By Rachel Bussett
In 2000, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) considered that measles had been eliminated in the United States. However, eliminated doesn’t mean that there are zero cases of the disease.
Rather the CDC says eliminated means that there has been “the absence of continuous disease transmission for 12 months or more in a specific geographic area.” Yet in 2014 there were more than 650 confirmed cases and in 2018 there were over 360 confirmed cases of measles. So what does that mean for our population?
Forced vaccinations have become a hot topic of discussion after the latest season of measles outbreaks. Further, talking with people about their views on vaccinations seems to be about as controversial as asking someone their view on abortion. It’s a hot button issue and you never know how extreme of a reaction that you are going to get – whether pro or anti-vaccine.
Much of the debate about vaccines arises out of a study from the 1990’s which attempted to link the rise in the incidences of an autism diagnosis with the measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine. The correlation began when a study was published showing that certain people who had the MMR vaccine were more likely to have a bowl disease.
One of the researchers went forward and speculated that a “persistent infection with [the] vaccine virus caused disruption of the intestinal tissue that in turn led to bowel disease and neuropsychiatric disease (specifically autism).” The leading researcher on this theory allegedly admitted in his 1998 published case series that he could not demonstrate a causal relationship between the vaccine and autism but verbally stated that a causal relationship did exist.
Since this study came out it has been soundly discredited by the medical research community but the belief that the MMR vaccine in particular can cause or contribute to the development of autism in children persists.
There is no doubt that autism diagnosis is on the rise. There is also no doubt that we give our children a lot of vaccines which causes stress on their small bodies. But does this mean that it’s the vaccine causing the rise in the diagnosis? I don’t know the answer to that question specifically.
What I do know is that there is a rise in immunological diseases. We have genetically modified plant foods and animals that are injected full of hormones and antibiotics. Our food is less nutritious than it used to be, our soil is depleted of vital nutrients from over farming and we use an abundance of pesticides, herbicides, and preservatives in the growth, production and manufacturing of our food.
Basic science concepts tells us that this is impacting our bodies, our environment and our offspring. It’s the same cycle that Rachel Carson wrote about in her book “Silent Spring” which helped focus opposition on the use of DDT by showing how the pesticide impacted the life cycle of birds and was passed down through their offspring.
I also know that vaccines cause injury. Yes that’s right – vaccines cause injuries. If vaccines didn’t cause injury of some sort then Congress would not have passed the “National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act” (NCVIA) in 1986. The simple fact is all medications have some sort of risk of side effects and a vaccine is simply one form of medication. The purpose of the NCVIA was to eliminate the risk of liability to vaccine manufacturers for vaccine injury claims to ensure a stable supply of vaccines and to create a “low cost solution” to resolution of the claims.
The program created by NCVIA was a no fault system, meaning that parents didn’t have to prove that the vaccine manufacturer did anything wrong in the vaccine process but simply that there was a cause between the vaccine and the injury. In truth, the NCVIA system for vaccine injuries is a lot like the workers compensation system for on the job injuries. There is a lot of lip service to a simple solution for your injury but no one who has ever been through the claim process will tell you that it’s as smooth or easy as the ones in charge proclaim it to be.
The NCVIA did not completely prevent lawsuits from being filed against doctors, administrators or vaccine makers. Doctors and administrators could be sued for improper administration while manufacturers could still be sued for a “design defect” in the vaccine as opposed to a “manufacturing defect” or a “warning defect” which are other claims made against product manufacturers when a product injures its users.
The liability was further limited in a 1987 amendment and then in 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated the right to sue for a design defect. In Bruesewitz v Wyeth, 562 US 223 (2011) the U.S. Supreme Court held that vaccine injured individuals could no longer hold drug companies accountable under the theory of design defect and failing to improve an approved vaccine to make it less harmful to patients.
So, if vaccines can cause injury does that mean vaccines cause autism? To answer that question we have to look at the bigger picture of how long autism has existed versus how long have vaccines existed. Are vaccines the cause of all autism diagnosis? Clearly the answer is no because autism existed before vaccines. Are vaccines the cause of one or more cases of autism?
On a purely logical and statistical basis I believe the answer is more probably than not yes at least one case of autism can be related to the administration of a vaccine. The basis of this conclusion is that brain trauma or injury are a known potential side effect from the administration of medications including vaccines and brain injury or trauma are the suspected cause of autism or autism like symptoms. Unfortunately, even with knowing this we aren’t’ any closer to knowing whether vaccines are really behind the higher rate of autism diagnosis today than in the past.
The NVCIA program is an atypical program from a legal perspective. The government generally does not step in and eliminate the right of a person to file suit against a wrong doer. Usually the government only limits the government’s liability, but with the NCVIA the government protected an entire industry from liability.
So these unusual steps foster conspiracy theories based on otherwise minute statements or hypothesis which previously would have been overlooked because parents want an explanation of what it going on with their child. Because as parents we reason once we know what is causing the harm, we can usually figure out how to fix it but that isn’t the case with diseases like autism.
So now we know that there is at least a remote chance that the administration of a vaccine could cause autism or autism like symptoms as a complication from vaccine administration, that the government knows vaccines cause injury but determined that the risk to some was worth taking for the benefit of the masses, and that the government acted in an unusual manner in limiting the liability of vaccine manufacturers. But what does that mean with today’s measles outbreaks and refusal to give your kids MMR vaccinations. Well the government in its infinite wisdom is again trying to balance the interests of the greater good of society versus your right to personal freedom. In many states like forced vaccination laws are popping up.
In New York City, the mayor ordered forced vaccinations due to the ongoing measles outbreak affecting the Orthodox Jewish community. The order applies to those living, working or attending school in four specific zip codes and anyone over the age of 6 months old. Anyone found to not have received the vaccine or have evidence of immunity could be fined $1,000. The order also calls for the exclusion of all children or adults from schools and other common areas of the community without proof of immunization. The New York Civil Liberties Union is challenging this order.
In Oklahoma, children are required to have certain immunizations to attend school. Pursuant to 70 O.S. §1210.191 school age children must receive or be in the process of receiving immunizations for “diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, Hemophilus influenzae type B (HIB), measles (rubeola), (rubella), poliomyelitis, varicella, and hepatitis A or is likely to be immune as a result of the disease.” However, Oklahoma also has a process for exempting children from immunizations. Either a licensed physician can state that the condition of a child is “such that immunization would endanger the life or health of the child or a parent, guardian, or legal custodian can object in writing to the immunization of the child. 70 O.S. §1210.192. The statute doesn’t state what the nature of the objection must be health, safety, religion or other just that the parent objects. If the parent files the objection then the child is exempt from complying with mandatory immunizations.
As a parent of an immunocompromised child, I want every child that my daughter comes into contact with to be immune from as many deadly and harmful diseases as possible because her body cannot fight the disease like a “normal” person can.
However, as the same parent who doesn’t know what caused my child to become immunocompromised, I understand where parents are coming from when they choose not to immunize or to not follow the traditional immunization schedule. Determining whether to vaccinate your family has to be a balancing of risk and rewards for your family and your community.
If you choose not to vaccinate you also have to be prepared that society and the government may exclude you from participating in certain events including a constitutionally guaranteed right to a public education. However, if you choose to vaccinate your child you also have to accept the risk that if a harm happens from the vaccine there is likely no cure and it could change your child forever.
Neither is an easy choice and perhaps if we all spent a little more time trying to understand each other’s view on this matter, it might be a little less controversial and we all might learn a little more about one another.
Rachel Bussett is an Oklahoma City attorney. She can be reached at 405-605-8073.
