The pandemic vaccine is not new


October 14, 2021-Even as the fourth wave of COVID-19 cases declines, one aspect of the pandemic remains strong: differing views on the value of COVID-19 immunization and vaccine mandates in the United States

Strong feelings about vaccination are not new. The claims that link the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine to autism and the opposition to measles vaccination that has caused outbreaks in California are recent examples.

People who oppose smallpox immunizations, for example, run ads, write in newspapers, and set up anti-vaccine organizations, as seen in news clippings from the 1860s to the 1950s.

In other words, although the furor over vaccines feels like a modern experience, disagreements throughout history reveal many similarities.

“There are many parallels – many of the same exact arguments,” said Dr. Anna Kirkland, director of the Institute for Women’s and Gender Studies at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor.

“Some of the differences now are the obvious political biases of the parties that we see in COVID, which existed in some way before, but have become very prominently organized by the party,” she said. “However, these are only differences in the degree, because there has long been anti-government support for sentiment against the vaccine.”

For example, the American Society for the Fight Against Vaccination was founded in 1879. Its public campaign against compulsory smallpox vaccination uses a phrase about personal freedoms that may sound familiar today: “Freedom cannot be given, it must be taken.”

Society was part of a larger movement that also questioned the motives behind the promotion of the smallpox vaccine.

“The anti-vaccination movement has questioned data released by health authorities and accused politicians, doctors and pharmaceutical companies of colluding to act on their economic interests rather than health,” said MyHeritage, which maintains an archive of – and anti-vaccine news clippings.

“That’s why – and because MyHeritage has access to billions of historical records, including newspaper clippings – it was natural for us to check the newspaper archives, to try to make sense of today’s significant vaccination debate,” said Roy Mandel, a leading researcher at MyHeritage.

Other historians point out that the vaccination movement in the United States began in the 1850s with the announcement of smallpox vaccine mandates.

Much of this movement is based on widespread concerns about the safety of the smallpox vaccine, as well as the belief that vaccination laws are a “tyrannical violation of personal liberty,” wrote Joseph B. Domachovske and Manica Suryadevara, both doctors. in 2013 report in Human vaccines and immunotherapeutics.

“Unfortunately, anti-vaccination activism has helped to significantly reduce the rate of immunization, which led to the recurrence of smallpox only a few decades later,” they said.

Vocal minority

“The main reason for refusing vaccination in the 21st century in the United States is very similar to those in the 19thth century in the United Kingdom, “says Dr. Jose Esparza, an associate professor at the Institute of Human Virology at the University of Maryland School of Medicine.

Some studies show that the number of people who are absolutely against the vaccine is no more than 4% of the population, he said. But the ratio can vary from country to country and from community to community, says Esparza, who is also a senior adviser at the Baltimore Global Virus Network.

“A very important point is that anti-vaccination is nurtured by a very loud but small minority,” he said. “Interestingly, the only reason for refusing a vaccine, which appears to be dominant, is related to” resistance to compulsory vaccination. “

It also reflects a “political position that protects the individual’s right to choose,” he said.

But history shows that “compulsory” vaccinations can be successful.

“Some mandates were usually part of the decision,” Kirkland said.

Differences between countries

Smallpox vaccination policies also varied by country, another parallel to the COVID-19 pandemic today.

Massachusetts was the first to introduce compulsory vaccination in 1809. Washington, D.C. and eight other states later joined the requirement to vaccinate infants.

Other government officials opposed such mandates, and by 1930, Arizona, Utah, North Dakota, and Minnesota had passed laws against vaccination requirements for their residents.

A total of 35 countries did not have legislation for or against mandates and instead allowed local authorities to regulate such actions.

Ultimately, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the case of compulsory vaccination in 1905. Jacobson v. Massachusetts set a legal precedent, finding that individual freedom did not replace actions necessary for the public good.

“The freedom guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States does not imply the absolute right of any person to be at all times and in all circumstances completely free from restriction, nor is it an element of such freedom that a person or a minority of persons residing in any to be a community and to enjoy the benefits of its local government, they must have the power to dominate the majority when they are supported in their actions by the state, ”the court wrote.

The 1905 case was cited during the COVID-19 pandemic in support of orders for face masks and home stay orders.

Vaccinations in childhood

Parents who oppose vaccinating their children are also nothing new.

For example, a newspaper in Meriden, CT, reported in 1915 that a father was in prison instead of paying a fine for not allowing his children to be vaccinated.

Even after friends paid $ 15.75 to release him from the county jail, the man “did not change his mind,” according to a newspaper clipping.

Different opinions

Eighty years before Facebook and other social media platforms appeared, different opinions were often broadcast in newspapers. For example, an open letter to The evening news in Hawaii on June 26, 1924, was called “To Vaccinate or Not to Vaccinate: Responses to Vaccination.”

The anonymous writer said doctors “were led to believe that vaccination was a safe and sensible way – the only way – to erase smallpox. Nothing could be further from the truth.”

“Instead of protecting its victims from smallpox, vaccination actually makes them more susceptible to it by infecting the blood and reducing natural resistance,” says the writer.

The letter raised a familiar refrain that healthy people should not worry so much about contracting the disease:

“Smallpox is a dirty disease that closely monitors gross violations of the laws of hygiene and health. No one is susceptible to smallpox or other dirty disease, as long as they are in good health.

“Everyone can be protected against smallpox if they have enough air, sunlight, healthy work, good food and an interest in life. They give immunity.”

The newspaper’s editor, Lorrin A. Thurston, counters: vaccination, damage and eventual death, and the number of innocent members of the community. “

Thurston acknowledges the risk associated with the press, and thus draws attention to “propaganda” against vaccination, but adds “strong dislike” to preventing a full and free discussion on all topics.

Prospects for vaccination

Newspaper clippings from earlier times also highlight the mood associated with the vaccine.

Strongly worded piece in The star tribune on April 17, 1903, for example, expressed disappointment with the movement against vaccines. The author notes that people who oppose vaccines are also those who are most likely to die of smallpox.

There is nothing the state can do to save people who are determined to “die when the fool dies,” other than preventing them from involving others in their destiny. … “partial states.

The author adds that if the anti-vaccine “is determined to avoid” the law of compulsory vaccination, “he can do it in a hundred ways. But the law of nature will reach him sooner or later. This will not be avoided.”

Encourage positive examples

One tactic used to promote greater vaccination was to publish reports of people who listened to the call to get their smallpox vaccine. For example, The star A newspaper in Canada emphasized how the Jewish community in Toronto came out to be vaccinated in November 1919.

Controversy over the polio vaccine continued into the 1950s, prompting health officials to call on doctors, community leaders and celebrities to help counter sentiment against the vaccine.

Controversy also peaked after Dr. Jonas Solk announced the successful testing of a new polio vaccine on March 26, 1953.

Boston Post reported calls by doctors, public health organizations and charities for people to be vaccinated, for example. Also, an ad for March of Dimes showed a procession of Disney characters singing “Hello ho, hello, we’re going to lick this polio.”

Behind the scenes before he appeared The Ed Sullivan Show in 1956, Elvis Presley received the polio vaccine from New York officials, as shown in the report this summer 2020. Humanities, the magazine of the National Fund for Humanities.

Elvis was immunized in front of the press and Ed Sullivan himself. At the time, polio infected about 60,000 children in the United States each year.

“Despite the literally crippling effects of the virus and promising vaccination results, many Americans simply did not get vaccinated. In fact, when Presley appeared on the Sullivan show, immunization rates among American teens were a staggering 0.6 percent,” according to a January section. 2021 Scientific American.

The campaign was successful and changed some suspicious thoughts.

Within six months of Elvis vaccination, the rate of immunization among American youth rose to 80%. The achievement is due to the social influence of Elvis, how he changed the social norm and his desire to set an example.

Risk Assessment

The era of smallpox is likely to be remembered for many things, including the first vaccine developed against a widespread viral disease and the first infection that humanity has been able to eradicate. The last case of smallpox in the world was diagnosed in 1977, and by 1980 the World Health Organization had confirmed that the world was free of smallpox for the first time in centuries.

How the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccination controversy will develop can be speculated.

“Another interesting point is that the refusal to vaccinate reflects the perceived degree of risk to benefit,” said Esparza, a professor of medicine at the University of Maryland. “Two years after the pandemic, many people have decided on their own risk of dying from COVID-19 and are willing to take the risk.”

“As we wait for this difficult time to pass, we can at least take comfort in the fact that people around the world have dealt with these same limitations a century ago. And while it has certainly been difficult, it hasn’t lasted forever,” Mandel said. the leading researcher of MyHeritage. “Things have returned to normal after a while. A new kind of normalcy. And they didn’t have the technology and advanced medicine we have today.”



Source link

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.