Wakefield’s affair: 12 years of uncertainty whereas no link between autism and MMR vaccine has been proved
Faculté de médecine Paris-Sud 11, département de santé publique, d'évaluation et d'information médicale, 94277 Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France. La Presse Médicale
(Impact Factor: 1.08).
06/2012; 41(9 Pt 1):827-34.
In 1998, a Lancetpaper described 12 cases of children with autism, and having been vaccinated (MMR) in the United Kingdom; medias presented the information to the lay public, stating that a link was possible. In 2004, TheLancetpublished letters responding to allegations against the paper. Later, it was established that no link existed between MMR and autism; few years and many publications were necessary to conclude to the absence of evidence. In 2010, the General Medical Council published a report against Dr Wakefield, first author of the 1998 paper, and showing that the children hospital records did not contain the evidence; hospital records differed from the published paper; theLancetretracted the 1998 paper. In 2011, Brian Deer, a journalist, published the complete story in theBMJ: in 1996, Wakefield was approached by lawyers representing an anti-vaccine lobby, and they supported the Wakefield research. Dr Wakefield left England; in 2012 he works in Texas, USA, for anti-vaccine lobbies.
Available from: Marta Fadda
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Whether or not to vaccinate one's child is one of the first health-related decisions parents have to make after their child's birth. For the past 20 years, the share of parents choosing not to immunize their children has increased in many countries, for various reasons. Among these, rumors affirming that vaccinations contain dangerous chemicals or might trigger severe chronic diseases have negatively affected parental attitudes towards pediatric immunizations, particularly the vaccination against measles, mumps and rubella (MMR), raising a number of public health concerns. The primary aim of this qualitative study is to understand what drives parents' decision, giving special attention to vaccination literacy and psychological empowerment in such a context.
Twenty individual semi-structured interviews were conducted in the Canton of Ticino (Switzerland) between January and June 2014. Participants were either mothers or fathers of children less than 1 year old living in Switzerland. An inductive thematic analysis was performed to identify the main themes with regard to vaccination literacy and psychological empowerment in the MMR vaccination decision-making.
Parents' reports yielded four main themes: (a) the paradox of the free choice, referring to the misinterpretation of current vaccination policies; (b) giving up the power, pointing at the outcomes of a low perceived competence; (c) a far-reaching decision, reflecting the importance attributed to the MMR choice and the different levels of impact the decision can have; (d) the demand for shared-decision making, referring to the parental needs in relation to the child's healthcare provider.
Understanding what drives parents' management of their children's immunization schedule in terms of vaccination literacy and psychological empowerment can help health professionals to communicate more effectively with parents in order to facilitate an informed decision, and stakeholders to design tailored health education programs and materials. This can ultimately help increase the coverage of the MMR vaccination.
Available from: Sorin Hostiuc
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Translational research tries to apply findings from basic science to enhance human health and well
‑being. Many phases of the translational research may include non‑medical tasks (information technology, engineering, nano‑technology, biochemistry, animal research, economy, sociology, psychology, politics, and so on). Using common bioethics principles to these areas might sometimes be not feasible, or even impossible. However, the whole process must respect some fundamental, moral principles. The purpose of this paper is to argument the need for a different approach to the morality in translational bioethics, and to suggest some directions that might be followed when constructing such a bioethics. We will show that a new approach is needed and present a few ethical issues that are specific to the translational research.
Translational research—the need of a new bioethics approach. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290599709_Translational_research-the_need_of_a_new_bioethics_approach [accessed Jan 19, 2016].
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.