out this website as they state ratios of people who suffer side effects (eg 1 out of 25 people may experience a rash). Side effects do occur!
This research article states that vaccinations may cause skin infections.
In this article, research show that there seems to be a link between vaccination against pandemic influenza A H1N1 and narcolepsy. They stated that a vaccination against the so called swine flu was developed in a rather short amount of time to meet the pandemic of spring 2009. Narcolepsy is a disorder that causes patients to sleep more than would be the case in healthy individuals. The researchers found this in Sweden and Finland, but also stated that similar findings were made in France, England and Norway. This is an exceptional case, not only because the correlation found, but also because this vaccine was developed under exceptional conditions. I found another research article that had the same findings
In summary it is a valid statement that vaccinations cause side effects, and that those side effects may be due to contaminants found in vaccines.
A Note on Non-Credible Sources
It is very time-consuming to find research articles that show good evidence against vaccination. Most sources I read that investigated vaccine safety, concluded that vaccinations are safe. Even the sources I found that stated some harmful effects of vaccinations showed that vaccinations are still safe. During my search I encountered websites like this one, that portray statements as facts, which have no scientific basis. They did quote some legitimate research (and I included this in my con arguments), however, they also link sources that claim to be scientific studies, but are not following appropriate methods. This survey, is really just a survey - it has nothing to do with research. The website they published their survey on does not allow any pro-vaccination adds. This indicated that there is a high chance of anti-vaccination bias. I am not saying that conducting a survey is not legitimate, but surveys need a random population of unbiased participants. The claim to be science does not mean it is science.
Another common website type you encounter is this one, which uses emotionally loaded language. I would recommend to refrain from visiting such websites as they do not allow for an objective opinion to be formed.
The Pros of Vaccination
Why do we vaccinate? Because there were diseases that plagued people. Once Robert Koch discovered that many diseases are caused by bacteria, we were able to develop medicine and vaccinations against diseases. This research article shows that human papillomavirus vaccine showed to be effective in the prevention of certain diseases. I need to say that not everybody that was vaccinated was protected against the target disease. Please read the article yourself. Another research article that suggests high effectiveness of vaccines is this one. The effectiveness of vaccine against rotavirus was found to be 94% in industrial nations (hygiene is a factor in vaccine and drug effectiveness).
As a matter of fact, I do believe that this is the only pro of vaccination. Everything else is just a direct effect of this one pro. Vaccinations do what they are supposed to, they prevent infections and wide-spread pandemics. There will always be pandemics appearing, because we simply do not have vaccinations against every disease and because people refuse to vaccinate. Another factor is that germs and pathogens are constantly evolving and because vaccinations undergo a rigorous testing phase (CDC, CDC on vaccine safety research, US Department of Health and Human Services, NHS), which usually prevents unsafe vaccines to hit the market.
Inform Yourself About Safety
Again, there are side effects! Decide for yourself if the risk of having a mild reaction like a rash (1/25) outweighs the risk of you dying from measels or polio. There is an good amount of studies that demonstrate that vaccinations are safe, while it is somewhat difficult to find research suggesting the opposite. Yes, there is evidence of potential harmful substances in vaccines. But why do you worry about a few drops with nano particles, when you sit in a car, which has an air inlet for your cabin right were the toxic exhaust from the car in front of you is?
Additionally, durining my research I read a lot of statements that pointed at the authorities claiming isufficient education about the risks of vaccination. I do not understand why. A simple google search led me to agency website and they disclose almost everything you would want to know:
CDC Vaccine Safety Datalink
CDC Vaccine Information Statements
CDC Vaccine Safety
NHS Information Leaflet
NHS Vaccine Safety Information
University of Oxford Vaccine Knowledge Project
Research Article About Vaccination of To-Be-Mothers in Different Trimesters
I would like to share this link also: Google Scholar Search
If you believe I ignored research articles that were against vaccination, please go and search for articles yourself.
Informing yourself is important, but it is even more important to have the right sources. Media does need to catch readers attention, and thus uses sensationalism. Research on the other side, writes to postulate hypothesis, which are then tested by other researchers. This is why I included only research from the last four years. No research article can claim to be true forever, because new evidence arises all the time.
This is only an opinion. Even though I tried to be objective, this is not a scientific article. I have looked at current research in this area, using multiple sources and websites. I have not conducted any experiments myself.
I want to apologize to anyone who may have been affected by an adversive effect of vaccination. While cases are very rare, they do occur.
Again, if you do decide to share your opinion, cite research from legitimate sources. I will downvote you if you attack someone personal. I am looking forward to having a constructive argument!
Thank you for reading and thank you for giving constructive opinions!
Cheers @lesshorrible!
Thanks for this post!
I would like to add that the person you mentioned in the beginning was able to flag you and the new member of steemit mainly due to a large, bought, SP delegation. There is a general problem attached to these kind of delegations, that enables abuse by trolls.
I am really wondering how that person got a 55 reputation score. Glad he backed off, that really was not a good experience. Thank you for your support! Cheers!
np. When I first saw your resteem, I honestly thought: WTF, @lesshorrible is an anti-vaxxer?!? But when I got what was going on, I couldn't stay silent - even if it changed nothing in the end.
What is bugging me is that he uses his delegation to downvote other opinions and to give 100% upvote to his one-sentence comments. This is clearly an abuse of that feature, and I wrote a mail to @blocktrades' support (where he bought the delegation from) adressing this. However, I fear there is nothing that will be done. Abuse of delegations is a growing challenge for steemit's community, I fear.
Haha no worries! I mean that is what "curation" means. Like I said, I really respect people expressing their opinions, and Steemit is all about that. But you must respect people and accept that there are different opinions, and that opinion may have a better basis than yours.
Well, the good thing is that most people on here are treating others with respect. And I have a really good experience on Steemit so far. I am convinced that the good people on Steemit outweigh the bad ones by a lot.
Cheers!
Firstly I'd like to thank you, because this post is extremely interesting! This is a sensitive topic, because we all have a different opinion about vaccination. On the other hand, I liked the way you took the subject, which is quite delicate. I find relevant and reliable information. I am not pro-vaccine, but not against vaccination. I always inquire and do research before receiving one. I know someone who has unfortunately suffered grievous problems following a vaccine, but this is a rare case, we must not deprive ourselves of vaccines that could save us because of the effects behind the vaccine. Btw, I just followed you because I love the subjects you talk about on Steemit and the way you write. Have a good day!
Olivia D.
Thank you very much @mlleolivia! This is exactly the type of comment I was hoping for! I really appreciate it. Your approach to vaccination is based on reason. I will refrain from such controversial topics in the future, because it takes a lot of time and discipline to try to construct an objective argument. Also I am afraid that somebody will get personal, even though it is not necessary. Thank you for reading, commenting and following!
Cheers!
Yes, I understand your point of view and it takes a lot of courage to write an article like this one! But well done. Good work. I will Resteem. :)
From a purely statistical standpoint, vaccines are a no-brainer. But everyone has this one story about something going wrong. As a scientist, and from a personal point-of-view, I can comment on this.
For three out of the last ten years, I got the flu shot. Each of those years I got the flu. The other seven years, I neither got the flu shot nor the flu. Now is it possible this is entirely a coincidence? Yes. The flu could have just been worse those three years, or I could have got lucky or unlikely, as you may.
I also understand that it is sometimes difficult to predict the exact effects of injecting genetic material into the body. This concern is why genetic-based medicines have not moved forward as fast as promised. The delivery paradigms can be challenging and require significant individual optimization of dosing for meaningful effects.
So from a scientific viewpoint, there is always uncertainty. Part of the challenge is that too many people on all sides seem to have way too much certainty. It's always best to express in terms of real statistics. In the case of the flu vaccine, the statistics aren't generally great. Between 10-60% effectiveness each year. Most others are much higher.
I agree with everything you said @luckynumber777. Thank you for your comment. I am sure that you know that there are multiple different stains of the flu. So the flu shot is virtually a lottery. There are statistical models that predict which flu strain will be the most common in a year. Personally, I have never gotten a flu shot. And I never gotten the flu. And from what I heard (my mum, the doctors I worked with), the flu shot makes most sense only for people who are at high risk, such as people working in health care, teachers, etc. For everyone else it is not necessary, especially since we do not know which strain of flu may hit you. Again, I really appreciate your input and the fact that you stayed objective and friendly! Cheers!
If it makes you feel good, I have gotten the flu vaccine each of the past 8 years and have had the flu 0 times in that span. The last time I had the flu was 9 years ago :p prior to getting the vaccine.
Constructive discussion with vaccine deniers, I'd like to see that :D
My mother is a doctor. My English language is rather poor, but I believe she would be called a "Chief Physician" in English (I'm from Russia). That is to say she is a physician and she also takes a rather important position from management perspective, if that makes sense :D
Now get a load of this - whilst being a "doctor" she is also, on top of it - a homeopath and a vaccine denier, both for humans and pets. She actually holds some kind of special animosity towards vaccinating pets and veterinarians in general. You'll get no constructive discussions out of her, that I can guarantee you, and don't even think about arguing that whole sham homeopathy thing~ Even my older sister who is a cardiologist, doesn't bother discussing it with my mom, I think she just gave up on that~
Meanwhile I, with no background in medicine whatsoever and without an ability to construct a proper and compelling argument (as opposed to you), I therefore don't touch that topic with a ten-foot pole. And in general just slowly back out of the room whenever discussions about the horrors of vaccines begin :D
I am not a anti-vaccine person and I do vaccinate my cats and myself semi-regularly (I'm still a lazy asshole, but if someone pushes me to a vaccination station or a hospital, I won't hesitate).
That being said I admire your desire to have a discussion on that topic, in part because I myself support vaccines, but as I mentioned above am unable to effectively partake in such conversations. But what's more - it is a kind of sensitive topic to me because of my character I suppose. Even watching such discussions online(say on YouTube) or arguments like "creationism vs science" make me so nervous and agitated that I feel like I'm getting myself into an early grave xD So I tend to avoid it altogether, I'd rather listen to an educational scientific podcast, bypassing all the arguing and drama~
And then there is of course all the backlash that you might get from those who disagree with you, as you yourself mention in your article.
So whenever I see someone who is calm, collected, able to look at both sides of the argument and can provide proof from legitimate sources, all without losing his or her head~ And all while promoting science and scientific approach - well let's say it just makes me warm and fuzzy inside :D
I truly wish you all the best, I hope you become more and more popular, so that you can share the things you know and learn with more people. And also start new conversations on these sensitive topics which hopefully will be seen and joined by more participants~
Thank you very, very much @catpaws. It is very interesting to hear that it is an issue in Russia. So far I have only been aware of this issue in the US and England.
I would say it is not necessarely that you cannot argue with people who oppose vaccinations, but rather just certain individuals. In my opinion, a lot of problems we have today, all around the world, are because some people do not want to listen to or consider other opinions. I am just trying to encourage people to argue constructively and evidence-based.
I would write a longer response because I am really thankful. However, I am pretty tired of typing so please dont take this short reply as a sign of me disliking what you wrote! I hope you have a good night!
Cheers!
It's impossible.
Hey @justtryme! You know, I tried haha.
by the way, I could use some help here:
https://steemit.com/vaccines/@steemtruth/vaccines-do-not-stop-disease
The guy is using graphs in the wrong way, as he shows mortality instead of infections. Nice trick, but leading to the huge misconception that deseases went down before vacs were started, as I pointed out in my comment.
Pretty sure that one is a lost cause. They are throwing "studies" left and right. Some of them are so old.... Also, I really doubt any of them understands the concept of "correclation". Appreciate the effort though. Cheers!