Why are some parents/families anti vax?

[Sistersis]

Just read an article about the UK no longer being measles free. Just trying to understand what are the reasons that some people are against vaccination.

Not being cheeky here, geniuenly interested. Sorry if this has been done already.

By all means, start with one point that is of interest to you.

Ok, how about the all trials campaign?

I was responding to questions you yourself kept asking Lweji

If you don’t want me to bang on, don’t keep asking the question.

Another good point is the problem with the yellow card reporting system. Someone raised an issue with that earlier on this thread.

I think if we could discuss these limitations honestly, it could go a long way to garnering trust and really, it benefits us all.

Oh I must have broken the thread.

Ok, how about the all trials campaign?

Fine. What do you want to discuss about the all trials campaign?

Didn’t you understand her point though? She wasn’t wearing a tin hat. It was a discussion-worthy point.

I did and argued it back. Certainly worth discussing rather than repeating the same old catch phrase.

I remember the rage I felt when my brother brought his 3 year old to visit my 2 week old and announced “oh “dear niece” hasn’t been vaccinated I don’t see the point the governments not filling her with poison, dr also said she has hand foot and mouth but they don’t know”

Vaccinate your kids god and the increase in autism’s argument has nothing to do with vaccines and everything to do with it being better identified now.

I'll paste something I wrote in a parallel thread, if it helps kick it off.

"TBF, drugs companies tend to hide bad results. It's a well known practice, which is not to mean that everything that comes out of drugs companies is bad or useless.
Taking it with a pinch of salt, as with most things, I'm more willing to accept that some new drugs are close to useless than dangerous.
Same with vaccines."

Adding that it's very difficult to publish negative results in peer review papers anyway. It's a situation that every scientist is aware of and we all agree that it shouldn't be the case, but it's still hard because scientific journals want to sell and be cited.
I've struggled with a similar issue during some of my research, as the people who had made attempts at something hadn't published their results and we only became aware through personal communication but without methods.

This to say that lack of reporting is both an endemic problem within science and an ethical problem with medical trials, at different levels, as there's a lot of time and money involved in general.

Having said that, and from what I know, it's not as bad as anti-vaxxers claim.

Certainly a lot better than in the beauty product industry.

My DD who has friends in the three secondary schools affected by the measles outbreak in West London says her peers are very angry at the risk they and their families are now exposed to and clear what should happen. Anyone not vaccinated should not be allowed through the school doors...... Finally a positive use of teen peer pressure 🤔

No takers on the all trials campaign?

@Emilyontmoor - I understand their anger. Try having an under 1 year old when there's an outbreak (multiple cases in my area when DS was 10 months old). We know from multiple toddlers dying in my family pre-vaccine era that our family babies might be more susceptible to dying from measles, yet there's no way of protecting them from these selfish anti-vaxxers wilfully spreading disease until they're over 12 months old. When it's your baby it's mostly fear and a little bit of anger.

I think publishing all results has the potential to be abused even more by conspiracy theorists. "X new vaccine causes Y, they update it, theorists say Y still happens even though it doesn't happen with the latest version. Accusations of rigging the control group or whatever.

Publication of all results allows scrutiny and compilation of results to allow higher power.

yet there's no way of protecting them from these selfish anti-vaxxers wilfully spreading disease until they're over 12 months old.

During the huge measles outbreak we had in New York earlier this year they dropped the minimum age for vaccination to six months with no ill effect that I'm aware of.

@thecatinthetwat

Still alive? Not in the mood for serious discussions after all?

I don’t know enough about the all trials thing to comment usefully or intelligently, but i’m always happy to bow to Ben Goldacre on such matters. And @Lweji of course.

@Lweji

Still alive? Not in the mood for serious discussions after all?

Yes alive, yes definitely in the mood! Sorry for the delay

This to say that lack of reporting is both an endemic problem within science and an ethical problem with medical trials, at different levels, as there's a lot of time and money involved in general.

Totally agree.

What do you think is the answer?

Publishing of negative results in general is so important. Scientists shouldn't be held to ransom by Journals (who make so much money from public funded research). A searchable negative results repository? Does one exist?

As for clinical trials, they absolutely should be published, always. Even if it's efficacy they are trying to hide. Efficacy is important because it has to be weighed against side-effects of course.

How do you think clinical trials and reports should be made public, if they are conducted by Pharmaceuticals?

Underreporting is not only an issue with side effects. Infectious diseases suffer from the same.

Well I suppose you would require by law that all trials are published in a database. Or you could even require that the trials were conducted by another body/institute all together.

How are infectious diseases reported / recorded?

The problem is that some studies will go to countries where scrutiny and human rights are still not well implemented.
There will be pressure for scientists on their payroll to ignore some data.
But, eventually, proper tests will have to be conducted if vaccines/drugs are to be a) allowed to be sold and b) available through the NHS. The EC is strict. Human trials are costly, and have to pass through ethical committees that have to follow stricter and stricter laws.

It's no different from buying a new car and trusting that it will keep you safe past the standard tests.

The pharma industry is no better, but is also no worst than any other industry.

As for reporting, there are different methods, usually via a doctor reporting. They don't always do, and not always properly.
The problem with side effects reporting is that they have to be taken with a pinch of salt.
For one, just because something happened the days after vaccination, it doesn't mean it caused it.
Then, some people will be prone to exaggerating anything they feel just because side effects were mentioned.
But long term effects may be ignored or missed and will only be noticed in large populations and after some time.

Not for the covid vaccination but for another illness which is creeping up in numbers and will only get worse with the increasing anti vaxer population.

Measles vaccine really needs to be made mandatory, just as it has been in France, makes me sad this country won’t do what is necessary to stop the anti vaxer spread of false information!

www.change.org/p/matt-hancock-make-the-mmr-vaccine-mandatory?recruiter=155577565&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=share_petition&recruited_by_id=04b59309-b2c0-4e9c-9239-f4512717676a