Measles, Rubella, Vaccine, Vaccines, And Vaccines

Although there is no scientific proof that vaccines cause autism, proponents still believe that they do. The theory that vaccines cause autism were based on unproven facts and falsified information (DeStefano 81). In an article called CNS Drugs, the author writes about how a man named AJ Wakefield stun the public with a theory that the MMR vaccine may cause autism and how enterocolitis (bowel dysfunction) and MMR vaccine may be linked to autism (DeStefano 831). Even though Wakefield falsified information and his theories were proven to be discredited many people still

For years there has been public controversies over the advancements in science and all of the health risks that have been around, but now the use of the media has certainly boosted the amount of confusion throughout the public. Frightening stories regarding the progressions of science have been appearing online and in print. One particular example of this issue was the MMR vaccine debate. The MMR vaccine is an immunization vaccine which fights against rubella, measles, and mumps. During the 1990’s the media played a huge role in the decisions parents made regarding whether or not they allowed their children to get vaccinated. The media portrayed the MMR vaccine as having a possible link between autism. Which left the public worried about the MMR vaccine and having conflicting views and feelings towards the safety of vaccinations. In the MMR vaccine debate scientist and the media played two different roles which helped citizens make decisions regarding vaccination.

Although the negative claims behind anti-immunization stances are deceptive and discredited, some parents find it difficult to accept that vaccines are necessary and safe. Many of these reasons are due to personal or religious beliefs that have persuaded parents to bypass immunizations for their children. Consequently, health officials are seeing disquieting rises of diseases that are easily preventable. The CDC (Center for Disease Control and Prevention) has reported hundreds of measles cases in the United States in 2011, the largest number in 15 years (Ben-Joseph, Elana). Essentially, almost all of these cases were in individuals who had not received a vaccine shot. Also found in the article was that a great amount of the quarrel over the shots comes from a 1998 study that tried to connect autism to a type of vaccine that defends against measles. However, there has been no scientific evidence that a vaccine or a combination of any of the shots induces autism. Undoubtedly, the doctor that wrote the article, calling vaccines a “deliberate fraud” ,lost his license for not submitting any evidence of his claim and causing people to neglect shots for that year. Sadly, due to that article, 1 in 4 parents still believe that vaccines are

In order to investigate more about Wakefield’s study, Brian Deer, a journalist of British Medical Journal, carefully talked to the parents of all children who were participated in the study. Interestingly enough, he revealed the fraud behind Wakefield’s research. The Lancet, the journal that reported Wakefield’s study, retracted the paper soon afterwards (Deer). However, the real trouble still exists. Though it has been proved by many researchers that the MRR doesn’t cause autism, many people perceive the vaccine as a threat. Dr.Nemeroff once said “it is quite difficult to get the cognitive sewage out of the water even after the real sewage is gone” (Greene).

Andrew Wakefield is a former gastroenterologist and medical researcher who was discharged from his medical register in the UK, because of his dishonest research paper he released back in 1998, that analysed a possible link between measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine and the presence of autism and bowel disease (Godlee, F., et al, 2011). Wakefield's research generated a substantial scare for the MMR vaccine and MMR vaccination rates began to drop because parents were concerned about the risk of autism after vaccination (DeStefano, F., Chen, R.T., 1999). After the paper was published by the Lancet medical newspaper, other reviews were trying to repeat Wakefield's conclusions,

In 1998, the British medical journal called The Lancet published a controversial research paper written by Andrew Wakefield. In the research paper “Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children, ” Andrew Wakefield et al. attempted to link MMR (Mumps, Measles, Rubella) vaccinations and autism. Nevertheless, the paper seemed to successfully do that. However, this was not known was at the time was Wakefield had tampered with the findings. Furthermore, this was brought to light in 2004 by British journalist Brian Deer. In 2011, thirteen years after The Lancet published the paper, and seven years after Brian Deer exposed the paper. The Lancet finally retracted the article. A common theory

The topic of childhood vaccinations and the dangers that accompany them has been a topic of controversy in contemporary times. At the near edge of the twenty-first century, a man named Doctor Andrew Wakefield released a study which created a mass uproar in both parents and health professionals alike. Parents were panicked as to whether or not they should have their young child vaccinated (in fear of their acquiring autism), and health professionals fearful that the population percentage of people acquiring measles, mumps, or rubella (for it was the M.M.R. vaccination that the parents feared in particular) would rise to a number which would lead to a mass risk of disease. Despite Wakefields’ study, the truth persists in all types of experiments related to vaccination. Whether being tested in a replication of Wakefields’ study or in any other, vaccines have been proven to work at preventing disease and display no causation of autism.

Do vaccines cause autism is a question that has been bouncing around for over twenty years. The increase in the number of diagnosed cases of Autism Spectrum Disorder has increased significantly and due to the impact this has in people’s lives several studies have been done in an effort to determine the cause. More specifically the MMR, Measles, Mumps, and Rubella, vaccination has been accused of being the cause of autism. This accusation then contributed to families not vaccinating their children. Even though science disproves the link between vaccines and autism in several studies done in the United Kingdom, California, and Canada, many people cling to the vaccination-autism connection (Gerber, 2009).

In fact, The BMJ, or the British Medical Journal, chimed in on Wakefield’s paper. “By the time the paper was finally retracted 12 years later, after forensic dissection at the General Medical Council’s (GMC) longest ever fitness to practise hearing, few people could deny that it was fatally flawed both scientifically and ethically” (Godlee, “Wakefield’s”). Furthermore, Wakefield’s license to practice medicine was stripped away by Britain’s General Medical Council because of misconduct, including the time Wakefield paid his son’s friends £5 each to take blood samples during his son’s birthday party (Burns, “British”). More recent studies also prove that the vaccine-autism link is nonexistent. One study, performed by the Journal of Pediatrics, found that, “ … of MCO members, increasing exposure to antibody-stimulating proteins and polysaccharides in vaccines during the first 2 years of life was not related to the risk of developing an ASD” (Destefano, “Increasing”). In other words, having a young child exposed to the ingredients of vaccines does not result in the child developing autism (Destefano, “Increasing”).

Andrew Wakefield was the lead researcher on a study that linked autism to certain vaccines given to children. The study was later retracted and Wakefield lost his medical license. From a strictly ethical standpoint, if Wakefield did the things he was accused of, there are several issues with how the research was reported. Scientific misconduct occurs when a researcher purposely fabricates data or alters a study in some way that is not reported (Schweigert, 2012). Wakefield is accused of falsifying medical histories of children in the study and framing the data to confirm the information he wanted to portray (Cohen & Falco, 2011). If Wakefield did change or alter medical histories used in the study, this would be scientific misconduct on his

One such factor helping to manifest these large-scale epidemics is a study from 1998 by Andrew Wakefield, which claimed that there was a direct link between autism and the MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella) vaccine (Smith 1). As a result, many parents refused to vaccinate their children out of fear, and vaccine-preventable diseases like measles began reappearing more in both America and Britain, the place where Wakefield conducted his study (Cohen 2). Although a later investigation by the British Medical Journal discovered that Wakefield had distorted or altered the medical records of all twelve of the study’s participants and that he had been paid $674,000 USD by lawyers attempting to sue vaccine manufacturers, the atmosphere of apprehension surrounding vaccines is still strong among many individuals, and especially parents (Cohen 1-2). But despite all the controversy and the scientifically unsupported arguments of anti-vaccine sympathizers,

The current issue I have selected to discuss is vaccinations. In particular, I will be addressing the anti-vaccination movement that has gained popularity in recent years and the contributing biases that influenced its emergence. One event stands out at as a major contributing factor to the growth of the anti-vaccination movement, the 1998 study by Andrew Wakefield that was published by the English medical journal, Lancet. This study claimed to show a connection between the MMR vaccine and autism. Even though it was just one small study, the media picked it up and it became hugely publicized.

What Dr Wakefield did is really disastrous and I can't blame you for calling him a monster. Furthermore, I do agree with you that his colleagues could have stand against it. I am still hoping for the best with regards to the implications that this unethical research caused.

the question posed by gastroenterologist and medical researcher Andrew Wakefield and is now used as a counter-argument by those who oppose vaccination. Autism is, “A developmental brain disorder known to impair social interactions and communication,” [28]. Andrew Wakefield originally proposed a link between the measles vaccine and autism in a study he conducted and published in 1997 in the Lancet, and as a result many were led to believe the so. Actress Jenny McCarthy believed strongly that vaccines were responsible for her son's autism, “the soul left his eyes” [11]. and many have pointed out that after the wide spread of vaccines the number of autism diagnoses has

& Andrade C. (2011), “ a groups of colleagues leaded by Andrew Wakefield has been published a dangers and very series in the Lancet,” which suggested that the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine may predispose to character regression and pervasive growth in life of children(Sathyanarayan Rao & Andrade,2011). Despite the fact without enough researched and reality and the fact wrongfully speculated and brings it up to the public attention and confused parent and stop vaccination of their children.Because of this dangerous information from media and critical situations, the parent had a difficult time to vaccinate and put their lovely child’s life at risk (sathyanarayan Rao & Andrade, 2011). Not very too long that almost the same time after the wrong post, epidemiological studies were come out and reported stated that the similar posted link between MMR vaccination and autism (p 3,4). The logic that the MMR vaccine may trigger autism was also questioned stated because both are dangers for the child's future (Sathyanarayan Rao & Andrade, 2011). Almost all of the groups admitting the all mace they created, and they decided to gain benefit from this wrong action and complete by retracting and interpreted the element in the paper incorrectly. which is contrary to the findings of the original report and finally Wakefield were responsible and guilty ethical violations which they had completely irresponsible, and invasive investigations on the child’s life with false statement and scientific misrepresentation(Sathyanayan Rao & Andrade, 2011