Herd Immunity or Herd Stupidity?

Vaccination Decisions - part 2

The case against forced vaccination

by Doug Collins

Why are we Americans--living in the "land of the free"--so willing to embrace forced vaccination, a compulsory mass-campaign that would seem more at home in an authoritarian country?

The ongoing debate surrounding vaccinations largely pivots on this issue: whether state or national governments should have the power to force people to be vaccinated. In most states, parents have for decades been allowed little or no choice in the matter of vaccinating their children. Last year, the federal CDC ramped up the pressure by drafting model state legislation that would allow state militia during health emergencies to forcibly medicate or vaccinate anyone without liability for any resulting injury. This legislation has been roundly denounced by the ACLU and a leading bioethicist, George Annas of Boston University (see www.cato.org/events/030527pf.html). Nevertheless, some states have recently adopted such draconian provisions.

Critics of forced vaccination can find support in the ethic of "informed consent", one of the cornerstones of Western medicine. According to this ethic, patients should never receive a medical treatment unless they 1) understand the treatment and its possible side-effects, 2) understand alternatives to the treatment, and 3) agree to receive the treatment. The counter-argument often repeated by proponents of forced mass-vaccination is that of "herd immunity." As this argument goes, if we allow someone to go voluntarily unvaccinated, then the "herd"--the larger group of surrounding people--is at increased risk of epidemics among both unvaccinated and vaccinated (roughly half of all pertussis cases, for example, are contracted by those who have been fully vaccinated).

There are at least two problems with this argument.

The first problem is that what we hope to be herd immunity might in fact be herd stupidity. Because of the lack of long-term safety testing for vaccines, and the lack of control groups of unvaccinated individuals in standard safety testing, potential widespread chronic damage caused by vaccines remains almost completely untested. Before we rush as a herd, lemming-like into yet higher numbers of vaccines, we simply must have realistic long-term safety testing of existing vaccines and much better knowledge of side effects (see Sep/Oct '03 issue, www.wafreepress.org/65/vaccinationdecisions.htm). The second problem with herd immunity is that it might later become herd vulnerability. For most vaccines, the duration of the vaccinated immunity is temporary (such as with the tetanus vaccine) or can wane with time. Even if you have been vaccinated as a child, you may still be at risk of catching measles, mumps, etc in later life, when chances of complications are higher.

Incidentally, childhood vaccines are "required" for public school entry in Washington State, but unlike in most states, Washington parents may sign waiver forms for any or all vaccines. If there is an outbreak of a particular disease in your school district, your child will be sent home.

As more parents opt out of vaccinations in this state (see "Vaccination rates in state among lowest in nation" Seattle Times, 8-17-03, pA1) don't be surprised if pharmaceutical companies help organize a legislative campaign to eliminate or restrict parental choice. Doing so would be a slap in the face of Hippocrates.

This series to be continued.

Concerned Washingtonians should proactively seek to preserve vaccination choice in our state laws. If you know of any individuals or groups in Washington that would like to work on this, please contact the writer at 206-860-7065 or dcc700@yahoo.com.

WWW Washington Free Press