The Measles, Mumps and Rubella Vaccine - Essay Example

The Measles, Mumps and Rubella Vaccine Introduction The MMR vaccine is an immunization product that is meant to give the body the necessary immunity against mumps, measles and rubella. Like every other vaccines, it is made up of mild viruses of the three diseases. Attenuation causes the viruses to be mild and harmless to induce the production of antibodies that will in turn fight the pathogens or causative agents of the three infections. The vaccine administration is through injection and it was invented by Maurice Hilleman. However, a number of controversies encompass the use of the vaccine. Medical professionals support its use but it has been facing criticism from the general public. The criticism is based on the possible side effects associated with the use of the vaccine The Controversy over the MMR Vaccine The medical fraternity is in favor of the use of the MMR vaccine but the general public has been conducting Anti-MMR campaigns in order to prevent its use. The reason for the criticism from the general public is the fear that exists among parents over the side effects of the vaccine on their children. Parents fear that the MMR vaccine may be the primary cause of autism among children (Newton, 2013, p. 90) Autism is a mental condition that usually affects individuals from childhood and causes difficulty in communicating and establishing bonds with other people. It also causes slurred speech because using language and abstract expressions becomes difficult. The medical world has not been able to provide an appropriate account on the emerging issues concerning the vaccine. In 2002, Medical Research Council did a review of autism. This review covers matters on the prevalence of autism, its effects and possible causative factors. The review finally associates a number of factors with the cause of autism but singles out genetic factors as a major cause. According to the report, there is no tangible evidence that can establish MMR vaccine as a causative agent of autism. The report further links autism with environmental and behavioral factors like the exposure to drugs or heavy metals before giving birth. Such an exposure causes genetic susceptibility to autism (Hollins, 2015, p. 1). Evaluation of the controversies has also remained accomplished by independent federal committees such as the Joint Committee on Vaccines and Immunization. The reports from these committees suggest that the argument that autism is related to MMR vaccine has no scientific basis. Therefore, the committees’ conclusion is that there is no causal link between autism and the MMR vaccine. The use of MMR vaccine has been extensive all over the world for about 30 years. Distribution of over 500 million doses of the vaccine has been done to at least 90 countries (Hollins, 2015, p. 1). The United Kingdom has never been in agreement with the administration of three different injections to children and there is no sovereign state that is in agreement with this as well. Therefore these states recommend the use of MMR because it is composed of three separate vaccines for the three different infections. Administering separate vaccines at different intervals puts children at the risk of contracting the infection as they wait for the next vaccine dose. During the waiting period, such children are susceptible to mumps, rubella and measles. This is the main argument that the governments are putting forward to back their support for the use of the MMR vaccine. Major health organizations support the use of MMR. Examples are the WHO, the BMA, and the RCN (Boyce, 2007, p. 83). The concerns parents have been airing about the MMR vaccines owe their origin to a research done by a U.K. doctor known as Dr. Andrew Wakefield. The results of his research establish a link between autism and the MMR vaccine. In the long run, Wakefield’s research has been found to be faulty full of baseless arguments. Retraction of the paper containing the research results was done on February 2nd 2010 by The Lancet, a British journal on which the research had been published. (Science Learning, 2010, p. 1) A ruling by the General Medical Service which is a medical organization in the U.K. in January 2010 is the cause of the retraction. In its statement, the council states that Wakefield and two of his associates were responsible for a series of breaches in the practice of medicine. The council brings out Wakefield’s efforts as being irresponsible, ill-centered and dishonest. During a press conference, Dr. Wakefield claims that parents should use separate vaccines for the measles, mumps and rubella. He warns them to desist from allowing the administration of the three-in-one MMR vaccine to their children. A discovery was later made that Wakefield had been receiving funds from a British legal team to conduct research and find ways of linking MMR to autism. The legal team’s aim was to file a legal case against the manufacturers of the vaccine. The need for a basis on which the team could file a viable legal case led to their association with Dr. Wakefield. Wakefield himself files a patent that supports the use of a single vaccine for measles and the patent filing would only succeed with the discretization of the MMR triple vaccine. On the other hand, Wakefield was aware of test results that were contradicting the theory in his research but he chooses to ignore them and does not include them in his publication (Science Learning, 2010, p.1) In 2004, a journalist known as Brian Deer began an investigation on the controversial issues surrounding the use of the vaccine. The findings of his investigation further discredit the research done by Dr. Wakefield. Deer finds out that 12 of Wakefield’s associates were not legal recruits in the medical fraternity. He adds that the authors of Wakefield’s research had no accreditation from the ethics committee to conduct medical tests on the children participants in the research. Deer’s investigations are a further compromise to the research done by Wakefield. Extensive research and studies on the MMR-autism controversy have been in progress since 1998. None of the studies has been able to come up with a link between autism and the MMR vaccine. Despite the results from these researches being positive, medical practitioners say that the mindset of many people is still linking autism to the vaccine. The lack of confidence in the use of the vaccine affects the state of public health adversely. The incidence of the infections in the community is on the rise. As a result, infected patients die unnecessarily. Dr. Wakefield’s theory had a great impact on parents and this has been the cause of major measles outbreaks in the U.K. and New Zealand (Martin & Boumans, 2014, p. 243) A number of reasons exist why parents are still considering the theory by D. Wakefield in their decision-making. A major reason is the fact that the media gave the two opposing sides equal platforms for advancing their opinions on the relationship between the MMR vaccine and autism. Therefore, the perception that Wakefield’s theory is relevant depends on a given number of parents. Such parents tend to believe that Wakefield’s claims have a proper basis and he might as well be right. Parents have had to bury their children as a result of the disease and are still seeking an explanation for such events may also decide to mount blame on the vaccine because they do not have other viable reasons. This has remained the basis for anti-MMR campaigns, which contributes to difficulties in fighting measles and other infections (Brown, 2012). Would Public Understanding of Science Have Prevented the Controversy? In this case it is first important to understand what science is from a broad perspective. Science is an area of specialty and study that encompasses intellectual and investigative practical activities aimed at understanding behavior and characteristics of various elements based on experiments. Having this in mind creates the knowledge that science deals with finding the basis of various elements. Baseless theories are not considered as scientific. Therefore, in the field of science, Dr. Wakefield’s theory would not be acceptable since it does not have reliable supportive evidence. If the general public acquires scientific knowledge and understand the basic scientific principles, the avoidance of the controversy would have been possible. The public would be aware of the fact that all matters pertaining to science be subject to confirmation by conducting experiments. Making observations and formulating relevant conclusions after analysis are also vital aspects of science. In this way, the public could avoid theories like Dr. Wakefield’s theory since science is not based on theories. The avoidance of Wakefield’s theory on the basis that it does not conform to scientific principles would enable the public to have a positive opinion as far as the MMR vaccine is concerned. Since the vaccine has been taken through various scientific experiments, parameters that can be used to evaluate its effectiveness have a scientific basis. This means that the importance of the vaccine is not a baseless theory but a scientifically proven concept in the field of medicine. Proper understanding of science would enable the public to identify and understand the scientific attributes of the vaccine. The advantages of using the vaccine would be clear to people from the experiments conducted on the effectiveness of the vaccine. Once the public can relate the vaccine with certain positive attributes, they may be able to accept its use. Science also gives room for questions and criticism to be given solutions. If the public understands this, people would air their grievances and possible questions on the safety of the vaccine through proper channels. Release of the scientific information relating to the vaccine would address these questions. Once such questions are given appropriate answers, individuals can therefore decide whether to adopt or reject the vaccine. An in-depth understanding of scientific concepts would also ensure that deception of the public on scientific matters associated with the problem is not possible. The public will be able to analyze and establish the credibility of the information given to people (Chatterjee, 2013, p. 189) Therefore, greater public understanding of science could have prevented the controversy. This would also prevent the occurrence of perils relating to the controversial situation. Science could provide an appropriate platform for the evaluation and analysis of the issues brought forward from both sides. Those in support of the use of the vaccine and those who do not support its use would argue their points out in an organized manner and solutions to the emerging issues found (Balogh, 2010, p. 82). Would the prevention of the controversy been a good thing? The controversy creates a lot of uncertainties within the public. People are not sure whether to believe the once who are advocating for MMR vaccine use of the ones who are against its use. The theories confuse the public further and the desperate measures they take may result into some negative impacts like the increase in the incidence and prevalence of measles. The controversy has led to the increase in the number of measles-related deaths which would have otherwise been avoided. Prevention of the controversy would have been appropriate because non-controversial situations provide equal opportunities for all the parties concerned to be heard. This would prevent strive by both parties to outrun each other and in this way confuse the general public. If the parties come together and put their ideas together, the identification of inaccurate and misleading information would be possible. This improves the credibility of the decisions made. In this case those opposing the use of MMR would present their reasons for opposing its use. On the other hand, their counterparts who are in support of the use of the vaccine would also give reasons for their stand. Therefore a platform for eliminating baseless theories and inappropriate reasoning will have been established. Conclusion In conclusion, many controversial issues surround the use of the MMR vaccine. Public confidence in the use of the vaccine is still low. The controversy creates more harm, than good since the incidence of the diseases in question is on the rise. Therefore, there is the need for such controversial issues to get solutions that are acceptable to all the partakers in the matter. The MMR vaccine has the support and recommendation of major health organizations like the World Health Organization which deem it fit and safe foe use. Bibliography Balogh, Brian. 2010. Integrating the Sixties: The Origins, Structures, and Legitimacy of Public Policy in a Turbulent Decade. Pennsylvania: Penn State Press Boyce, T. (2007). Health, risk and news: [the MMR vaccine and the media]. New York: Peter Lang. Brown, K. F. (2012). UK parents’ decision-making about measles–mumps–rubella (MMR) vaccine 10 years after the MMR-autism controversy: A qualitative analysis. 27;30(10):1855-64. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2011.12.127 Chatterjee, A. (2013). Vaccinophobia and vaccine controversies of the 21st Century. New York, NY: Springer. Hollins, S. (2015). Controversial Issues in Autism: The Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine. Intellectual Disability and Health. Web. May 11, 2015. Retrieved from http://www.intellectualdisability.info/diagnosis/controversial-issues-in-autism-the-measles-mumps-and-rubella-mmr-vaccine Martini, C., & Boumans, M. (2014). Experts and consensus in social science. Cham : Springer Newton, D. E. (2013). Vaccination controversies: a reference handbook. Santa Barbara, California : ABC-CLIO Science Learning. (March 21, 2010). MMR Vaccine Controversy. Web. May 11, 2015. Retrieved from http://sciencelearn.org.nz/News-Events/Latest-News/News-Archive/2010-News-archive/MMR-vaccine-controversy Read More