Why the sudden hostility to anti-vaxxers? (Not here, I mean in the culture at large...)

[Rocaille]

Sorry, this will be garbled: I'm thinking aloud. First of all, I'm not an anti-vaxxer. I don't think I've ever refused a vaccination, either for myself or DD. But in the last year or so, I've noticed a sudden ramping up of hostility towards people who choose not to vaccinate their children, not necessarily on Mumsnet, but certainly in the culture at large. Even the term 'anti-vaxxer' is a new coinage, I think.

I'm posting to find out, has anyone else noticed this, and if so, what do you make of it?

For me, it's reminiscent of the way that, some years back, the trans agenda appeared suddenly at the forefront of public discourse. In my tinfoil-hat-donning moments, I wonder who decides what issues we debate, when we debate them and to what end. Why now for anti-vax? I suppose there have been some serious measles epidemics in recent years, but that doesn't seem to account for the heat and urgency of debate, or the way anti-vaxxers are being characterised as a certain type of person.

Another thing that makes me associate pro-vax with the trans agenda is that it's potentially about the compulsory medical treatment of children, and removing the parent (mother) as the final arbiter of what can and cannot be done to her child's body. That's where I see pro-vax going.

Could this be another dimension of the same agenda, or have I completely lost the plot?

It's funny you ask that OP as I thought the opposite was true! I have a med sci background and am very pro vaccinations so am always very interested to read the vaxx-bunfight threads on AIBU to see what the current arguments against actually are. The last one was about a month ago and I felt reading it that there were a lot more anti-vax voices and the opposition to it was a bit softer. I also noticed (before I quit FB) a huge uptick in anti-vax stuff appearing in my news feed, mostly from my extended breastfeeding/ babywearing/ cosleeping/ gentle parenting groups. There's growing support for these parenting practices and whilst I think that's a good thing it seems hard to separate that from the alternative medicines/ anti vaxx crowd.

A few years ago when I was at med school there was a fair bit of talk about how the medical modal was losing favour and people were fed up of doctors as gatekeepers (where else have we heard that!) The power difference between patients and doctors is huge and people don't like that. Increasingly people want to have a larger say in their own medical care, and a top down approach like gov mandated vaccinations would only widen that rift. Women especially seem to have had enough with traditional medicine. Whether it's an increase in home/ midwife or doula lead births/ birthing centres over hospitals, tracking apps over contraceptive medicine, or a resistance to medicating anxiety/ depression, most of the women I know will choose an alternative option to seeing a doctor/ taking medicine if it's available, and this often naturally extends to their children. Yes the information about vaccine safety/ efficacy is out there but that's only relevant if you trust the research. There's going to be plenty of "research" published in the next few years "proving" that a year on oestrogen removes any male sporting advantage - I can assure you that most of us here won't trust that research. That's because we have reason to believe that the science is being corrupted for political reasons. Well, anti-vaxxers believe that too, just about different things.

I was very interested in that last AIBU thread because for the most part it wasn't "blah blah autism/ wakefield" nonsense it was "here's a study saying X", "here's a lawsuit about this research having been falsified" etc. I'm not saying their reasons/ evidence for what they believe is good, but they seem to have a lot of it, and it's not going away just because we're fed up with it. If we want to bring these people on board with vaccinations then compulsory vaccinating isn't the answer, that's just going to feed into the conspiracy beliefs. We need to really start engaging in good faith with the concerns, not just straw manning every anti-vaxx argument as being about autism or labelling every anti-vaxxer as thick/ gullible. But most importantly we need to rebuild public trust in medicine, doctors, and scientific research in general. And to do that we might need to start accepting that there actually are some problems there that need addressing.

From Dr Richard Horton, Editor in Chief for the Lancet:

"The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness."

www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736%2815%2960696-1.pdf

Arnold in regards to boys and the HPV vaccine that is due to happen. My DS is 11 and will be starting secondary in September and he should be having it. (DD is 2 years older and it was just girls at that point)

@ArnoldWhatshisknickers HPV is being rolled out for boys in Ireland soon.

I believe, but am not certain that Scotland is one of the regions that have had very good uptake of HPV vaccine.

I suspect it's because more and more we are having our society changed because of beliefs which are totally irrational and without evidence.

This is different to arguing about the effects of different tax rates, the best way to provide health care, the merits or otherwise of private schools. These are all political issues that can be argued over with reason and evidence. Anti-vaxx, Brexit, these are ideologies which their proponents cannot justify rationally, yet we are all expected to live with the consequrences, whether it's measles or queues at the ports.

but unless you want to change their mind what’s the point engaging with them? And you won’t change their mind by bullying them

My children are in their early 20s. The anti-MMR crowd were in abundance when they were babies.

I have tried presenting the clear scientific evidence a thousand times. I have tried appealing to rationality, common decency a thousand times. None of it makes a difference so I'm done. I haven't tried to 'change minds' on this for years. There is no point.

I will however, with heavy heart say 'I told you so', because I, and thousands of others did.

As for linking pro-vaccination to anti-mutilating and sterilising children that's an effing joke.

Anti-vaxxers and pro-trans individuals are the same cohort. Predominantly middle class, university educated (though rarely in sciences), have little to no contact with vulnerable people yet think they know better crowd.

I find the OP muddled and the logic difficult to follow.

I am concerned about mandated medical treatment, but in this case its anti vaxxers that are driving mandated vaccinations; because they are causing outbreaks of harmful diseases that were previously suppressed. Anti vaxxers cause harm to people who cannot be vaccinated and rely on herd immunity, and harm their own children.
The trans agenda is well supported and on the verge of becoming State mandated. Many parents who don't think their children are trans are being overruled.
There should be State intervention to say that drastic medical treatments that leave adults sterile and without sexual function are not something we should do to children.

So I think OP is well meaning but misinformed.

I have tried presenting the clear scientific evidence a thousand times. I have tried appealing to rationality, common decency a thousand times. None of it makes a difference so I'm done. I haven't tried to 'change minds' on this for years. There is no point.

Why did you do that? Don’t you think you should leave it up to their doctor?

• Obviously once children are Gillick competent then should be able to get themselves vaccinated.

Some are doing exactly that.

Thank you for the replies regarding HPV vaccines and boys.

I'm glad it is being rolled out to them, and am now wondering if it wasn't previously due to cost issues?

As far as Scotland is concerned last I looked uptake of vaccines generally is high here so I'm not surprised that is also true for HPV.

Why uptake is generally higher in Scotland is a question worth pondering as it suggests there may be cultural factors in play beyond simple religious ones (which were an issue when HPV was first rolled out).

The anti vaxxers have been around for ages. I can remember seeing stuff on the internet about the MMR vaccine (Dr Wakefield IIRC) leading into when DS1 was due for his and got a bit panicky. I spoke with FIL who eased my mind.

What I have noticed over the ensuing years is that initially the anti vaxxer demographic was pretty solid among the alternative lifestyle/back to nature left leaning type. Now it seems to be more embraced by the religious conservative/home schooling don't trust the government type. So I do wonder have ideas and beliefs "flipped" between these two demographics? I think it would make a fascinating study.

I actually think that honest conversations around vaccine injury, and the possible risks and side effects, for the individual and wider population, would help; instead of just shutting people down and calling them idiots. (I’m not an anti-vaxxer and I’m pretty sure my dc are up to date with their jabs.)

That’s the only way to really convince and inform but even on this thread that approach is not common.

People are vaccine damaged. That’s factual. A minority in comparison, but it’s still something that causes fear and concern- especially to those who have damaged children or know of someone. It’s not all about Wakefield and MMR at all, although I’m surprised people are still convinced by him. Anyway, if the aim is to make sure every child is vaccinated, we need a different conversation then what is taking place. False claims and insults from either side are not helpful.

I see your point Arnold but no, presenting clear scientific evidence is never going to work, because they don’t believe it. That’s the problem, the expectation that you can just throw in a link to a science paper and get them changing their mind and thanking you. You’re just a stranger on the internet- they don’t trust you. So your engagement with them is completely misplaced and doomed to fail. So just stopping that and bullying them instead isn’t the answer- just leave them alone.

I often think the internet arguments actually fuel some anti vaxxers and make them further entrenched in their views as a kind of rebellion against the sort of people they dislike.

What do they say? The definition of madness is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome? Internet arguing about vaccinations is just a game on both sides. It’s a more extreme version of how often you wash your towels

presenting clear scientific evidence is never going to work, because they don’t believe it.

I don’t know who you mean by ‘they’, but there are different types of people with different concerns. My mother was reassured by clear evidence, a kind doctor who had seen her next to her sick children and treated her with respect and understanding.

Why did you do that?

Because I don't want people dying or being left disabled by preventable diseases. Because all of society is responsible for the safety and well being of our most vulnerable members. Because leaving misinformation and outright lies unchallenged means others will believe them.

The better question is why I stopped? Because it is mentally exhausting. Because it wears you down. And that is the danger of anti-science dogma generally.

Just to clarify a few points FIL is a paediatrician. DS1 was coming due for his MMR about 17 years ago.

ArnoldWhatshisknickers

Are you a medical professional? It’s someone else’s medical decisions, you ought to stay out of it. It makes it worse when people are attacked by other parents. You’re not helping so I’m glad you stopped.

JessicaWakefieldSV Sorry I wasn’t massively clear but that sentence is also taken out of context- they (anti vaxxers) aren’t going to believe “clear scientific evidence” posted by a stranger on the internet in the context of most anti vaccination threads, which include bullying and ridiculing.

In short I think we’re pretty much saying the same thing

Passthecherrycoke

I’m so sorry! Misunderstood, apologies. Yes, agreed. No sense taking this to Internet forums IMO. As a family actually affected by vaccines, which does happen, there are far better ways. Alienating and setting up opposite camps is all the internet is good for.

Yes, I am a bit muddled on this, Inebriati! ByGrabthar's post in particular has got me thinking about the issue from a very different perspective, so thank you for that.

I had no idea TERFs were being lumped in with anti-vaxxers. I'll echo whoever it was upthread and say this TERF's family is fully vaxxed!

By and large, my instincts are with sakura though. I think we all, but women in particular, have very good reasons to treat the claims of the medical profession with skepticism.

Two separate issues:

The rise of pseudoscientific wackerywoo, and the real devastation caused by its unchallenged proliferation,
and the right of individuals to freedom of belief and liberty

Important to separate the two.
I am pro vaccination.
But opposed to compulsory vaccination.
Pro parental authority,
But parents who reject vaccination ought to understand they are voluntarily choosing to limit their own and their child's freedoms, and taking risks.

I cannot be forced to wear a seatbelt, but if I expect to ride in a car I can. If I reject seatbelts, my choice would have to be to forfeit riding in cars.
Similarly, if I reject vaccination, I must forfeit other freedoms, like my child attending schools which may determine all children must be vaccinated to attend.

One of my issues with the constant left/right political division, is the way unrelated beliefs are packaged arbitrarily into silos.
So the left adopts public welfare initiatives and universal healthcare (good) but also embraces wackerywoo (bad) and ALSO leans towards totalitarianism (bad), whereas the right are more inclined towards individual liberty (good), less inclined to wackery (good), but fail to understand the impact of class and collective harm (bad).

I see the antivaxx movement as an alignment with trans ideology, it's false pseudoscience perpetuated widely.
The difference is that people do not yet feel able to trounce the pseudoscience of trans the way they can with antivaxxers, because it's been paired with 'most vulnerable group on the planet and you're a bigot if you challenge me'.

Because they're idiot wankers.

One can understand that these parents have concerns, but the concerns are grounded in ignorance and are dangerous to the babies. If parents sincerely believed that it was a good idea to feed infants only vegetable soup instead of milk, or to leave them unsupervised for long periods, etc. etc., or put them outside in the winter without warm clothing, I think most people would say that those parents are not being good watchdogs for children's care, even if those parents had philosophical reasons for wanting to do so. The children are vulnerable and have some rights, too.

I strongly disagree with disallowing unvaccinating children to attend school. I suspect it will just send them underground to homeschool or Steiner schools rather than increase vaccine rates. And then they’ll be off the authorities radar.

Cross Post with Barracker who basically summarised most of what I think but have been struggling to express!

(I'm a lurker and this is the first time I've posted anything on MN in years. I'm experiencing a clunky phone, clunky fingers and clunky brain!)