Blog Post #1

In a published paper, written by Andrew Wakefield, there is the detailed summary of an experimental trail and its findings regarding possible causes of regressive developmental disorder. My understanding is that he claims that his research supports that the Measles, Mumps and rubella vaccine is a factor causing the condition. Another article, written in response to the retraction, analyzes the flawed aspects of the experiment, motivations and conclusions. There was a small sample size of only twelve children, who were selected for the experiment based on their consecutive referrals to a gastroenterology office to check their behavioral regression. This article reveals that Wakefield was motivated to publish his paper, drawing the connection between the vaccine and the developmental disorder, because of the financial gains he would make. Other independent studies had been conducted that refuted his theory very quickly after his paper had been published, further tarnishing the credibility of his conclusions. Even ten of the twelve co-authors of the paper admitted that there was not enough evidence to maintain the claim that the MMR vaccine makes children vulnerable to developmental issues.

A study conducted by Roos Bernsen and Johannes Van Der Wouden, aimed to support the MMR vaccine by supporting that it does not cause atopy, as many have speculated. Many refuse the vaccine for their child with the intention of improving their child’s immunity to other diseases, specifically in this study atopy. This is important because refusing vaccination reduces the effect of herd immunity and can lead to breakouts of measles, mumps, and rubella. The study was conducted with both vaccinated and un-vaccinated children and the association between atopy and vaccination was studied. Scientists concluded that un-vaccinated children who had had MMR diseases were no more protected from atopy than the vaccinated children. This supports the claim that atopy is not caused by the MMR vaccine.

Reading both of these articles reveals the importance of honest and unbiased scientific research. As a trusted source, the public should be able to trust the findings of published articles, however the Wakefield retracted article shows some of the possible politics that can be found even in scientific research. This is a good thing to become aware of. The second article that studied the possible protective qualities of opting out of the MMR vaccine was important in my opinion because vaccination for the general health of the population is so important and should be encouraged especially in the scholarly science field. It is important to show as much scientific data that vaccines are not harmful to the body.