H1N1 Vaccine

Vaccine Refusal
By Allan R. Handysides, M.B., Ch.B..

Question:

With the recent outbreak of a new strain of influenza, there has been a lot of talk about the dangers of vaccines. I have seen a lot of activity on the internet about the dangers, and wonder if there could be a “cover-up” of the side effects. What is your take on the situation?

Answer:
Firstly, we too have noted the flurry of internet activity, much of it against the use of vaccines. It is important to recognize that there is a vocal “anti-vaccine lobby” and always has been. This group pounces upon any and every possible side effect, real or imagined, to try to dissuade people from using vaccines. These are the group of people who promoted the idea that thimerosal, a mercury-containing stabilizer in measles vaccines, was causing autism. The amount of mercury was so tiny, it contributed little more to our total mercury load than does the atmospheric pollution prevalent everywhere; yet, the claims resulted in multi-millions of dollars being spent on research to either confirm or refute the allegations. No evidence of linkage between the vaccines and autism could be found. Every time a new vaccine is developed, the same type of scare campaign is mounted.
It is very difficult to tie a rare side effect to any medication, and studies require the use of control groups to monitor the background rates of spontaneous events. For example, a person may claim the vaccine causes headaches, but if one thousand vaccine recipients are compared to one thousand controls and the rate for both groups is 16 headaches per 1,000, it is difficult to claim a vaccine is causing the effect. A single person who develops a rash or neuropathy or diabetes shortly after the vaccine does not prove it is a complication of the vaccine. Such conditions occur spontaneously, and the event may be coincidence rather than caused by a vaccine.
Vaccines are tested in large numbers of people, and equally large numbers of controls are monitored. It is these studies that reveal what may be real complications. The numbers of real complications with vaccines are usually extremely small, though reputable producers of any vaccine or medication will withdraw a product rather than risk the population’s health.
As with most things, people neglect to enter into the equation the results of not doing something. For example, with birth control pills, side effects are well-described; but consider the far greater number of complications that attend a given number of pregnancies.
Modern societies have not faced the lethal epidemics that confronted our great grandparents. Few indeed have sat watching infants gasp to the grave with diphtheria. Not many beggars with distorted, wasted limbs grab our attention in the cities today. Smallpox killed half its victims, leaving the rest scarred for life with disfiguring pox marks all over their faces. Vaccination has eradicated this disease. To watch a youngster in the throes of tetanus is a gut-wrenching experience. I spent two weeks supervising the care of an Amish youngster who had to be paralyzed and ventilated while he battled with tetanus.
As a society, we have no understanding of the specters of death. Vaccines rank with clean water and sewage disposal, refrigeration, and antibiotics as the greatest advances in medicine of the last one hundred years. Ellen White and her household were vaccinated against smallpox, giving us a sensible example.
Measles, mumps, and rubella are diseases whole classes of medical graduates may not have seen.
Studies have shown that children who are not immunized are not only at risk for themselves, but for others. Outbreaks of disease often have geographic boundaries that are defined by pockets of the population refusing such immunization. In fact, unvaccinated children have 35 times greater chances of contracting measles. Some delay vaccination erroneously, seeking to protect their younger children. Their children then become vulnerable at an age of high risk to contracting disease. Even what used to be common-place diseases, like chicken pox, can prove lethal. I shall never forget seeing a 7-year-old boy die from chicken pox encephalopathy, nor the agony of his anguished mother as she clutched his lifeless little body.
Because many states demand immunization, but leave an exemption for religious objection, some seek to have the Church endorse their personal choice as a religious tenet of Adventism. It is dishonest for us to participate in such deception.
Clearly, we recognize an individual’s right to choose – but would be duplicitous to pretend this refusal of vaccine is based on Seventh-day Adventist doctrine.
Unlike many Americans, I trust information coming from the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta – and I’m a British Canadian! There is no reason in the world why vaccine producers would do anything but produce the best, most effective, and safest vaccine possible. It is in their own, as well as society’s, best interest to do so. There may be the occasional complication, but thousands of lives will be saved.
If you choose to refuse immunization, that is your prerogative. But it is not an evidence-based position to urge others to follow your example.[1]


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] New England Journal of Medicine, 360;19, May 7, 2009, page 1981-1987