Contents
Even before the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic, confidence in vaccines was declining. Surveys in France said 45 percent. of respondents believe that vaccines are dangerous, in Japan, 31 percent had a similar opinion. citizens. Globally, the number of opponents of vaccination was estimated at 13%, which means that more than one in ten people was anti-vaccine. The anti-vaccine movement has been around for three centuries and is always for the same reasons. The necessity to stop an epidemic or pandemic is inextricably linked to giving control of a large part of our freedom to the state, and this provokes a protest.
- Vaccine opponents became active in the XNUMXth century. With the development of medicine and the emergence of newer vaccines, they grew stronger and gained more and more supporters
- Several hundred years ago, anti-vaccines claimed that the preparations could cause disease and contain harmful substances
- From the 80s, anti-vaccine campaigners started appearing in the media. Celebrities and physicians challenging the idea of vaccination have led many people to shirk mandatory immunization
- According to experts, anti-vaccine methods have not changed over the centuries. They are still based on disinformation and the use of unconfirmed sources
- You can find more such stories on the TvoiLokony home page
Pictured: Image published by H. Humphreys in 1809 in the anti-vaccine pamphlet
Anti-vaccination movements from the 19th century to the COVID-XNUMX pandemic
Eighteenth century
This may seem surprising, but the anti-vaccine movement was born before the first vaccine was developed. Before Edward Jenner started working on a smallpox vaccine in the 90s, the practice of variolation was already known. This term describes the vaccination of a healthy person with pus from a person suffering from smallpox. This method was used for centuries in Africa, China, India and the countries of the Ottoman Empire.
The practice of variolations was propagated in England by Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, witnessing its effectiveness in Turkey in 1717. However, since she began encouraging the government to vaccinate children, the first opponents emerged. There was a fierce and long-lasting debate between the supporters and opponents of this practice.
And already at the beginning of the dispute, the vaccine camp, supported by the Royal Society in London to combat the emotional tones of opponents “tended to write coolly and to the point with frequent references to common sense, the progress of modern science, and the kindness of gentlemen.”
XIX w.
Jenner’s development of the smallpox vaccine that would eventually replace variolation did not close the debate. While it was evidently much safer and more effective, the resistance stemmed from the UK government’s decision to make childhood immunization compulsory under penalty of a fine.
In 1853, shortly after the adoption of the Vaccination Act, the Anti-Vaccine League was established in Great Britain, and then the League Against Compulsory Vaccines., the establishment of which was a reaction to the obligation to vaccinate children (imprisonment for parents who did not vaccinate them) at the age of 14 and younger.
In parallel, anti-vaccine leagues began to emerge in the United States. Vaccine opponents claimed, among other things, that it causes disease, contains poisonous chemicals (it was carbolic acid), and that compulsory vaccinations were medical despotism.
League supporters pushed for alternative medical practices, including herbal medicine and homeopathy, while disseminating their own literature warning of the dangers of vaccination. One of the leading voices in the anti-vaccine movement was that of playwright George Barnard Shaw, a passionate advocate of homeopathy and eugenics.
XX w.
The tone and tactics of anti-vaccines did not change until the beginning of the 100th century, probably because 1885 years passed before the next vaccine was introduced (it is a vaccine against rabies developed by Louis Pasteur in 35). Another 20 years later, the diphtheria vaccine appeared, developed in the XNUMXs.
The intensification of resistance was caused by negligence, such as the administration of a batch of contaminated vaccines. This was the case in 1929 in Lübeck, Germany, when contaminated tuberculosis vaccines resulted in the death of 72 children.
In the second half of the twentieth century, as new vaccines appeared on the market – for whooping cough (whooping cough) in 1943, polio in 1955, measles in 1963, mumps in 1967 and rubella in 1971 – the movement the anti-vaccine regimen was also gaining momentum.
A study published in 1974 in the Archives of Diseases in Children cited the example of 36 children vaccinated against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DtaP) who developed serious neurological complications for 11 years, the first occurring 24 hours after the injection. While it was revealed shortly after the article was published that British scientists had not seen the children described for years, media coverage of the publication sparked a wave of protests in the UK and a significant drop in vaccination rates, all during the whooping cough epidemic that hit more than 100 thousand people.
1980 – 1999
The anti-vaccine movement was supported by celebrities. They were not only movie and television stars, but also self-proclaimed “experts”, often without medical education.
One of the leading figures in the anti-vaccine movement was Lea Thompson, a reporter who sparked a nationwide debate in 1982 with her television documentary entitled “DPT: Vaccine Roulette”. Thompson has linked disability to the administration of the DTaP vaccine, which has consequently led to numerous trials against its manufacturers. The Thompson anti-vaccine campaign led to the formation of the Distraught Parents Together (DPT) group, which later developed into the influential National Vaccine Information Center. Activists in the group argued that DTaP and hepatitis B vaccines caused Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS).
In 1984, Dr. Robert Mendelsohn, one of the first anti-vaccine pediatricians, wrote a book called “Medical immunization time bomb” claiming pertussis vaccine could cause brain damage or delay development. In addition to ridiculing vaccines, Mendelsohn has spoken out actively against water fluoridation, coronary artery bypass surgery, licensing nutritionists, and routine breast cancer screening.
In the 90s, the US anti-vaccine movement was driven by TV shows such as “Sally Jessy Rafael and the Maury Povich Show”, which provided a celebrity flow and platform to express views to reach millions of viewers.
Former The Cosby Show star Lisa Bonet equated vaccination with “foreign microbes” that can cause “cancer, leukemia, multiple sclerosis and sudden infant death syndrome” during her appearance on the Phil Donahue Show in 1990.
In 1994, Miss America, Heather Whitestone, the first deaf title-holder, suggested that her deafness was caused by the DTaP vaccine. Meanwhile, her pediatrician later reported to the public that the deafness was caused by meningitis, which is being prevented by vaccination.
In 1998, the anti-vaccine movement turned into a real crusade after the publication of a study by British physician Andrew Wakefield, which argued that the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine predisposes children to neurological conditions, including autism.
Wakefield’s findings linking MMR to autism were later discovered to be dishonest, leading to the revocation of his professional license and the withdrawal of the article from The Lancet 12 years after publication. Despite this, many people today believe that MMR preparations expose children to the risk of autism.
We are in the XNUMXst century, and the tactics of anti-vaccines have not changed much since the XNUMXth century. It still includes disinformation and the use of unconfirmed sources. However, as social media grows, anti-vaccines can reach their audiences directly. Among the celebrities who actively question or ridicule vaccinations is the American actress, model and activist Jenny McCarthy, who in her three books on autism perpetuates the myth that it is linked to the MMR vaccine. Meanwhile, the end of measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccination in the UK immediately resulted in measles outbreaks with 2032 cases in England and Wales in 2012.
The anti-vaccine movement is evolving. Taking advantage of public dissatisfaction with high drug prices, anti-vaccines are promoting the theory that pharmaceutical companies deliberately suspend treatment processes in order to earn longer. And the strategy of ridiculing vaccines turns into a policy of promoting an alternative approach to vaccination.
In 2007, influenced by Thompson’s book and her frequent television appearances, pediatrician Bob Sears publishes The Vaccine Book: Making the Right Decision for your Child, which questions the need for immunization. In 2014 it states that “the risk of disease is low and it is safe to raise an unvaccinated child in modern society”. Sears admits that vaccines work, but suggests a “selective” approach involving delaying or avoiding certain vaccinations.
In the era of the coronavirus pandemic, preparations against COVID-19 have become the focus of attention of anti-vaccines. Every now and then there are reports of deaths caused by them, suggestions that Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, using messenger RNA (mRNA), may change our DNA after administration. So far, convincing about the effectiveness of vaccinations and dispelling skilfully fueled fears has been slow. Despite the impressive results of universal vaccination policies and a more flexible approach to this obligation – many countries have eased penalties for those who refuse to submit to them and introduced exemptions for, for example, religion – according to some polls fluctuations in vaccination are at the highest in the world in 20 years and still growing.
Why are we questioning the effectiveness and safety of vaccines?
Will understanding the history of anti-vaccine sentiments help overcome them? First, just because someone hesitates whether to get the vaccine does not necessarily mean that they are strongly against it. He may have doubts or only questions about their effects on allergy sufferers or people suffering from various chronic diseases. Often a professional and comprehensive answer convinces the person to inject.
A year ago, in the summer, most Americans when asked if they would be vaccinated against COVID-19 replied: no or I don’t know. However, vaccine research was not yet complete at the time, so it is not surprising that people were skeptical about them. Indeed, a poll a few months later in France found that vaccination coverage rose from 39 percent. in December up to 51 percent. in January, it was similar in other countries.
Bernice Hausman, a cultural theorist at Penn State University, says the coronavirus pandemic has increased empathy in people who hesitate. According to her, public opinion has undergone a huge change – from counting those who are reluctant to vaccination among the victims of disinformation to perceiving them as distrustful for important social and historical reasons.
Paula Larsson, a medical historian at the University of Oxford who studies anti-vaccine movements, believes hesitation is as old as vaccines. For at least one hundred years after the development of the smallpox vaccine, vaccination was incomparably more risky. The preparations were administered under various sanitary conditions, which sometimes resulted in secondary infections. Their effects were sometimes unpleasant and long-lasting, they could also affect the ability to work and cause loss of income.
The concerns were valid throughout the nineteenth century, escalating during the smallpox epidemic as authorities tried to extend vaccination coverage. In addition, there were people who additionally fueled them to promote their theses and pose as heroes.
An example is Dr. Alexander Ross, author of a pamphlet popular in Montreal during the smallpox epidemic in 1885. He assured readers that vaccinations did not prevent infection, but also caused syphilis and deaths in children. Moreover, he claimed that there was no epidemic in the city and that the best way to protect it was “fresh air, cleanliness and restraint”. To confirm his theses, he quoted the statements of people whose names were preceded by the titles: prof., Dr or sir.
A similar tactic is used by the leaders of anti-vaccination movements to this day. It involves minimizing the risk of the disease (smallpox killed one in three infected and left most of those who survived it scarred), exaggerating the risk of vaccination, suggesting conspiracies, and appealing to authorities who question the vaccination campaign. According to Paula Larsson, the use of disinformation differs from those who are reluctant to vaccines. And going back to Ross, it turned out that he himself had taken the vaccine.
Ross’ reincarnation was credited to the aforementioned Andrew Wakefield and Judy Mikovits, a virologist whose conspiracy theories appeared in the popular film “Plandemic”.
History teaches us that the reasons people hesitate to take the vaccine are varied and complex. The socio-political context counts, for example, during the smallpox epidemic in Montreal, resistance was fueled by tensions between the Francophone and English-speaking communities.
“The Francophones hated upper-class English doctors who would vaccinate them,” says Larsson. – In addition, the contaminated batch of vaccines caused cases of skin infections. Yet it was only when the authorities introduced compulsory vaccinations that the resistance turned into riots.
Efforts to educate the population about the salvation of vaccines have failed, believes Berenice Hausman, and when asked why, replies that simply communicating the positives does not build trust. Public health experts focus on the societal benefits of vaccination, “but people do not experience adverse reactions to the vaccine at the population level, only in person”.
Australian epidemiologist Stephen Leeder argues: “Facts are not dismissed because they seem untrue, but because they are perceived as irrelevant.” Therefore, in persuading people to vaccinate, apart from statistics, it is worth presenting specific positive cases.
The idea of telling the stories of individual successfully vaccinated people has its own critics, but anti-vaccines have successfully used a similar approach on social media. A report by the international non-profit organization Center for Countering Digital Hate shows that they coordinate their efforts online so that people start to have doubts. Besides, not only “ordinary people” react poorly to statistics; those who make key decisions for vaccination policy behave similarly.
It is always easier to stop someone from taking action than to convince them. Therefore, immunizers will always have to work much harder. Vaccinations are also a kind of test of our ability to cooperate, so the basis of their success is a strong social contract, which does not work everywhere.
This may interest you:
- He lost his doctoral title for cheating. The anti-vaccinators cite him
- Doctor gets death threats. “They write that they will feed me the fish in the Vistula River”
- What can encourage Poles to vaccinate? The answers are surprising
The content of the medTvoiLokony website is intended to improve, not replace, the contact between the Website User and their doctor. The website is intended for informational and educational purposes only. Before following the specialist knowledge, in particular medical advice, contained on our Website, you must consult a doctor. The Administrator does not bear any consequences resulting from the use of information contained on the Website. Do you need a medical consultation or an e-prescription? Go to halodoctor.pl, where you will get online help – quickly, safely and without leaving your home.