Saar Kuzi
Alessandra Coutinho Fernandes
William Cope
Richard Tapping
Kashif Ahmad
Reda Sadki
Shubhra Kanti Karmaker Santu
Adam P Rusch
Elle Meisner
Nereyda Ochoa
Landon J. Kunzelman
James DotimasFA16 Immunization Module’s Updates
Are media and the internet to blame for vaccine hesitancy?
Are media and the internet to blame for vaccine hesitancy?
It is fairly common knowledge these days that vaccinations, and more importantly the stigma associated with them, is a matter of intense debate. Coming from a scientific background, I have always found the concept of anti-vaccination (outside of legitimate health concerns) to be incredibly troubling. The fact that cases of vaccine-preventable diseases in the US have continued to be traced to children exempt from normal immunization requirements demonstrates both how important immunizations actually are, and how failure to maintain vaccinations even in a small population can compromise herd immunity.1-3 With this in mind, the question I have always asked is why in our current society does the view that vaccines are dangerous continue to persist?
One article that I found of particular interest concerning this subject looks at the role of mass media and the internet as catalysts for the increasing resistance against vaccinating children.4 When comparing the scientific view of vaccines, appropriate testing must first be conducted and reviewed before being communicated to the public. However, in the event that the public is made aware of a “potential problem” there is no vetting or review process. In such cases this negative view of vaccines can be released directly to the court of public opinion. Combined with the fact that “controversy sells,” media outlets are inclined to spread negative stories about vaccines even if the science behind them has not been substantiated. One such example cited in this article was a case where a family received a settlement after claiming that their child’s vaccinations had lead to autism, even though her condition was more likely a result of a mitochondrial enzyme defect.5
It is interesting to consider that the massively increased role which media and the internet plays in our daily lives might be leading factors in how our society views vaccinations. A logical conclusion then is that these same lines of communication can be used to help educate the public about the importance of vaccinations, as well as dispel some of the rumors which lead to hesitancy in vaccinating children. Indeed, the Opel article gives suggestions for setting up marketing strategies to use social and general media to increase health literacy amongst the public, at least as far as vaccinations are concerned.
References:
1) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Outbreak of measles—San Diego, California, January-February 2008. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2008;57 (8) 203- 206
2) Olson R South Whidbey's unvaccinated spur pertussis outbreak. Whidbey News Times. July21 2008
3) Parker AAStaggs WDayan GH et al. Implications of a 2005 measles outbreak in Indiana for sustained elimination of measles in the United States. N Engl J Med 2006;355 (5) 447- 455
4) Opel DJ, Diekema DS, Lee NR, Marcuse EK. Social Marketing as a Strategy to Increase Immunization Rates. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2009;163(5):432-437.
5) Offit PA Vaccines and autism revisited—the Hannah Poling case. N Engl J Med 2008;358 (20) 2089- 2091
You brought up a really interesting topic. I like the idea of using the same line of communication to educate the public about the importance of vaccination. One issue that might arise would be people refusing to watch or listen such media that does not align with their views. How would you go about overcoming that?
I think the problem is larger than just how the media have portrayed vaccines as dangerous. The media is often incompetent with their treatment of new scientific studies in general. Sometimes this means that they do not vet their sources properly like in the case of the vaccines cause autism study, but other times it is just a gross oversimplification of a complex study which warps the entire point of the article. A statement from a scientific article out of context can have a very different meaning than it was intended to. It is important that the media be more responsible with their treatment of scientific topics. However, it is unlikely that they will be, on the whole, because it is easier and flashier to summarize science down to a catchy title rather than explaining details or investigating sources.
For anyone who wants a humorous taken this issue to check out this episode of John Oliver's: Last Week Tonight:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rnq1NpHdmw
@Stephen Shey I absolutely agree with you. I will even admit that attention-grabbing headlines get me to click on the link, although I won't necessarily believe what I read. Even if technology and media is used to educate people about vaccinations, people will still be drawn to whatever is more interesting. I think most people would rather read something like Vaccines Linked to Increased Risk of X Disease than something about the science behind why vaccines are safe.
@Stephen Shey, it's interesting how profound the effects of negative marketing are on the affected institution. The manner in which the institution tackles overcoming the negative marketing will influence its intended audience either for the better or for the worse. We also have to know the demographics of our intended audience. Who are the anti-vaccinator or vaccination hesitant individuals?
You bring up a really interesting point about the downside of advancements in technology in regards to medicine. And all it really takes is a misleading but attention-grabbing headline like VACCINATION CAUSES AUTISM for misinformation to be widely spread. While the idea of using this same media to help educate people on a more accurate and scientific view of vaccinations sounds nice, it would be quite a challenge to actually get people to read such material. Most people probably don't read past the headline, which is a shame.
I definitely agree with you that controversy sells. Facts are often taken out of context or cherry picked to create a specific reaction from the public. This could easily be remedied by individuals delving deeper into the issue themselves, but unfortunately many people take what they read on a news headline or what they see on Facebook at face value. Part of this may be due to the scientific nature of these issues. Sadly, I think that our scientific literacy as a general population is quite low.