Vaccine Wars

As stated in its title, "The Vaccine Wars" focuses on the debate of immunization: should newborns be vaccinated or not? Prior to watching the video, I thought that vaccination is something that every newborn should have. I was myopic in the sense that I saw no reason not to be vaccinated. Why should one decline vaccination for their child when this action would simply put their child in danger of being infected by a horrible disease? However, after watching the video, I recognized some of the cons of immunization- both from the parents' and doctors' points of views. This was very interesting to me, as I have never thought about the negative effects of a vaccine, something that prevents terrible diseases from resurfacing the population. 

As expected, doctors and other professionals in the field generally argued for immunization of all children, as they stated that vaccines are a public health miracle. They supported their standpoint by arguing that any unimmunized children can be infected by a virus, and can in turn harm immunized children. This is not fair. In addition, they argued that the risks of immunization outweigh the risks of unimmunization. Specifically, one doctor argued that the only risk of getting a vaccine is getting a harmful reaction or small amounts of pain, while the risk of not getting a vaccine is getting a serious disease. Ultimately, the risks of unimmunzation are greater than those of immunization. 

On the other hand, many parents argued against vaccination. Some main arguments for this point of view are that children should contract natural illness the same way people have in the past: without vaccination. Illness is not bad, and people must deal with it. They also argued that vaccines can cause brain injury in a small segment of the population. For example, many parents truly believe that the MMR vaccine can cause autism. In addition, some parents don't see the need for a vaccine against diseases that they haven't seen in generations. For example, some parents argue that there is no need for the polio vaccine, as polio has not surfaced the population in many decades. Lastly, many parents think that the doctors just want money;  doctors don't care about protecting the patients against disease, as long as they are making money from their vaccines. 

The vaccine war is especially prevalent in the public health world. This may be the case because of the few serious reactions to the vaccines. When someone reacts badly to a vaccine, the word quickly spreads. This creates a serious debate between those parents against immunization and health professionals who are for vaccination. In addition, the video made it clear that there are many people who see health professionals as money-seeking and uncaring for their patients. While I don't believe this to be true, it could cause a serious debate on the topic of vaccination. Regarding the debate, I think the parents should be the ones who ultimately decide whether children should receive a specific vaccine. However, I think it is the doctor's job to convince the parents that vaccination is the right thing to do. 

In order to attempt to increase vaccination rates, health policy makers could use the mass media to promote the goodness of vaccines to the public. Just as the community uses the mass media to show a bad reaction to a vaccine (for example, the Redskins cheerleader), health policymakers could show people who have been protected against the disease. One example that was especially persuasive to me was the idea of herd immunity. Herd immunity is immunity of a community, or population. In the view of the health professionals, the more immunity of a community, the better. Herd immunity can be compared to a brick wall protecting a community against an enemy. If more people in the community are protected, the less likely anyone in it is to be harmed. The idea of herd immunity is compelling, and is one that i think policymakers should use.