Since the beginning of the twentieth- century, newborn babies have been vaccinated in order to protect against infectious diseases. As time progressed, more vaccines began to be introduced into society to protect from other diseases. Vaccines proved to be effective in stopping the spread and introduction of infectious diseases at birth; however, a controversial group believes that vaccines have led to severe life-altering diseases such as autism. That group, known as the “Anti-vaccination Movement”, has been opting out of vaccines for their newborns which has led controversy. Beliefs that vaccines cause more harm than good has led to an increase in breakouts that should have been stopped because of the vaccines. Anti-vaccination activsists’ argument against vaccinations is not relevant, as more people will end up being infected by a disease if less people are vaccinated and having no vaccines leads to a higher percentage of babies being infected by disease.

Edward Jenner became the founder of vaccinology when he inoculated a young boy in 1798 for smallpox and that boy demonstrated an immunity for the disease (Riedel). From that point on, the amount of diseases that vaccines can protect against has increased. A vaccine is an injection that helps the body’s immune system by introducing it to an inactive form of a disease tricking the body to build an immunity against that disease. In order to keep the public free from disease, “herd immunity” must take place. Herd immunity is the effect of having ninety to ninety-five percent of people immunized in order to have the general public disease-free (Corum). This percentage of people needs to be immunized so the disease cannot form a “functional chain of infection”. Due to this, newborn babies are not exposed to diseases at birth, as everyone administering the vaccines is vaccinated resulting in the eventual defeat of the disease because no susceptible hosts are available. On average, vaccines save 2.5 million babies from potential life-threatening diseases, so they definitely are preventing disease, but people who support the Anti-Vaccination Movement think otherwise (Patel & Hart). 

The core of the “anti-vaxxers” argument is strictly anecdotal. There have been many stories regarding the connection between the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine to autism. Specifically, Dr. Andrew Wakefield, graduate of St. Mary’s Hospital Medical School in London claimed his research supported the connection between the vaccine and autism inciting public panic among newborn’s parents. However, the medical community alongside outstanding researchers proved Wakefield’s research to be fraudulent. Since then his research has been destroyed and his medical license revoked. Following Wakefield’s misleading information, was a scholarly study of over 500,000 vaccinated babies which showed absolutely no connection between the vaccine and autism (Patel & Hart). Without any scientific backing, the anti-vaccination argument cannot be valid. Stories of babies potentially becoming infected with a life-altering disease after vaccination are not enough information to prove the anti-vaxxers argument true. In today’s society, unfortunately, once an idea reaches any sort of social media, especially one of this nature, the idea becomes viral and public panic erupts. Due to the anti-vaccination group’s purely anecdotal evidence, their argument as to why vaccines should be avoided are not relevant, as scientific evidence is needed be valid. 

The rise in number of babies who are not receiving vaccinations at birth is leading to a reintroduction of diseases that were almost, if not entirely, rid of. Since 2000, there have been outbreaks in California, New York, and Texas. Disease officials declared measles to be eradicated in the United States in 2000; however, the disease now is on pace to infect three times the amount of people it did in 2000 in 2009 (Alcindor). This is a result of people avoiding the vaccines at birth and becoming infected when travelers spread the disease to the United States. Although the number of people infected with the disease was just under 200, measles has been known to move from “sporadic nuisance to widespread killer” in a short period of time (Alcindor). Across the United States, vaccination rates are roughly 90%, but there are small areas of people in certain states who have become potential threats. For example, more than 4.5% of kindergartners last year did not get vaccinated for non-medical reasons in Idaho, Illinois, Michigan, Oregon, and Vermont (Alcindor). In 2008, there was a measles outbreak in San Diego. Officials later found out that one in five children at the school at not been vaccinated. Although the most vulnerable to the disease are infants too young to become vaccinated, children with compromised immunes systems are able to become infected by the disease just as easily. One instance of whooping cough, another deadly disease, was noted when a family took their baby, who was one at the time, into the doctor’s office for a simple cold. Two weeks later, the baby had stopped breathing. The parents of this baby hope to have their unfortunate experience serve as a wakeup call. A researcher by the name of Schuchat noted that these diseases can be contracted everywhere when he said “it doesn’t have to be on an airplane or at an airport. It could be at a grocery store or the concert you went to” (Alcindor). Another researcher, Paul Offit wrote a study about the topic and his main argument was that if the public is split on whether or not vaccines are safe, then nobody is going to get vaccines. There will be one group who is entirely against vaccines and then another group who now has raised concerns about vaccines. Offit believes if nothing is done then we will return to “an era when children routinely die from infections” (Offit 1).  An outbreak of measles throughout the United States would be entirely detrimental to society. Anti-vaxxers ratio to the amount of people who are getting influenced by people not getting vaccinated to the amount of people potentially getting autism is completely lopsided. A far greater amount of people would be infected or exposed to these deadly diseases on a normal basis if this anti-vaccination movement continues. To believe that the number of people that are being saved from autism is more than the amount of potential deaths is not logical. Therefore, the argument that the anti-vaccination movement is based around is entirely irrelevant.

Based on the scientific evidence, the argument is not remotely accurate; however, in today’s society the public’s reaction to such a controversy increases the amount of people who are aware of and could potentially join the anti-vaccination movement. Social media spreads news faster than ever, so as soon as one case of potential autism is noted, more and more people become aware and more paranoid. This leads to more false diagnoses as people are more concerned and would blame any sort of disease on something other than nature. Well known politicians across the United States have been neglecting to mention anything in any sort of legislature or congressional meetings, but as of this year things have changed. President Donald Trump in his presidential campaign mentioned a story regarding a baby who had just been immunized and is now autistic. This mention of a potential threat in vaccines gives the anti-vaccination movement a glimpse of hope. Believers in the movement have begun to draw up new proposals for certain pieces of legislation such as SB 277 known as the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth in California (Garza). A common tactic politicians use during the campaign process is preaching about a small controversial topic, such as marijuana or, in this case, the anti-vaccination movement in order to win over a group of people to obtain more votes in the election. This is the tactic that Trump used in this situation. During campaigning he alluded to the controversy and since then there have been no changes to legislature regarding parental rights. Anti-vaccination Activists believe that something will come up, but while they are achieving nothing within the government, their argument still does not have much relevance, as no action is being taken.

In an online video clip, researcher Hank Green approached the argument from a much more logical standpoint. He discussed how the anti-vaccination movement got their ideas from and which aspects of the argument are meaningful and which are not. The main purpose of his video was to appeal to people’s logic. He stated that since the start of the development of autism in people, doctors are entirely unaware of how it starts. They do not know if the babies are born with it, or if they develop it in the womb if their parents aren’t leading healthy lifestyles while pregnant. Due to the fact that the only event that occurs after babies are born is vaccination, logically, people are going to assume that that is the cause of the autism (Green). Autism is not able to be noticed until the baby is about one years old when the development of language is delayed or development ceases. He believes that the only way to entirely eradicate disease is to make vaccinations necessary. If the choice is personal and is not influenced by some sort of medical reason, an allergy or reaction, then inaction will lead to more harmful disease than action will. Although his argument at points is very philosophical and uses psychology terms to back it up, his main point is valid. People are going to try and figure out why something went wrong with their baby and not look into why they had a healthy birth. So, naturally, they will blame the development of these life-altering diseases on the only thing that took place from the time of birth to the time when symptoms started to become noticeable, the vaccination procedure (Green).

The counterargument to the thesis stated before has various aspects. The initial argument is based on strictly anecdotal evidence. No scientific research has directly connected any sort of vaccine to the development of autism. The one instance of a potential connection led to a doctor being stripped of his medical license. Jacqueline Howard, a science writer for the Huffington Post, elaborated on the anecdotal evidence when she wrote “But anecdotes aren’t proof, and there’s no reason to believe that vaccines caused the children to become autistic. As scientists put it succinctly, correlation simply doesn’t imply causation” (Howard). Another large part of believers suggest that the immunizations overload a newborn’s immune system. Most of the doctors, the Center for Disease Control, and the Institute of Medicine all agreed that babies are exposed to so many diseases initially that their immune system is able to handle the antigens from multiple vaccines. San Francisco based pediatrician, Dr. Laurel Schutlz wrote that “children are exposed to more antigens in the environment every day than to those in all of their vaccinations combined” (Howard). Not only is their immune system not overloaded, but it is working harder than ever just after birth. One last argument that the anti-vaxxers had towards the controversial topic is the idea of natural immunity. Natural immunity is allowing the babies to fight the diseases off themselves building up the ability to rid of the disease so no more harm can be done. Mother of a naturally immunized baby, Sarah Pope outlined the idea behind it when her baby was born. Pope decided against vaccinating her children and “after several weeks of coughing and with treatment by a holistic doctor and natural supplements, all of her children recovered.” (Alcindor).  This natural immunity results from the body successfully fighting a disease. Pope was never scared by it. She said that “people only see the bad with infectious diseases. But infectious diseases do help children strengthen their bodies” (Alcindor). Again, an anecdote leading to an idea placed in activists’ head. There is a possibility that the people who were naturally immunized did survive through deadly disease; however, more people have died than have been naturally immunized due to a stronger immune system. Although some parts of the anti-vaccination movement’s argument can be valid in certain situations, the negative consequences outweigh the potential positives significantly.

Any sort of medical procedure, vaccines included, do not come without any sort of risks. There are certain protocols that the people proctoring the vaccines must take. From the cleanliness of the area to the activation of the antigen in the immunization, all must follow certain steps. Sometimes, something does not go as plan and the vaccine may cause some sort of pain, but never anything life-altering, unless an allergic reaction is discovered. There is, in fact, a National Vaccine Inquiry Compensation Program that was established to compensate people for the “development of a disease due to vaccination” (Novella). Essentially, this was created to quiet certain vaccine skeptics who believed that their child had been a victim of a vaccine. Although the government did put a compensation system into place so people do not begin to sue medical agencies for their vaccine processes, the anti-vaccination argument is entirely invalid. Vaccines are meant to prevent the development of diseases that are known to kill thousands, not cause a form of autism to develop.

The anti-vaccination movement began to become more mainstream once people began to realize that measles was making a return in 2000. There was a devastating outbreak of the disease at Disneyland that aroused suspicion. Scientists realized that a group of people in the United States were avoiding vaccinations as they believed that they were causing more harm than good. These activists believe that the vaccines were causing their newborns to develop signs of autism. The only event that occurs between birth and the symptoms of autism showing is the vaccine, so through natural thought process people are going to make the assumption that the vaccine is the cause; however, as mentioned before, correlation does not imply causation. This argument is simply invalid as the only evidence is anecdotes which have no scientific fact behind them. Even if people continue to avoid vaccines, there are going to be outbreaks. More people are being affected by the diseases now that everyone isn’t getting vaccinated. Avoiding the vaccinations is leading to more outbreaks of the diseases the vaccines were intended to get rid of. A suggested solution by some scientists and doctors is to mandate vaccines. This would ensure the stop of disease because the inaction that is growing rapidly, is resulting in more harm than the vaccines potentially cause. The detection of autism has also changed since this movement began. There are now almost three times the amount of branches of autism as there were before this controversial topic arose. There are many sources of evidence that point towards the same argument. Vaccines do not cause autism, and the rates of true autism are not changing despite other beliefs. In fact, the number of people being affected and harmed due to people not being vaccinated is far greater than the people who are developing autism due to the vaccine, zero.
