Pro-Vaccination Efforts May Be Scaring Wary Parents From Shots 482
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Thomas Kienzle reports for the Associated Press on a study which found public health campaigns touting vaccines' effectiveness and debunking the links between autism and other health risks might actually be backfiring, and convincing parents to skip the shots for their kids. 'Corrections of misperceptions about controversial issues like vaccines may be counterproductive in some populations,' says Dr. Brendan Nyhan. 'The best response to false beliefs is not necessarily providing correct information.' In the study, researchers focused on the now-debunked idea that the vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella (or MMR) caused autism. Surveying 1,759 parents, researchers found that while they were able to teach parents that the vaccine and autism were not linked, parents who were surveyed who had initial reservations about vaccines said they were actually less likely to vaccinate their children after hearing the researchers messages. Researchers looked at four methods designed to counter the myth (PDF) that the MMR vaccine can cause autism. They gave people either information from health authorities about the lack of evidence for a connection, information about the danger of the three diseases the MMR vaccine protects against, pictures of children who had one of those three diseases, or a story about an infant who almost died from measles.
At the study's start, the group of parents who were most opposed to vaccination said that on average, the chance they would vaccinate a future child against MMR was 70 percent. After these parents had been given information that the MMR vaccine does not cause autism, they said, on average, the chance they would vaccinate a future child was only 45 percent — even though they also said they were now less likely to believe the vaccine could cause autism. Vaccination rates are currently high, so it's important that any strategies should focus on retaining these numbers and not raise more concerns, tipping parents who are willing to vaccinate away from doing so. 'We shouldn't put too much weight on the idea that there's some magic message out there that will change people's minds.'"
At the study's start, the group of parents who were most opposed to vaccination said that on average, the chance they would vaccinate a future child against MMR was 70 percent. After these parents had been given information that the MMR vaccine does not cause autism, they said, on average, the chance they would vaccinate a future child was only 45 percent — even though they also said they were now less likely to believe the vaccine could cause autism. Vaccination rates are currently high, so it's important that any strategies should focus on retaining these numbers and not raise more concerns, tipping parents who are willing to vaccinate away from doing so. 'We shouldn't put too much weight on the idea that there's some magic message out there that will change people's minds.'"
Too much information... (Score:5, Insightful)
When you order a burger from McDonalds you probably wouldn't be too happy if worker who gives it to you said "don't worry, the chances of you having got a burger that has been spat on are tiny so it is very unlikely I spat in it! Enjoy your meal!"
Re:The more someone yells (Score:5, Insightful)
We live in an age of propaganda, mendaciousness, and manipulation. PR-men are literally in charge of public policy. A positive public information campaign reliant on trust is impossible in our present circumstances.
The answer is simple (Score:3, Insightful)
Jenny McCarthy needs to be impoverished and imprisoned for the huge disservice she has done the human race.
Re:Wrong, study shows disfavor with science. (Score:5, Insightful)
Translation: I'm a fucking moron who fears and doesn't understand science.
Re:Solution - Face-saving way out (Score:5, Insightful)
But just make vaccinations mandatory. Simple as that. No more BS opting out on religious grounds, no more opting out because Jenny said not to, no more trusting in herd immunity while actively undermining it. Get your kids vaccinated, period, end of story; don't like it, too bad.
There will always be valid exceptions. Some people (immune-compromised, usually) simply can't handle vaccination - it really would kill them. This is a recognized problem for which there is no solution. And which vaccines should be required? I happen to think that immunization against HPV is a good idea, but you can't get HPV because the kid next to you didn't cover his mouth when he sneezed.
There is historical precedent for your proposal, however: this is what was done with smallpox, which is why no one has caught smallpox since before I was born. But smallpox makes measles look like a mild cold in comparison.
Re:Solution - Face-saving way out (Score:2, Insightful)
But just make vaccinations mandatory
Devil's advocate: What part of the United States Constitution (or even the Constitution of one of the 50 States) authorizes the Government to compel vaccination? It's "compelled" through requirements to vaccinate your children before they can attend public school, which has passed muster, but an outright mandate absent no other interaction with the State? Where does such authority come from?
No more BS opting out on religious grounds
That wouldn't pass Constitutional muster even if you can find authority to mandate vaccinations.
A far more effective IMHO (and Constitutional) way to encourage vaccines would be to give the opposed parties an all expenses paid vacation to any part of the Third World that doesn't have access to modern vaccinations. People forget just how horrible some of these diseases truly were. Perhaps it's time to remind them.
"I am NOT a child molester!" (Score:4, Insightful)
Because Jenny McCarthy is always right. (Score:4, Insightful)
That stupid bitch.
How do you prove that they are wrong. (Score:4, Insightful)
People do not trust science. They are more apt to believe that the numbers are made up fill some agenda.
On the Right you got them having issues with Climate change and evolution. They see it as fake science made by their opponents to force their agenda of taking things away from people and a push towards atheism, figure with "God" out of the way they can push their agenda with impunity.
On the left you have GMO food, and non-organics food. All the science points that there isn't any danger to these foods, however they will stick to their guns as the science is obviously have been altered by corporations as to keep their profit up.
In short if you tell someone that they are wrong, that means you are part of some conspiracy to hide the truth.
Re:Wrong, study shows disfavor with science. (Score:5, Insightful)
Translation: I'm a fucking moron who fears and doesn't understand science.
You know, I don't usually support insults like this, but SuperKendall's post shows such a level of willful ignorance and misinformation that I think in this case MightyMartian isn't actually insulting him but stating a fact.
Re:You would hope (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually this knowledge is counter to evolution. Our evolution has shaped the survival mind to trust only your self and those extremely close to you and be extremely wary of others.
Pro-vaccination messages should really pursue the "trust" model, and get commuity leaders, churches, womens magazines etc to all join in the discussion and focus on the positive only. Don't even mention all the false autism links etc...
Re:Education (Score:5, Insightful)
People need to be educated in a general sense to evaluate this stuff rationally. If you take a bunch of uneducated redneck hicks and have an authority figure tell them how it should be they're going to be suspicious because they don't have the tools to evaluate the claims and for most of their life authority figures have FUCKED them.
And yet..., they will still vote for those same authority figures who simply tell them what they want to hear.
Re:Solution - Face-saving way out (Score:4, Insightful)
This study basically says that people get pissy when you prove them wrong, making them dig in their heels even though they may grudgingly agree with you.
Nope. It says that teaching the controvery proves there is a controversy. If there wasn't, why are you trying so hard to tell me what I should do?
Re:Education (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words, people are fucking morons.
Apparently those untrusting "fucking morons" are in very good company.
Re:Wrong, study shows disfavor with science. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Flu Shots are Ruining Vaccinations (Score:5, Insightful)
Generally flu shots aren't for you. They're for the people you hang out with.
I'm a healthy early 30something guy. I can get the flu, I've had the flu, I made it out just fine. I also only hang out with people in the similar demographic, I'm psychologically allergic to kids so I'll never be seen around one, my friends overall don't have kids, my grandparents are in another country. There's a small chance I may get the flu and before I notice, I transmit it to someone at the restaurant, but realistically, it won't happen.
Now, if you're the parent of 3 toddlers, have your 80-90 years old grandparents coming every other day to help out, 2 of your toddlers go to daycare all the time... you could seriously get someone killed if you get the flu and spread it around. Thats why you want the shot. If its not the case? Sure, skip. The flu won't kill you.
Re:Flu Shots are Ruining Vaccinations (Score:4, Insightful)
Tens of thousands of people die every single year from flu. My wife is an ICU nurse and watches people die every year from it. Yes you might be healthy and perfectly capable of handling the flu virus. But when you get it, for the three or four days after you are infected and before major symptoms set in you are spreading virii around like typhoid Mary. And when you go to the grocery store and stand in line next to the guy that just had a transplant and is on immune surpressors you might just kill them.
Sometimes getting the vaccine isn't about you. So next time you get the flu spend the time thinking about all the people you interacted with while you were a walking virus factor and wonder just how many of them your stupidity killed.
Re:You would hope (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You would hope (Score:2, Insightful)
This is just plain wrong. Vaccines are not 100% effective in people who take them. Herd immunity still plays a factor.
Re:You would hope (Score:5, Insightful)
Been saying it for a while: many, many people have lost any and all trust in establishmentarianism, even when some of them simultaneously cling to strange authoritative belief systems, and as the "Information Age" progresses this is extending to a fundamental mistrust of well presented information. Mainly because liars are some of the best presenters out there.
Every single ethics violation by established corporations, professionals, professional organizations, media, and other would-be pillars of the community has long lasting and far reaching effects, damaging our aggregate level of trust in those who actually deserve to be trusted. The damage is probably partially offset by trusting even fewer of those who don't deserve it, but overall my instinct is it is corrosive since trust plays such an important role in all things economic and communal.
Re:Solution - Face-saving way out (Score:5, Insightful)
But just make vaccinations mandatory. Simple as that. No more BS opting out on religious grounds, no more opting out because Jenny said not to, no more trusting in herd immunity while actively undermining it. Get your kids vaccinated, period, end of story; don't like it, too bad.
There will always be valid exceptions. Some people (immune-compromised, usually) simply can't handle vaccination - it really would kill them. This is a recognized problem for which there is no solution.
Actually, there is a well-understood solution. Just make the vaccines mandatory, and provide exceptions based on the medical judgement of a doctor (who is liable if their error results in harm).
The kids who can't get vaccines are much better off if all the kids around them are vaccinated.
Instead today we let everybody opt-out, and the kid who can't get a vaccine for medical reasons ends up catching whooping cough from somebody who could have been vaccinated without incident.
Re:Solution - Face-saving way out (Score:5, Insightful)
Easy: Make a vaccination plan.
In Europe, that's what happens. Guess what? Every time you sign up for something involving lots of people, you may be asked for proof that you were actually vaccinated (or could not be for valid medical reasons).
Some stuff is absolutely mandatory, for good reason. Some stuff can be bought at a pharmacy if required (Malaria for instance, isn't really a problem unless you travel to Africa) and is thus optional.
Problem solved.
Re:Solution - Face-saving way out (Score:5, Insightful)
Wrong. The general public gets just as much, if not more protection than the individual through herd immunity. The whole systems depends on herd immunity.
Re:Solution - Face-saving way out (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullshit. Herd immunity is a critical by-product of individual immunizations, and allows those who can't be (or by biological fluke, don't get) immunized.
Re:Education (Score:5, Insightful)
Well,I think you're onto something, although it's certainly not the case that anti-vaccination ideology is confined to "uneducated redneck hicks". It is rampant among educated, middle class people too who *do* have the tools to evaluate claims. They just don't have the inclination to use those tools. I know because I have a niece who is an anti-vaccine crusader; she's always posting links to anti-vaccine screeds on Facebook, only to get knocked down by all her science geek aunties and uncles. She is not an ignorant, uneducated moron. She is an intelligent, accomplished and educated suburban mom who just happens to be off her rocker about this one thing.
The problem, I think, is that anti-vaccine hysteria actually arises out a healthy impulse: distrust of authority. We've raised a generation on tales of the Tuskeegee experiment, of bungled CIA actions in Iran, of government leaders' deceptions about the course of the Vietnam war. But the line between healthy distrust and paranoia is often fuzzy. In attempting to raise a generation of healthy skeptics, we've also made paranoia respectable.
This explains the counter-intuitive result in the study. Convincing people to distrust anti-vaccine information doesn't make them trust their doctors or public health authorities. It makes them distrust everyone. And some of the mud probably still sticks. Here's where knowing what the anti-vaccine crowd is saying helps. They've moved well beyond the autism thing; their message has two prongs: "vaccines aren't as effective as claimed" and "vaccines put children at risk for a wide spectrum of harms".
Finally there's another misunderstood aspect about who these people are. They've been raised to admire crusaders like Dr. King who stood up against authority figures, and they've been taught to emulate them. We've raised them to be firm and determined in their convictions, even the face of ridicule and condemnation. But that attitude of Emersonian self-reliance has a dark side: it's very hard to change your mind once you've donned your crusader surcoat and drawn your greatsword.
So the idea that these people are anti-vaccine crusaders *because* they're contemptible is wrong. These people are attempting to do something heroic. In other circumstances they *would* be heroic. The problem with self-righteousness is that it feels *exactly the same* as righteousness.
Re:Sinister? (Score:5, Insightful)
Vaccines have had numerous concerns over many decades, so the latest batch does not make people sinister it makes them cynical and skeptical. Start here [wikipedia.org].
As much as vaccines help the majority of people, other people have been crippled and killed by the same vaccines. The latest MMR vaccine is linked to a couple hundred (237 last I looked) of narcolepsy, the latest polio vaccine is linked to numerous deaths and various levels of paralysis. Sometimes these are blamed on contamination in the vaccine, and other times we have no explanation.
If you are a parent and know about the potential for harm, you may not wish to give your kid a vaccine. Especially for something generally not life threatening like chicken pox.
Why not educate people to both sides of the argument and let them make an educated choice?
There is middle ground on normally nonlife threatening diseases like chickenpox and the average flu bug, the problem is dumbasses that won't vaccs their kids against anything for fear they might be one of the couple hundred out of billions that would have a reaction then insted their kid get a disease and spread it to the immunocompromised that genuinely cannot get vaccinated. They are endangering their children and society over a risk lower than the odds of you getting hit by car tomorrow on the way to drop them at school yet they do drive their children.
Re:Wrong, study shows disfavor with science. (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe it's the part where he makes unsubstantiated claims of bias and corruption against every scientist ever?
You only have to look back through his post history to see it all stems from his personal (and equally unsubstantiated) belief that AGW is a massive, money-grabbing hoax that all those "so-called scientists" have foisted on the unsuspecting public, no doubt at the prompting of the current liberal gubbermint (you know, despite similar research for 30 years). Seems clear to me that the cynicism resulting from climate science not saying what he wants to hear has spilled over into science in general.
Re:You would hope (Score:4, Insightful)
If you're vaccinated, it's not going to affect you.
In our valley a daughter of vaccination sceptics (i.e. she was un-vaccinated) contracted Whooping cough. She then passed the disease onto a vaccinated child at school.
Given that vaccines cannot confer immunity in 100% of cases, and given that people are not always in the state of health required for their "immunity" to fight off an infection, herd immunity remains a major factor the effectiveness of vaccination.
When you decide not to vaccinate your child, you are making health decisions (potentially life and death decisions) for other children as well.
Re:Sinister? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Solution - Face-saving way out (Score:2, Insightful)
The entire pro-choice movement is based on the concept of "My Body My Choice". You start forcing people to accept injections of anything into their bodies and you lose the moral basis for that argument. How do you "force" people to accept vaccines? Strap them down and inject them? Could anything be more frightening than the government forcing chemicals into someone's veins? That will make people even more anti-vaccine than ever.
I'm am very pro-vaccine. From childhood illnesses to flu to hpv, I want them all for myself and kids. And I have gotten into arguments with ignorant anti-vaccine people. What I have found is that they simply have lost all faith in "authority" because they have been lied to time and time again. WMD in Iraq! You can keep your insurance! Eat the food pyramid because you need to eat twice as much bread as you do veggies (not kidding, look it up). Leaders lie and lie and lie again to get what they want. Is it any wonder why people don't believe anything. In fact, it seems like the more forceful the denial the more likely the lie. You try and make vaccines mandatory you WILL make a bigger anti-vaccine movement.