Anti-vaccination insanity

Dear readers, I was impressed by this piece written by epidemiologist Elizabeth Jacobs, so I’m copying it here in its entirety (with her permission). Note that it was written before Election Day; but rather than editing it to reflect what has happened, I prefer to provide the column as is. While I have my own opinions about the critical importance of vaccination and the absurdity of putting anti-vaxxers in positions of authority in our public health system, I think this message is much more powerful coming from experts like Dr. Jacobs. – Morgan

The discourse surrounding vaccines has reached a fever pitch in the 2024 Presidential Election cycle, and the serious danger of vaccine misinformation has been largely overlooked. Several candidates, particularly Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Donald Trump, have repeatedly cast doubt upon the safety and efficacy of vaccination, despite the overwhelming wealth of scientific evidence demonstrating the opposite.  Very often, a false equivalence is presented in media reports, but there are not two equal sides to this issue. There is the side that the vast majority of scientists and healthcare professionals hold, and the side that is espoused by those who seek to win votes based on deception and division.

The history

The anti-vaccination movement is not new or novel. It has been around since smallpox inoculation began, which George Washington ordered his troops to undergo in 1777, despite the fact that many people were opposed at the time. In 1902, Immanuel Pfeiffer was staunch in his belief that smallpox inoculation was unnecessary when an outbreak commenced in Boston. He decided to demonstrate this erroneous sentiment by touring a smallpox isolation hospital without being inoculated. Two weeks later, he had smallpox. Although he survived, his argument should not have, but nonetheless it continued to simmer in pockets of the United States.

In 1998, Andrew Wakefield stoked the anti-vaccination embers once again when he published a now-retracted article in The Lancet describing 12 children who had been vaccinated against Measles Mumps and Rubella (MMR) and went on to develop behavioral and gastrointestinal symptoms. The study design could best be described as gravely flawed; worse, the conclusions were not supported by the data. It took years before the article was justifiably retracted, and the damage was already done. The consequence was another generation of parents who were unnecessarily frightened by fraudulent claims about vaccines.

Public health misinformation spreads

In the modern era, false claims about vaccinations continue to be amplified via social media, a pernicious vector of misinformation for which no satisfactory solution has yet been put forth. Part of this arises from the social media model itself, which rewards engagement in the form of clicks, reposts, and replies to comments. Misinformation has been shown to spread on social media up to ten times faster than factual information. Even when scientists present evidence-based information in an attempt to debunk false claims, the fact that misinformation is at the root of many of these conversations serves to further promote anti-vaccination talking points by endowing them with validity that doesn’t exist. But outrage earns clicks and reposts, and these earn money for social media companies. Consideration must be given to whether these companies have any real motivation to stop it.

Indeed, rampant misinformation about COVID19 was driven by social media, even after story upon story was published about outspoken individuals who opposed the vaccine and who tragically went on to die of the disease, some after expressing their regret for not having been vaccinated. Repeated attacks on public health and its practitioners gained momentum on social media as charlatans appeared out of the woodwork to claim that vaccines didn’t save lives; the data show otherwise.

It is in this climate that major political candidates are throwing kerosene onto the fire. Robert F. Kennedy, in particular, has been benefiting from peddling, sans evidence, anti-vaccination falsehoods since his polemic “Deadly Immunity” was published in Rolling Stone and on Salon’s website in 2005. The editor of Salon at the time, Joan Walsh, later said that it was “the worst mistake of her career” and that she “probably should have been fired” for allowing the article’s publication, so fraught with misinformation was it. Donald Trump has said repeatedly that he will cut federal funding for schools that require vaccinations for attendance. Neither of these men’s positions have the support of the scientific or medical community, because, quite simply, they are wrong. Both have been made aware of the safety and efficacy of vaccines from experts numerous times, yet they continue to undermine public health. Vaccines aside, their position provides further a clue as to the type of leadership we can expect should Trump be re-elected—the type that eschews all expert opinion built on decades of research in favor of nonsense. As Trump ponders installing Kennedy Jr. into some kind of science administration role^[1], voters in the United States must be aware of the stakes. Two men with zero formal education, training, or credible experience in any field remotely related to vaccines will severely hamper decades of public health successes that protect the lives of Americans, undermining every community’s health as well as national security. This isn’t leadership. This is a disgrace. 

---

^[1] As readers know, President-elect Trump (oh, how I hate writing that) has proposed that RFK Jr be the new head of Health and Human Services (HHS). I’m hoping at least a few Republican Senators will have the cojones to vote to block this. I’m not holding my breath, – Morgan