Like many people born in the U.S. over the past 60 years, I received some sort of vaccine or vaccines when I was very little.
There’s a vague recollection of a trip to a doctor’s office for shots when I was about 2 or 3 years old. I remember not liking being stuck in the arm so much — not that anyone I knew enjoyed that part.
There was also some type of shot required before starting kindergarten. We moved from Maryland to California in the 1980s, and after another round of shots to enroll in public school there, I remember feeling rather invincible — immunized to the core of my being.
Not much was made of these facts, save for an occasional medical questionnaire item or historical discussion. Long forgotten were the elementary-school movies and filmstrips about President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Jonas Salk and how the polio vaccine is considered one of the great inventions of the 20th century.
There is a building or center named after Salk in several states. Few of us would argue that vaccines, as a general concept, introduce more evil than they eliminate — however, whether children should be required to get vaccines is a heavy question.
It seems there is almost as much evidence presented to support pro-vaccine viewpoints as there is on the anti-vaccine side, although I seem to have found very few established medical governing bodies that denounce vaccination. The talk about whether vaccines cause autism has been stirring for quite some time, and it seems to have surged in prevalence lately, as 2016 presidential hopefuls have been making more public statements.
I don’t have a definitive take on any deep questions in this subject area, and it doesn’t seem anyone would have the “right” answer. However, it’s frustrating to find that most of our conversations about health care are about who is going to pay for it, and how much it will cost out-of-pocket, rather than best medical practices.
As I don’t have any children, I feel parents are the best qualified to address vaccination choices, with the medical community being a very close second. As a journalist, there is a huge responsibility in passing along information, but parents and folks on the front lines of health care have more at stake.
I’ve talked to some parents who don’t want to take even the most remote risks; even if some scientists state the risk of contracting a grave disease from a vaccine is “1 in 100-gazillion-trazillion,” some parents think that’s too high, and would rather take their chances with non-immunization.
Other parents point out there is the health of the masses to think about. One sick child or adult could infect the nurses, doctors, educators, public transit workers and fellow doctor’s-office patients, and, with certain illnesses or strains, it could have morbid consequences.
I decided to get flu shots the past several winters. Yes, there are plenty of resistant strains around, as we’ve seen this year, but I felt like I at least won’t have as great a chance of getting one of the defeated strains.
It’s been an emotional decision for most adults, as school requirements seem to be the main point of contention over the past couple of years (I say this about Americans who don’t travel overseas much).
It could become quite politicized if government decisions are made to expand immunization. It might end up getting more and more political even if few significant bills are passed or proposed.
My hope is that things don’t happen that way. Distrust and lack of confidence in government is running high, and there are plenty of reasons to doubt medicine is free of pharmaceutical-company bias. But let’s not lump every health care professional in with the rest, and get medical information from scientists first.
Contact Jason W. Brooks at
641-792-3121 ext. 6532 or
jbrooks@newtondailynews.com.