This piece is both a “newsy” item and a saga about battling media disinformation, specifically vaccination disinformation.
The first point is that I chose the word “disinformation” intentionally. Willful dissemination of false information is not misinforming. It is dis-informing. Here is the story:
There is new, very very bad news for believers in pertussis vaccination.
You might recall my postings about the ineffectiveness of the whooping cough vaccine (pertussis) here or on Facebook over the last several years. You might also recall my other efforts to combat vaccination disinformation, including comments about mandatory vaccination and measles vaccination.
My previous comments about the pertussis/whooping cough vaccine were generally about the vaccine’s proven inability to prevent spread through the community, confirmed by the FDA. In the last few weeks a Kaiser study here in California demonstrated that the whooping cough vaccine simply does not work. As little as four years after pertussis vaccination, only nine percent of children studied retained immunity to whooping cough. That is simply horrible, as even the authors’ purposefully restrained comments expressed.
The following is a quote from the study itself (which won’t be published until next month):
“Routine Tdap did not prevent pertussis outbreaks. Among adolescents who have only received DTaP vaccines in childhood, Tdap provided moderate protection against pertussis during the first year and then waned rapidly so that little protection remained 2-3 years after vaccination.”
Hang on to your hats. One response to this would be increasing the frequency of vaccination for pertussis/whooping cough. Considering these data, it is hard to imagine recommending pertussis vaccination any less often than EVERY YEAR OR TWO.
Soon after the Kaiser pertussis study came out, the editor of my local paper wrote an editorial that galled me. I was upset because of the comments in this editorial regarding SB 277. As he has done before, the Editor of the Press Democrat blamed thoughtful parents for the rise in whooping cough:
The law was needed because so many parents were failing to have their children vaccinated — either because of personal beliefs or procrastination — that school districts were losing what’s known as the herd immunity, resulting in a rise in preventable diseases such as measles and whooping cough.
I was angry because the editor had the facts wrong and was disrespectful of parents who in this case were apparently better informed than he. Confronting ignorance combined with arrogant disrespect always disturbs me, much more so when the issue is medical. This Editor has become a fount of vaccination disinformation. So, I submitted the following letter to the editor:
Monday’s editorial contains a factual error, demanding correction.
Touting SB277, you wrote that parental refusal or neglect led to the rise of whooping cough because of waning herd immunity. This is not true.
In 2013, the FDA warned that the whooping cough/pertussis vaccine was not generating herd immunity because of a problem with the vaccine, not the number of people vaccinated. Nonetheless, most still assumed that the vaccine would protect those who were vaccinated.
A new study by Kaiser in California refutes that wishful thinking, discovering that pertussis-vaccine induced immunity plummets after the first year. After four years, less than 9% of vaccinated children are immune to pertussis.
Over the 30 years I have personally administered vaccines in my office, many of them have been withdrawn or replaced because they were ineffective or even harmful. It is willfully naïve to assume we have attained perfect knowledge. Even if the Editor of the PD does not understand this, well-informed parents do. Thoughtless repetition of scientifically disproven facts reflects poorly on the paper, and on the “experts” denying said science.
SB277 does not allow for any grey areas, assuming that all vaccines are equally (and perfectly) effective. Science tells a different story.
Over the decades, this paper almost without exception, has published every letter I submitted. Not this time.
Also, I wrote comments on Facebook. Although many saw my comments. I wanted to spread the news about these issues further. I was hoping to widen awareness and encourage discussion of the imperfect nature of vaccinations. This an important issue, heightened by the mandatory nature of our current vaccination laws.
The piece I wrote for FB included a link to the editorial in the Press Democrat. Facebook would not let me spread my posting as I had wanted. Their rationale was:
“because the image being used in the ad shows graphic medical conditions or procures (ex: open wounds, surgeries, injections). We don’t allow images that are intended to shock or scare viewers. Ads like these lead to high negative feedback.”
FYI, I did not select the image. That image is on the Press Democrat web page with the editorial. I could have deleted the image, but neither the PD or I felt that the shot image was offensive (I did agree with the PD on that).
The bottom line is that the scientifically false pretense that vaccines are perfect will be maintained as long as dialog is suppressed. Again, with my own hands I administer vaccinations, but I have a responsibility to ask my own questions while supporting parents in their right (and responsibility) to make carefully considered decisions for their children. Unfortunately we have a responsibility to combat vaccination disinformation.
<The image here is the one that accompanied the Press Democrat editorial and that FB rejected. The picture was taken by Irfan Khan for the Los Angeles Times>