May 28th, 2009 by Dr. Val Jones in Opinion, Quackery Exposed
6 Comments »
I’ve been fairly quiet about Jenny McCarthy’s campaign against childhood vaccinations, partly because Dr. David Gorski has covered the issue so thoroughly already, and partly because of my “do not engage” policy relating to the deeply irrational (i.e. there’s no winning an argument with “crazy.”) But this week I was filled with a renewed sense of urgency regarding the anti-vaccinationist movement for two reasons: 1) I received a personal email from a woman who is being treated with hostility by her peers for her pro-science views on vaccines and 2) a friend forwarded me a video of Jenny McCarthy speaking directly to moms, instructing them to avoid vaccinating their kids or giving them milk or wheat because of their supposed marijuana-like addictive properties.
Anti-Vaccination Views Are A Status Symbol?
I was surprised to discover that some pro-science moms are being mocked by peers who are uninterested in evidence, choosing to believe any dubious source of health information that questions the “medical establishment.” This concerned mom writes:
I am the mother of two young children, and I live in the trenches of the anti-vax woo. In my circle of about 14 mothers, my anecdotal analysis is that the rate of complete vaccination hovers around 60%. The mothers in this group are all very well educated, middle-class or affluent, predominantly stay-home mothers. One problem is what they consider reliable sources of information. They rely on anecdotes and dismiss scientific evidence in part because they are very anti-medical establishment. The group is self-validating and many shared values (and myths) increase in intensity over time.
Many of the mothers practice “Natural Family Living” which has some appealing aspects, but also harbors elements of a cult. In this environment, anti-vaccination becomes a very powerful status symbol… I have lost friendships and been partially ousted from this circle because of my views.
This note struck a chord with me, since I experienced similar hostility in the past for voicing my concern about pseudoscience and misleading consumer health information. I was accused of being “paternalistic, narrow-minded, a dinosaur – part of a dying breed, a racist against complementary and alternative medicine, and a Bible school teacher, preaching evidence-based medicine,” insulted for my desire to be accurate about what was known and not known about treatment options, and my expertise, training, and academic credentials were called into question publicly on many occasions. I endured all of this primarily at the hands of someone who supposedly believed in “natural healing” and the “art of kindness” as an integral part of patient care.
I am troubled by the mounting antagonism towards those of us who’d like to use critical thinking and scientific reasoning to learn what we can about medicine and our health. I’m not sure what to do about it except to encourage one another to stand strong for science and reason – to expect all manner of attacks and insults, and to be firmly committed to the objective quest for truth. It shall set us free.
Jenny McCarthy – Inaccurate, Unhelpful And Dangerous Advice
Although I find Jenny McCarthy’s advice and opinions painful to watch, I committed myself to viewing her recent video at my friend’s request. In order to spare you similar discomfort, let me simply summarize what she said so you can get a high level overview of the sort of bizarre and misinformed claims she promotes (feel free to check out the video for yourself).
“Autism is not primarily a genetic disorder, but caused by vaccine-related toxins (including mercury, aluminum, ether, anti-freeze ,and human aborted fetal tissue) and pesticides.”
“Kids get ‘stoned’ by wheat and dairy toxins. Giving them wheat or dairy proteins is like giving children marijuana.”
- There is currently no evidence that any diet improves or worsens the symptoms of autism spectrum disorders. In fact, whole grains and dairy products are an important part of a healthy diet for most children.
“Food allergies are like Iran and Iraq. Glial cells (they’re like chef cell) provide food to the neuron kings. Glial cells can turn into Rambo to fight Iran and Iraq. If a child is allergic to everything, the Rambo cells stop feeding the neurons and the neurons starve. That causes the symptoms of autism.”
- I don’t know what to say about this strange analogy – clearly no science-based information here.
“To treat autism, you need to give your child supplements to fight off the yeast in their bodies. I recommend Super Nathera, Culturelle, Cod Liver Oil, Caprylic Acid, CoQ10, Calcium, Vitamin C, Selenium, Zinc, Vitamin B12, B6, and Magnesium.”
- There is no evidence of efficacy for any of these supplements in the treatment of autism.
“You need to consult with a DAN! Practitioner.”
- DAN! Practitioners recommend chelation therapy for the treatment of autism. There is no evidence that chelation therapy has any benefit for children with autism, and in fact, can be fatal.
“Whatever you think becomes your reality. Imagine your child going to his/her prom and he’ll be cured.”
I think it’s pretty clear that Jenny McCarthy’s recommendations range from ineffective (imaginary healing) to harmful (malnutrition related to absent dairy and wheat in the diet, excessive levels of vitamins) to deadly (chelation therapy with DAN! Practitioners). Will mothers watching her new show on Oprah fall for her pseudoscience and poor advice?
I was pleased to see this open letter to Oprah from one concerned mom. Here’s an excerpt:
To me, it is clear that a significant number of people look up to you, and trust your advice and judgment. That is why it is such a huge mistake for you to endorse Jenny McCarthy with her own show on your network.
Surely you must realize that McCarthy is neither a medical professional nor a scientist. And yet she acts as a spokesperson for the anti-vaccination movement, a movement that directly impacts people’s health. Claims that vaccines are unsafe and cause autism have been refuted time after time, but their allure persists in part because of high-profile champions for ignorance like McCarthy. In fact, ten of the thirteen authors of the paper that sparked the modern anti-vaccination movement retracted the explosive conclusions they made due to insufficient evidence. Furthermore, it is now clear that the study’s main author, Andrew Wakefield, falsified data to support these shaky conclusions.
We have come close to eradicating life-threatening and crippling illnesses because of vaccines, but are now struggling to prevent outbreaks because of parents’ philosophical beliefs that vaccines are harmful. Realize this: when someone chooses not to vaccinate their child, they aren’t just putting their own child at risk, they are putting everyone else around them at risk. Diseases with vaccines should normally be of little concern even to unprotected individuals due to herd immunity – with the majority of the population immune, unprotected individuals are less likely to come into contact with the pathogen. Unfortunately, herd immunity disintegrates as fewer people are vaccinated, putting everyone who hasn’t yet been vaccinated at greater risk for infection. Now, the rates of infection by diseases for which we have safe and effective vaccines are climbing, thanks to anti-vaccination activists like Jenny McCarthy.
You reach millions of people everyday and your words and endorsements carry an incredible amount of weight. If you say to buy a certain book, people will buy it. If you do a segment on a certain charity, people will contribute. And if you say that what Jenny McCarthy is saying has merit, people will believe you…
Conclusion
A certain segment of society appears to be emotionally invested in medical beliefs that are not based on science, but rather anecdotes, conspiracy theories, and magical thinking. Those who recommend a more objective method of inquiry may be subject to ridicule and hostility by that segment. Nonetheless, it is important (for public health and safety purposes and the advancement of science) for critical thinking to be promoted and defended. While some celebrities, like Jenny McCarthy, are committed to misinforming the public about their children’s health – parents who recognize the deception are speaking out against it. Perhaps the best way to combat Jenny’s propaganda is to boycott Oprah. Refusing to support the promotion of dangerous pseudoscience may be our best defense.
*This blog post was originally published at Science-Based Medicine*
May 6th, 2009 by SteveSimmonsMD in Primary Care Wednesdays
2 Comments »
Swine Flu has brought an awareness of the catastrophic potential inherent in pandemic influenza to the public consciousness and led many to panic. Industry has long played a major role in protecting us against epidemic influenza, providing doctors and patients with vaccinations and medications to help protect and treat the weakest individuals in our society: the young and old. However, pandemic flu frequently kills the healthiest in society; a hallmark of the 1918 Swine Flu Pandemic that left 500,000 dead in the U.S., far more that the average of 36,000 dead in a typical year.
This week, I had a discussion with Bill Enright, President and CEO of Vaxin Inc., about their efforts to create a vaccine for pandemic Flu. Our daughters are kindergarten classmates and over the last two years I have enjoyed the opportunity our friendship has afforded me to learn about the vaccine industry. As “Swine Flu” began to dominate the headlines I asked him to participate in a dialogue with me believing that a discussion between a clinical physician and a vaccine scientist would be interesting and informative for a reader without giving in to hysteria. He was kind enough to give of his own time and a part of the discussion follows:
STEVE: What is Vaxin, Inc.?
BILL:. Vaxin is a vaccine development company focused on needle-free vaccines to protect against influenza (both seasonal and avian influenza) and anthrax. Using technology developed at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, by our scientific founder Dr. De-chu Tang, we have been able to show proof of principle with our platform, intranasal seasonal influenza vaccine, and have just completed enrollment in a Phase I clinical study with an intranasal pre-pandemic influenza vaccine. We are also investigating patch-based vaccines.
STEVE: What is the difference between the vaccine you are developing for Pandemic Influenza and the vaccine given yearly for Epidemic Influenza?
BILL: Epidemic, or seasonal, vaccines are trivalent vaccines composed of three influenza strains (two A and one B) anticipated to be circulating. The CDC and the WHO spend considerable effort in monitoring the circulating strains around the world before making a decision on which strains should be included in that year’s vaccine. However, several changes could occur which result in the vaccine not being a good match for a particular year: mutations could change a strain, new strains could evolve or different strains than anticipated could predominate.
Pandemic vaccines will be made to the circulating influenza virus causing the pandemic. Vaccines made in advance of a pandemic are really “pre-pandemic” vaccines as they are attempting to estimate which influenza strain may make the jump to a pandemic and enable stockpiling and/or vaccination of at-risk individuals with the belief that the vaccine will mitigate symptoms and decrease mortality through cross-strain protection while a true pandemic vaccine is being developed/manufactured.
STEVE: How long does it take to produce an epidemic trivalent vaccine and is it feasible to have the current H1N1 strain or “swine flu,” included in the standard flu shot this fall?
BILL: That is a complex question. Do you include it as a 4th component? Replace one of the other A strains? Provide it as a separate vaccine? Manufacturers are currently trying to assess how much and of which type of vaccine they would be able to provide given a limited egg supply (since vaccine components require incubation in chicken eggs). Chicken populations take a significant amount of time to increase to add egg capacity. Seasonal vaccine antigen doses are typically 15µg and it takes approximately 1 egg for one, 15µg dose. To date it has taken 90µg of antigen to show similar levelsof efficacy for pandemic vaccines. Therefore, whether or not there is a sufficient egg supply and how that may impact the traditional epidemic vaccine is being discussed and calculated as we speak.
The length of time it takes to manufacture the epidemic trivalent vaccine depends a lot on the specific strains and how different the vaccine is from the previous year. For instance, the 09/10 vaccine will contain 2 of the same strains as the 08/09 version, only the B strain is different. The CDC put forward this years policy document on February 25th, identifying which exact strains were to be included in this year’s vaccine. Many manufacturers had already started the production efforts on the seed strains guessing that these would be the strains based on available surveillance of circulating strains. Typically the total process begins in December or January for most manufacturers. Usually the first vaccines are ready to ship to distributors in August or September. In certain years the process can take longer than usual because not all strains of influenza grow well in chicken eggs, including the recent H1N1 virus. New “reverse genetic” techniques are helping to alleviate this problem but the rate of growth and yield of virus continues to be a concern to manufacturers.
STEVE: Do you have any ongoing clinical trials for the H5 pre-pandemic flu?
BILL: Vaxin is currently completing a Phase I clinical trial for an intranasally delivered vaccine against the H5N1 influenza virus. This is the first step in getting a vaccine approved for use by the FDA. Typically Phase I trials involve a small number of otherwise healthy volunteers that agree to be vaccinated to allow us to test and ensure that our vaccine does not cause any serious unwanted safety concerns. Vaxin’s study involved 48 people that were divided into 3 groups of 16. Each group of 16 received a different dose of the vaccine on the first day and then received a second administration of a second dose 28 days later. Within each group of 16, only 12 people actually receive the vaccine and 4 people receive a placebo. Until the end of the study, no one knows who received the vaccine and who received the placebo.
STEVE: The mortality rates for H5 influenza have been between 30% and 70%. Did this lead you to choose H5 as a focus for your pre-pandemic vaccine?
BILL: The focus on H5 as a target for pre-pandemic vaccines is a result of the high degree of mortality seen in those that have been infected with the virus. While the 1918 flu had a catastrophic impact on the world and a large loss of life, it is estimated that the mortality rate was about 2%. However, it was able to spread very rapidly. Similarly, other pandemics from H2 and H3 outbreaks had relatively low mortality rates (estimated to be between 0.1%-0.5% for both the 1957 and 1968 pandemics).
STEVE: Can you speak about the delivery system you are using to deliver this vaccine?
BILL: Vaxin’s technology includes the use of another virus called adenovirus. This is a virus commonly found in nature which typically causes mild respiratory illnesses or cold like symptoms. It has a natural ability to infect humans at a very high rate. We have modified this virus so that it can no longer reproduce and we have incorporated a very small piece of the flu virus into the adenovirus. The adenovirus then infects people like normal but instead of making more adenovirus, it makes a piece of the flu virus. The body sees this in the same way it sees the flu…as a bad foreign protein and jump starts the immune system to get rid of it. In addition, our vaccine is given intranasally, the same way that the body normally sees both adenovirus and the flu. We believe the body responds in a very similar fashion in identifying and clearing the potential threat.
STEVE: Too many suffered complications to the H1N1 Swine Flu vaccine rushed through production in 1976; this leads me to ask if any corners would need to be cut, in terms of patient safety, to get a swine flu vaccine ready in time this year?
BILL: I am not familiar enough with the issues associated with moving the 1976 swine flu vaccine through the process to know about shortcuts taken, but the issues identified may still be issues. The result however was a significantly higher incidence of Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS) in those vaccinated vs those unvaccinated; 13.3 vs 2.6 per millions of people contracting Guillain-Barre, respectively. Note, significantly larger safety studies than are typically done for influenza vaccines would have been required to detect this event.
The current H1N1 swine flu vaccine would be against a very similar antigen and made with similar technologies for the most part and therefore the risk of GBS may still be prevalent. This will be weighed as a risk/benefit calculation when deciding how to proceed. It will depend in large part on the true mortality rate of the H1N1 swine flu vaccine. This was originally estimated at about 10%, but as identified cases of H1N1 and associated deaths are “confirmed” as opposed to being “probable” cases and the reporting becomes more accurate, it is now about 1% and falling. At 10% it is likely worth the calculated risk of GBS but at what point does the risk of death have a higher impact than the potential risk of GBS
STEVE: What percentage of health care workers, in our country, typically receive a flu shot?”
BILL: Only 36% of health care workers in the U.S. on average receive an influenza vaccine annually. (Source: CDC. Prevention and control of influenza: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). MMWR. 2003; 52 (RR8): 1-44.) Therefore, with a disease that can be spread two or more days before a person is symptomatic, an individual healthcare worker has a tremendous opportunity to spread the disease, without knowing it, to a population that is likely very susceptible, those that are sick and immune compromised to begin with.
STEVE: Do you have any suggestions for my colleagues and friends who tell me they get the flu from a flu shot?
BILL: It is scientifically not feasible to get the flu from a flu shot unless the vaccine has not been made appropriately and tested adequately. The licensed influenza vaccines on the market today are primarily inactivated whole virus or split subunit vaccines. Essentially the flu virus is grown in chicken eggs, purified and inactivated by heat or chemicals. The virus is unable to replicate and therefore cannot cause the flu. Usual side effects from any vaccination, because of the stimulation of a robust immune response from the body, include symptoms that some people associate with the flu, e.g., fever, body aches, sniffles etc. These symptoms are typical of many vaccinations including flu. Similarly in the new live virus vaccine (FluMist ®), the virus has been adapted to grow only in a cold environment. Once in the body its ability to replicate is severely limited and again not feasible to cause the flu.
All in all vaccines are the most cost effective medical procedure invented. Their use over the past century has saved millions of lives and untold expense with several previously common diseases now relatively under control or near complete eradication. Many people do not realize the annual cost, in lives lost, hospitalizations and subsequent economic costs, that influenza outbreaks inflict. Our ability to track and monitor influenza outbreaks and continual improvements in technologies and manufacturing processes are allowing us to attack influenza with the same vigor. While the world is more prepared than ever before to deal with potential pandemic influenza outbreaks, we still have room for improvement to ensure adequate, rapid access in all parts of the world. Vaxin is hopeful that our technologies and products will continue to advance this effort for rapidly available, safe, effective, easy to administer vaccines.
April 28th, 2009 by Dr. Val Jones in Announcements
No Comments »
Then you definitely need to subscribe to MedPage Today’s special swine flu news feed.
Just click here:
MedPage Today Swine Flu News
Get regular, peer-reviewed news updates delivered to your RSS reader of choice…
Also stay tuned for updates from the International Influenza Vaccines for the World conference, in Cannes, France. MedPage Today has sent reporters there and will be giving Better Health key updates. I’ll keep you posted.
March 17th, 2009 by Dr. Val Jones in Humor, True Stories
8 Comments »
As some of my Twitter friends already know, I had a bit of a scare a few days ago with my cat. I know that I more-or-less promised not to let this blog degenerate into cat talk (and for the record I love dogs too), but please indulge me because I think there’s a larger lesson to be learned.
A few days ago I was emailing away on my computer when I heard an odd thud behind me. I turned around to find my cat lying on her back with one leg fully extended, her pupils dilated, and a fine tremor in all four legs. This lasted for about 10 seconds and then she jumped back onto her feet and walked away as if nothing had happened.
My husband denied giving her any catnip, and since I hadn’t seen this odd behavior in her before I decided to keep a close eye on her. About an hour later she was walking across the floor when she suddenly raised her back rear leg, hopped a few steps, flopped onto her back and did the same weird leg extension, trembling, and let out a bizarre yowl.
That buys her a trip to the vet – and I started running my differential diagnosis through my head. It seemed to me that she was having some kind of focal seizures – and I wondered if she could be in renal failure (she had had a UTI earlier in the year) with metabolic encephalopathy, or perhaps a small tumor that had started to trigger some seizure activity. The episodes seemed to resolve completely in between episodes so I didn’t think she was having a stroke, she also wasn’t continuing to limp and when I pressed on her bones she didn’t flinch so I didn’t think she had broken anything. I called the vet and when asked for the “chief complaint” I was just as helpful as many ER patients:
Dr. Val: My cat’s ‘acting weird.
Receptionist: Could you be more specific?
Dr. Val: Well, she’s acting like she’s had catnip, but she hasn’t.
Receptionist: Uh huh… And what do you mean by that?
Dr. Val: She keeps falling on the floor and stiffening her rear leg. Then she gets up as if everything’s fine. This seems to be happening every hour or so.
Receptionist: I see. And is it possible that she could have eaten something toxic? Do you have poison lying around the house?
Dr. Val: Not that I’m aware of.
Receptionist: Well it sounds like you should bring her in. Can you be here in 15 minutes?
Dr. Val: Wow, that’s not much time. But I can try! I think she might be having seizures…
And so with the vet’s office being 15 minutes away, you can imagine the frenzied efforts that ensued – I managed (single handedly) to put together a cat carrier and stuff the “seizing” feline into it and hoist her onto a cart and push her down the city sidewalks, much to the amusement of onlookers, who probably fully believed that I was a cat-abuser, hearing the pitiful cries coming from inside the cage.
To make a long story short, I explained to the vet-on-call what I’d witnessed, and suggested that my cat might have a brain tumor. Luckily for me, the vet did not blindly take my diagnosis for granted, but performed her own physical exam.
The conclusion?
Vet: Dr. Jones I don’t believe your cat is having seizures. She has a subluxing patella.
Dr. Val: Um, so you’re saying that her knee cap popped out of place?
Vet: Pretty much, yes. That’s why she flops on the floor and stiffens her leg. She’s trying to get the knee cap to slide back into place. It’s a grade 3 subluxation, which means it pops out easily, but still goes back into place on its own.
Dr. Val: How do we fix it?
Vet: She’s a surgical candidate. We can create a divot in her femur to help keep the knee cap in the right groove.
Dr. Val: Wow, we don’t do that for humans. Are you sure that will work?
Vet: Well, you can try glucosamine. It will reduce the inflammation.
Dr. Val: Glucosamine doesn’t reduce inflammation in humans – and there’s no conclusive evidence that it improves joint health either. Isn’t this more of a mechanical problem that needs a mechanical solution?
Vet: [Becoming irritated] Yes, well you can see our orthopedic specialist. She’s not board certified though – but she has a lot of experience with these kinds of things.
Dr. Val: Well, is there a board-certified orthopedic veterinary surgeon that we could consult with? How much do you think that would cost?
Vet: There’s an animal hospital in Friendship Heights. I’m sure their surgeons are all equally well qualified. I guess the procedure would cost around $2000.
Dr. Val: Wow, $2000 to put a divot in a cat’s femur? Gee… I don’t know…
Vet: You should also know that your cat needs her rabies shot.
Dr. Val: She needs another one?
Vet: Yes, they need one every year.
Dr. Val: How likely is a house cat to get rabies? Are there rabid mice that could get into our condo?
Vet: [Scowling] It’s the law. All cats must get a rabies shot every year. There is one rabies shot that can be given every three years, but it’s been associated with osteosarcomas in cats. Would you like to give her that vaccine?
Dr. Val: Uh, no. But seriously, where is my cat going to catch rabies?
Vet: Maybe she’ll catch it from the other pets at the animal hospital when she goes for surgery?
Dr. Val: [Visions of Cujo dancing in her head] Well, that doesn’t sound like a very safe place to take her.
Vet: Would you like to buy some glucosamine?
Dr. Val: No thanks, I think I’ll go now.
***
I learned a few things from this amusing interaction:
1. People should try not to make diagnoses beyond their level of expertise. (Brain tumor versus subluxing patella? Yikes.)
2. Vets do not necessarily practice evidence-based medicine. (Glucosamine for a subluxing patella?)
3. There’s a lot of money in cat vaccines.
4. Cash-only practices are quite lucrative. My little visit cost $300.
What do you think I should do with/for my poor cat?
February 2nd, 2009 by Stacy Stryer, M.D. in Opinion
6 Comments »
By Stacy Beller Stryer, M.D.
After my blog last week discussing the recent increase in Haemophilus influenzae B (Hib) cases in Minnesota, I received a comment from “Indian Cowboy,” who is a blogger and fourth year medical student. While Indian Cowboy admits that he isn’t completely against vaccines, he does question their safety and says that, “if my (future) patients were to ask me specifically, scientifically, what the risks of vaccines are, I would be forced to shrug my shoulders and say I actually have no idea.” He suggests that pediatricians, in general, are not open and honest with their patients about any side-effects associated with vaccines. Furthermore, Indian Cowboy comments that he is a member of the “current generation of medical students,” where evidence-based medicine is important. Does this mean that we old-timers (yes, I am an ancient 45 years old), don’t practice medicine based on results of quality studies and proof of what actually works?
That is far from the truth. My colleagues and I practice medicine based on what has been proven to work and not just what we learned on a whim. We continue to read reputable journal articles and other medical literature, often discussing treatment changes based on new research. And I do not know any pediatrician who makes a blanket statement that vaccines are 100% safe. Personally, I spend a fair bit of time talking to parents who question vaccine safety. I tell them that anybody can have a reaction to a vaccine, just like anybody can react to an antibiotic, food, or something in the environment. I also discuss more common side effects of vaccines, such as fever, redness, and irritation at the injection site. In addition, I mention that there are very rare, more serious side effects associated with some vaccines, such as seizures and encephalitis. I am certainly not the only honest pediatrician in the United States. In fact, reputable organizations such as the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), which are major advocates for vaccines, clearly state on their website that no vaccine is 100% safe or effective.
Just as importantly, and an absolute necessity is discussing that the risk of becoming seriously ill or dying secondary to a vaccine is much lower than the risk of developing a serious illness or dying if a child becomes ill with one of the infections for which they could have been vaccinated. Parents must be aware of the benefits of receiving these vaccines. And they should know that vaccines are one of the greatest medical discoveries of the 20th century and have increased life expectancy and quality of life significantly.
Back to Indian Cowboy – he also comments that we really don’t know much about vaccine safety because studies only last days or, at most, a couple of weeks. This is also far from the truth. Before a vaccine is licensed, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) requires testing. Once the vaccine is being used, the CDC and FDA look for any problems and investigate them through the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It’s true that this system depends on pediatricians and parents to report side effects. This was recognized as a problem, so in 1986 a National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act was developed which, among other things, required experts to intensively review any possible adverse effects of vaccines. In 1990 the Vaccine Safety Datalink project was developed, where researchers gained access to the medical records of over 5.5 million people to evaluate for common and rare side effects associated with vaccines. All of these different safety methods have led to changes in vaccines to make them safer. In 2000, children began to receive the inactive polio instead of the live polio vaccine due to the rare risk of developing polio from the oral vaccine. More recently, the pertussis vaccine was changed from a whole cell to an acellular one because of the increased risk of rare neurological side effects.
I could continue, but the bottom line is that immunizations have been tested extensively for safety and continue to be monitored by reputable, quality organizations. There is an abundance of information available on safety for every vaccine. It is true that we cannot assure parents that their child will not develop a severe allergic reaction or a rare side effect to a vaccine. And we cannot say that we are 100% sure that vaccines do not affect the brain or the immune system, such as we cannot assure them that they will not get into an accident when they step into a car or that they will not be hit by a car when they cross a street. But we can reassure them that the chances of such an event are rare and that the benefit of receiving the vaccine far outweighs the risk of not receiving it.
I certainly hope that the one case of epiglottitis and pertussis that Indian Cowboy saw last year makes him realize not only how serious these infections can be in infants and children, but also that he only saw one case of each whereas, without immunizations, he would have seen many more and, most likely, a few deaths.
