Analysis of Denialism - Essay Example

? Denialism Denialism Doctors and numerous researches have already confirmed that vaccines are not responsible for autism; but there are many parents that are still unconvinced by this. Vaccine denialism holds that autism is triggerred in young children by the administration of the MMR vaccine. The advocates of vaccine denialism have no real evidence to substantiate their claims; but their beliefs have actually caused them to encourage many other oarents not to allow their children to have the MMR vaccine (Specter, 2009). It has also brought considerable problems for the public health sector which has had to deal with threats from well-meaning but misinformed people who are stirred up by the actions of fearmongers. In most cases of such dissenters, the stronger the emotion behind their beliefs, the more they are likely to invariably use cognitive inaccuracies to hold onto the false belief. In general, human beings tend to believe that there is a reason, and a physical logical one at that, why certain things happen. This especially true where emotional subjects such as the health of children is concerned. For example, they will feel that there is a reason why autistic children are that way. Some parents will also use examples of coincidental situations that occur to prove that there is a connection between autism and vaccinations. For instance, if a child dies soon after being vaccinated, its parents are likely to use that incident as justification for refusing to let their other children get vaccinated. Also, people have the tendency of expressing reservations on only the procedures that they are able to remember easily. In most cases where children receive vaccinations, they have no adverse reactions to them. This is an extremely common occurrence that is never reported on. Moreover, the media will report extensively whenever a child has adverse reactions to a vaccine. This will cause parents to be constantly reminded of the few cases of such magnitude. Parents can easily access information from the media, and so acquire a cognitive bias, believing that many children suffer from adverse reactions when they are given multiple vaccines. Parents also use false consensus to believe that reinforce wrong beliefs such as that about vaccines causing autism symptoms. In the false consensus effect, parents are led to believe that the subject belief concerning the danger of vaccines is one which is widely held. This is mainly the result of being exposed to selective data through various elements of the media (Specter, 2009). In addition, most parents have no way of getting feedback from others about questions regarding this premise due to the unspoken rules regarding social interaction. For instance, if a parent suspects that his son or daughter is autistic because of the administrations of multiple vaccines, this view is not likely to be corrected by others or by doctors because it is unlikely that the parent will express it out loud. In recent years, the people who believe that vaccines cause autism have been influenced by the consistency with which the media reports on the subject of vaccines in relation to autism. It is also a fact that the parents who feel that vaccines are the actual cause of their children’s autism are more speak about it more often than those who do not believe this. Another reason why people might be persuaded about the accuracy of this inaccuracy is that it is the one issue over which they feel that they have control. Healthcare, in most nations, is the responsibility of government ministries; which many people distrust. Most citizens in nations around the world do not have a choice about the vaccines that their children get because governments have determined that the child’s rights to health are more important than the parent’s feelings about the matter. In some nations, children are vaccinated before being allowed to attend school while in others, parents are obligated to deliver the child to clinics for vaccinations. Many parents are irritated by the fact that the decisions about their child’s healthcare are not left to them but are made in spite of their preferences. This makes them side with establishments that seek to take away some of the government’s power over their children. These parents, however, will ignore factors that prove that their beliefs are wrong about vaccines. For instance, there is a lot of inconsistency about the theory that vaccines can cause autism. The MMR vaccine is one that is administered to children from all over the world. While some nations only recently made it mandatory for all children, some developed nations have included it among the vaccines that are given to toddlers for almost the past four decades. If the vaccine were actually responsible for the occurrence of autism in young children, there would probably have emerged a trend of young children showing symptoms of the disease soon after being vaccinated in more than one nation. However, this has not been forthcoming. What is evident is that there are varying numbers of autistic people in developed as well as developing nations alike. Any assertion that there is a singular cause or trigger of autism is a misleading notion due to the variety of environmental as well as biological experiences that are encountered by people all across the globe. This, however, also does not prove that vaccines do not play a small role in the occurrence of autism in particular cases. Many parents also hold a false consensus about the danger of vaccines to a child’s health. Once this has happenned, motivated reasoning will cause such parents to want to confirm what they already feels is the truth about the negative effect of vaccines; even if this includes disregarding a considerable amount of evidence that suggests the contrary. This done without even seeking to discredit the existing evidence that suggests that vaccines are not harmful to the majority of babies. This type of motivated reasoning has emotional origins and feels food to the parent that uses it because it avoids cognitive dissonance. Trying to cope with conflicting ideas can be a great burden for a parent with a sick child. For such parents, it is easier to muster some type of support for the belief that vaccines cause autism than actually trying making the effort to force themselves to belief the reality that there is no correlation between the two. Once such parents receive support for their erroneous belief, their internal conflicts are somewhat blunted. In the case of the belief that vaccines can cause autism, there are many factors that can be used to create an acceptable opposition against those who do not believ this. For instance, the pharmaceutical companies that create vaccines provide a perfect target for the misplaced ire of denialists. Pharmaceutical companies have in the past been accused of various failures; some of which have not been won by the accusers. The argument against the use of vaccines provides a perfect platform for disgruntled people to take on pharmaceutical companies on a subject that is extremely sensitive, and thus is lily to go against the companies. People who present themselves as experts, such as the parents of autistic children, and expect themselves to be accepted as such due to their experiences with their chidren, can also present themselves as ‘experts’ on a subject of which they actually hardly know anything. Moreover, they are likely to attract the sympathy and support of parents who are undergoing similar problems and are not ready to accept the reality that there might be an as –yet unknown cause for their child’s autism. Most parents want to know that their child might have a chance at improving even if autism is the diagnosis. If the cause of an illness is known, there is a possibility that there might be a cure. Reference Specter, M. (2009). Denialism: How irrational thinking hinders scientific progress, harms the planet, and threatens our lives. New York: Penguin Group. Read More