Fact versus fallacy in vaccine hesitancy

I REFER to the letter by Anthony Whitmarsh, “Do more research to allay fear of vaccines” ( The Star, Feb 25). While we appreciate the reasons that he did not vaccinate his first child, we also have to look at a balanced view of the controversies brought about by the study quoted in his letter.

Dr Andrew Wakefield’s publication in the Lancet in 1998 was a hot topic but we also have to take note of the subsequent investigations done by reporter Brian Deer who blew it out in the open in 2004 ( Sunday Times Feb 22 and Nov 14, 2004), and the British General Medical Council (GMC) that investigated and tracked the cases and specimens documented in the paper. There was a six-year lag followed by another six years when the papers were retracted in 2010 which gave the anti-vaccine lobby a great deal of traction flogging and reproducing the article.

What Deer exposed was research that was fraudulent and had little scientific truth. The study was not reproducible and one of the study subjects was brought from the United States to fulfil the study criteria. Subsequent population studies in Britain and other countries did not show a definite correlation between MMR vaccination and the increasing incidence of autism spectrum disorder. It was debunked after extensive subsequent epidemiological research, and not based on political grounds.

The added information that Deer discovered was that a lawyer was funding the research and this made it even more suspicious. The secondary gain from the whole fiasco would have resulted in successful class action suits all over the country (and possibly the world) based on one study that was subsequently proven by the GMC to be fraudulent.

The fact that all except one of the collaborating authors of Dr Wakefield’s original paper withdrew from being associated with it is enough to reveal the extent of the fraud involved.

Autism is such a complex condition even for us doctors to under- stand and diagnose that it is an oversimplification to attribute it to a vaccine. There have been other associations, proven or otherwise, but there seems little doubt now that extensive screen exposure tends to contribute to it.

As far as vaccines are concerned, there is little to fear compared with the fear of getting the disease and all the accompanying complications. We have to ensure that our vaccination rates do not drop for the sake of our future generations. The religious objections also have to be dealt with.

DATUK DR ZULKIFLI ISMAIL Executive Committee member Malaysian Paediatric Association