Thursday, April 23, 2009

Vaccine-Nation

Jim Carrey, the Hollywood actor, has become an outspoken proponent of safer vaccinations. He recently published an opinion piece on The Huffington Post calling for more research into the effects of vaccination, more specifically the current vaccine schedule and the components in vaccines.

Judging by the comments, Carrey's suggestions strike some as close to blasphemy.

I myself never questioned vaccination until I became pregnant with my first child. As a child of the 80s, I had the MMR and DPT vaccines. Before trips to India, as a child and as an adult, I got the recommended travel vaccines. I was aware of the vaccine controversy because of the fact that I worked with autistic and autistic-spectrum children in my clinical training to become a psychologist. But it wasn't until I was 7 months pregnant and really looking at the latest vaccination schedule that I begin to feel something wasn't right.

The facts are simple: American children are getting more and more vaccinations as time goes on. Day-old infants, before they even leave the hospital, are usually given the Hepatitis B vaccine. Hepatitis B, by the way, is a bloodborne virus that is usually transmitted through IV drug use or unprotected sex. I asked several doctors why an infant would need to be vaccinated for an illness that is contracted through behavior that they would not be engaging in; after all, the Hepatitis B vaccine is only good for 10 years, and I seriously doubt that the vast majority of elementary school kids, even in this day in age, are engaging in sex while using IV drugs. None of the doctors could give me an answer. I saw that the Chicken Pox vaccine was required; I have a clear memory of having chicken pox at the age of 5 - certainly not the happiest memory, but I, like every other kid in my kindergarten class, made it through unscathed, save for a few scars from a scratched pustule. And now, states are seeking to add on more and more vaccinations. New Jersey has been considering adding the yearly flu vaccine to its mandatory schedule. Texas was, for a while, mandating Gardasil, which protects against certain certain strains of the sexually transmitted human papilloma virus, for school attendance. Where does it end? When is it enough?

It's not just about autism, though. To make this issue solely about whether or not vaccines cause or do not cause autism is to miss the bigger question: Is it safe to give so many vaccines? Are the risks of so many vaccines outweighed by the benefits? We know that allergic reactions to vaccine components do occur. We know that children, such as Hannah Poling, are, in fact, injured by vaccines. The risks/benefits of not vaccinating a health worker for Hepatitis B who comes in contact with blood is considerably different than for a day-old infant. To suggest there is a one-size-fits-all invasive intervention when it comes to vaccination - when I have yet to see a one-size-fits-all invasive intervention in any other part of medicine - almost seems obscene. To ignore the likelihood of individual reactions and the need to modify vaccination based upon the individual's own and familial medical history and vaccination needs is absurd. I use my own family as an example: There are four generations in my family (that we know of) who have autoimmune disorders. My paternal grandmother and my father both have rheumatoid arthritis. I have Graves Disease. My brother's daughter, at the ripe old age of 2, was diagnosed with Juvenile Rheumatoid Arthritis. The evidence is quite clear that the immune systems in my family are atypical. So why would I want to have my son -who received half of his genetic makeup from me - be vaccinated with a large number of vaccines at one time? Why would I want to vaccinate him for illnesses that he has little danger of catching at this time, such as Hepatitis B? The history is clear - overaggressive immune systems run in the family; why would I want to provoke an aggressive immune response in my little boy?

I believe vaccination, like all valid medical treatments, can be positive and lifesaving. But just as we don't arbitrarily send all depressed patients for electroshock treatment because of the risk/benefits involved, I don't believe we need to mandate that all of our children be vaccinated against every disease. There are risks to putting anything into the human body - from medications to foods - just as there can be benefits. The challenge is determine where the happy medium is, and as of yet, neither the government nor the pharmaceutical companies appear to want to consider doing the research to find that point. The risks of mandating so many vaccinations needs to be studied in depth and by researchers without ties to the vaccine manufacturers. A lot of little lives could depend on it.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

*smooch* I love your brain!