The Vaccination Debate

Providing accurate, accessible information on vaccines and the controversies that surround them, this book outlines the history of vaccine regulation and interactions between vaccines and the immune system, and thoughtfully considers each vaccine debate. A part of Greenwood's Health and Medical Issues Today series, The Vaccine Debate provides a straightforward introduction to the interaction between vaccines and the immune system. The book documents the rise of the anti-vaccination movement, provides reasons for its prominence today, and explains the effects of vaccine refusal on public health. It also addresses concerns about the role of government in regulating vaccine production and administration, along with questions about vaccine safety. Additionally, a majority of the book examines in detail seven major vaccine controversies and mainstream medical positions on them. These controversies are given individual attention, with questions at the end of each to encourage critical thinking about such topics as the effectiveness of vaccines in protecting public health and whether vaccinations should be mandatory for public school attendance.

The Vaccination Debate takes a rational approach to discussing the science of vaccines in the context of everyday life. As Spinelli and Karinch examine the schedule of vaccines from birth through adolescence, the authors shed new light on this timely and controversial issue, writing with a tone that a pediatrician would use with curious, concerned parents. Many parents and health care professionals believe vaccines to be one of the best public health practices ever instituted on a widespread basis. Yet the anti-vaccine movement has increasingly become one of hesitation and fear. Which is the right choice to make for your children? To vaccinate or not to vaccinate? Both grounded in scientific data and consumer-friendly material, The Vaccination Debate serves as an essential reference guide for parents on the fence about vaccinating their kids, and for physicians trying to vaccinate their patients.

The Vaccination Debate covers the history of vaccine controversies, the 2014 measles outbreak, and the balance between public safety and personal freedoms, studying how an accepted medical treatment has become a contentious issue in US society. Aligned to Common Core Standards and correlated to state standards. Essential Library is an imprint of Abdo Publishing, a division of ABDO.

A thoughtful evaluation of the vaccine debate, its history, and its consequences. Since 1990, the number of mandated vaccines has increased dramatically. Today, a fully vaccinated child will have received nearly three dozen vaccinations between birth and age six. Along with the increase in number has come a growing wave of concern among parents about the unintended side effects of vaccines. In Vaccine, Mark A. Largent explains the history of the debate and identifies issues that parents, pediatricians, politicians, and public health officials must address. Nearly 40% of American parents report that they delay or refuse a recommended vaccine for their children. Despite assurances from every mainstream scientific and medical institution, parents continue to be haunted by the question of whether vaccines cause autism. In response, health officials herald vaccines as both safe and vital to the public's health and put programs and regulations in place to encourage parents to follow the recommended vaccine schedule. For Largent, the vaccine-autism debate obscures a constellation of concerns held by many parents, including anxiety about the number of vaccines required (including some for diseases that children are unlikely ever to encounter), unhappiness about the rigorous schedule of vaccines during well-baby visits, and fear of potential side effects, some of them serious and even life-threatening. This book disentangles competing claims, opens the controversy for critical reflection, and provides recommendations for moving forward.

Explores the controversy surrounding vaccinations, discussing how vaccines changed history, vaccine errors that damaged public trust, possible links with autism, and the resurgence of old diseases due to reduced vaccination.

Antivaxxers are crazy. That is the perception we all gain from the media, the internet, celebrities, and beyond, writes Bernice Hausman in Anti/Vax, but we need to open our eyes and ears so that we can all have a better conversation about vaccine skepticism and its implications. Hausman argues that the heated debate about vaccinations and whether to get them or not is most often fueled by accusations and vilifications rather than careful attention to the real concerns of many Americans. She wants to set the record straight about vaccine skepticism and show how the issues and ideas that motivate it—like suspicion of pharmaceutical companies or the belief that some illness is necessary to good health—are commonplace in our society. Through Anti/Vax, Hausman wants to engage public health officials, the media, and each of us in a public dialogue about the relation of individual bodily autonomy to the state's responsibility to safeguard citizens' health. We need to know more about the position of each side in this important stand-off so that public decisions are made through understanding rather than stereotyped perceptions of scientifically illiterate antivaxxers or faceless bureaucrats. Hausman reveals that vaccine skepticism is, in part, a critique of medicalization and a warning about the dangers of modern medicine rather than a glib and gullible reaction to scaremongering and misunderstanding.

This open access book discusses individual, collective, and institutional responsibilities with regard to vaccination from the perspective of philosophy and public health ethics. It addresses the issue of what it means for a collective to be morally responsible for the realisation of herd immunity and what the implications of collective responsibility are for individual and institutional responsibilities. The first chapter introduces some key concepts in the vaccination debate, such as ‘herd immunity’, ‘public goods’, and ‘vaccine refusal’; and explains why failure to vaccinate raises certain ethical issues. The second chapter analyses, from a philosophical perspective, the relationship between individual, collective, and institutional responsibilities with regard to the realisation of herd immunity. The third chapter is about the principle of least restrictive alternative in public health ethics and its implications for vaccination policies. Finally, the fourth chapter presents an ethical argument for unqualified compulsory vaccination, i.e. for compulsory vaccination that does not allow for any conscientious objection. The book will appeal to philosophers interested in public health ethics and the general public interested in the philosophical underpinning of different arguments about our moral obligations with regard to vaccination.

A searing account of how vaccine opponents have used the media to spread their message of panic, despite no scientific evidence to support them.