Discussion unit three

The Immunization study

For the purpose of this discussion, I will be discussing the immunization study published

in the Indian Journal of Psychiatry.

In the article entitled “The MMR vaccine and autism: Sensation, refutation, retraction,

and fraud”, Rao and Andrade (2011), write of the case in which a group of researchers

led by Wakefield claimed that vaccination with Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR)

caused autism in children published in the Lancet. In their publication, Wakefield and his

group, claimed that children vaccinated with the MMR vaccines would get autism.

Although the sample size was insufficient (n=12), uncontrolled design, and the

conclusive nature of the paper, Wakefield’s work had a huge publicity among the general

population, as such, parents refused to take their children for vaccination with the MMR [

CITATION Rao11 \l 1033 ].

As parents refused to take their children for MMR vaccination, cases of measles and

other diseases that the MMR vaccines target rose in the United Kingdom and United

States of America as well as Canada.

To me, this publication caused more harm, as its impact was felt across nations (UK,

USA, and the Canada). It is reported that an outbreak of measles occurred in the United

Kingdom between 2008 and 2009, with some pocket of cases of measles in the USA and

Canada [ CITATION Rao11 \l 1033 ]. Measles vaccination is one of the most important

public health measures that has been proven to contain the disease and prevents death.

The Pan American Health Organization report that between 2000-2016, measles
vaccination prevented as many as 20.4 million deaths related to measles infections

[ CITATION PAH18 \l 1033 ].

Wakefield’s publication had the potential to cause massive epidemics of measles with the

worse possible effects should it have been allowed to stand for a long period of time.

What the scientists, media, and public could have done to reduce the harm

Because of the nature of the publication and the potential impact it had on the general

public health, scientists would have swiftly move to dispel the fraud Wakefield and his

team had published and a parallel study using the same methodology should have been

commissioned by a group of scientists to disapprove of the work by Wakefield and his

colleagues. First, the Lancet, should have questioned the methodology used in the study

before allowing such a controversial paper getting published in their Media.

The media had a big role in stopping the spread of the false information by verifying the

facts with other scientists. After the harm, the media had a role of running series of

publications to dispel the myths created by the Wakefield and team.

The public should have sought for information from medical scientists and practitioners

before taking such decision not to take their children for immunization.

Reference:

PAHO/WHO. (2018, January). Pan American Health Organization/ World Health

Organization . Retrieved July 5, 2021, from PAHO:

https://www3.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&i

d=14173:basic-measles-facts&Itemid=72231&lang=en
Rao, T. S., & Andrade, C. (2011, Pril-June). Indian Journal Psychiatry. Retrieved July 6,

2021, from NCBI: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3136032/