Position Paper on Mandatory Vaccinations in Public Schools in New Zealand

Immunisation in Education

The case for mandatory immunisation in schools.

Shaun de Malmanche

8/16/2017

Success

What would happen to the road-toll if drink-driving became an individual choice? Vaccines are the greatest success of modern science, yet, they’re still an individual choice in New Zealand. They’re safe, effective and necessary for a healthy population. Vaccines eradicated smallpox (Koplow, 2003) and controlled polio, tetanus, measles, varicella, HPV and pertussis. Unimmunised children are a health risk to the entire community (Omer, Salmon, Orenstein, Dehart, & Halsey, 2009). Schools are environments where infectious diseases spread quickly, so a high coverage is needed to keep a population safe, known as herd immunity (Ministry of Health, 2017a; Fine, 1993). When the coverage drops, infectious diseases spread quickly and lead to outbreaks (Hayman, Marshall, French, & Carpenter, 2017). Unimmunised children should not be allowed to attend schools in New Zealand.

Freedom of Choice

The issue with mandating anything is that the government is then taking away the right to choose. Freedom of choice is important in a society. But, when that choice impacts someone else, a change is needed. Drink-driving is illegal, for good reason. Amy Tuteur (2017) accurately likens drink-driving to vaccine refusal. If an irresponsible parent refuses to vaccinate their child, they are potentially endangering everyone that child comes into contact with.

In New Zealand, the Ministry of Health proposed a policy in 2012 that would prevent families receiving welfare payments if their children were not fully immunised. This was rejected in 2015, as it was seen to impeach the Bill of Rights Act, 1990 (Ministry of Health, personal communication. 28th July 2017). Article 11 states that “Everyone has the right to refuse to undergo medical treatment” (Parliamentary Council Office, 2013). Yet, the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child states that a child has the right to preventive health care (United Nations, 2017). Maybe it’s time for people to stop treating their children like property and realise they have rights of their own. The choice would still lie with the parents, except the choice would then be whether the child attends school or not.

In places where vaccination is a requirement rather than a choice, the coverage increases, outbreaks are far less likely to occur, and eradication gets closer. Places such as some parts of the US (Omer et al., 2009), Australia (Australian Department of Health, 2016), and Italy (Signorelli, Guerra, Siliquini, & Ricciardi, 2017). Australia’s total coverage in 2016 was 93.55% (Australian Department of Health, 2016), while New Zealand’s is only 88% in 2017 (Ministry of Health, 2017b).

Science Blogs writer, Orac (2017), recently wrote about California, where Personal Belief Exemptions have been outlawed. A child can no longer be exempt from vaccination on personal or religious belief alone. They require real medical reasons. When this law was first passed, the coverage increased from 92.8% to 95.6%, a very safe number.

Vaccines work

But, if vaccines work, why is my unvaccinated child a danger to your vaccinated child?  This is a question asked by people who fail to understand how vaccines work.

Firstly, not everyone can be vaccinated, such as immunocompromised people, with HIV, chemotherapy patients, pregnant women (for some vaccines) or young infants (Ministry of Health, 2017a). Some people may also be allergic to certain ingredients in the vaccine itself. This presents a problem.

This is when herd-immunity (Hayman et al., 2017; Fine, 1993) comes in. If enough of the population is protected by immunisation, then the diseases are less likely to spread. In NZ, for Measles, this is said to be 90% of all children by 5 years of age. In December 2016, the rate of full immunisation of 5-year-olds was 88.9%. Close, but not enough. Lower rates in previous years have led to outbreaks and closures of schools (Ministry of Health, 2017a).

Secondly, unfortunately, nothing is perfect. If a child is immunised with the first dose of the MMR vaccine, the efficacy is 85-100%. In 5-10% of recipients, the first dose can result in a “primary vaccine failure”, due to the body’s lack of immune response. The second dose of MMR is to protect this 5-10%, and no failure has been reported with the second dose (Ministry of Health, 2017a). So, even in vaccinated individuals, the risk of infection is still real.

Conspiracy and denial

What about the side-effects? Don’t vaccines cause autism? Vaccines do not cause autism (Taylor, Swerdfeger, & Eslick, 2014). This claim was made in a retracted, fraudulent study from ex-physician Andrew J. Wakefield, in 1998. The autism link, along with conspiracy theories, (flat-earth, doctors are bad, faked moon-landing), endures through social media and the delusion of a belief system in science (Arthur, 2016; Larru, Offit, 2014).

Commercial websites flout non-scientific statements, claim conspiracy and make accusations that the pharmaceutical companies and doctors don’t care about our health, they’re just in it to make money. These sites also sell unproven, natural alternatives to vaccines, like homeopathy, which cost a lot of money and don’t work (Arthur, 2017). The homeopathic industry is “expected to be worth US$17,486.2 Million by 2024” (PR Newswire Europe, 2017).

Some think newer vaccines are not to be trusted, such as the HPV vaccine. Human Papillomavirus (HPV) has been linked to cancers of the cervix (the most preventable), penis, vulva, vagina and throat (de Martel, Plummer, Vignat, & Franceschi, 2017). HPV is sexually transmitted. It’s highly infectious. This needs to be a mandatory vaccine.

Dunning and Kruger (1999) observed in tests, that the under-skilled overestimate their ability and the skilled overestimate the ability of the under-skilled, known as the Dunning-Kruger effect. This effect explains how celebrities (ex-Playboy model Jenny McCarthy, & Jim Carrey, the comedian) and individuals with no medical training to give advice on vaccines (Arthur, 2016), and the public taking it as truth. Desperate parents, seeking answers, have taken to blaming vaccines for their child’s problems, even Shaken Baby Syndrome (Buttram, & England, 2011). The autism link lives on, despite the studies showing no link (Taylor et al., 2014).

Some who receive vaccinations can experience adverse reactions, such as fever, rash, or in the case of allergies, anaphylaxis. However, these are extremely rare and can easily be dealt with. Some reactions are correlated to the vaccine. These include the presentation of autism, asthma, eczema and others. Although autism symptoms can be associated with the timing of the MMR vaccine, it is unrelated (Taylor et al. 2014). While adverse reactions to vaccines are rare, adverse reactions to the diseases are far more likely and serious. Nobody wants their child to die of a preventable disease.

Closure

Vaccines eradicated smallpox and contained tetanus, polio, measles, varicella, HPV and pertussis. Unimmunised children are a risk to everyone around them, especially the immunocompromised. They have been proven safe, effective and necessary. The coverage rate needs to be kept high in order to protect our population from infectious, preventable diseases. The choice needs to be made for all of us. No more opting out on non-medical grounds. Correlation is not causation. Anecdotes on Facebook are not evidence. Making vaccines a compulsory part of education in New Zealand is the next logical step.  

References

Arthur, D. C. (2016). Negative Portrayal of Vaccines by Commercial Websites: Tortious Misrepresentation. University of Massachusetts Law Review, 11 (2), 122-192. Retrieved from http://scholarship.law.umassd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1111&context=umlr

Australian Department of Health, (2016). AIR - current data. Retrieved from http://www.immunise.health.gov.au/internet/immunise/publishing.nsf/Content/acir-curr-data.htm

Buttram, H., & England, C. (2011). Shaken Baby Syndrome Or Vaccine Induced Encephalitis-Are Parents Being Falsely Accused?  USA: AuthorHouse.

de Martel C., Plummer M., Vignat J., & Franceschi S. (2017). Worldwide burden of cancer attributable to HPV by site, country and HPV type. International Journal of Cancer, 141(4), 664-670. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.30716

Fine, P. E. (1993). Herd immunity: history, theory, practice. Epidemiologic reviews, 15(2), 265-302.

Hayman, D.T.S., Marshall, J.C., French, N.P., & Carpenter, T.E. (2017). Global importation and population risk factors for measles in New Zealand: a case study for highly immunized populations. Epidemiology and Infection (145) 1875-1885. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268817000723.

Koplow, D. A. (2003). Smallpox: the fight to eradicate a global scourge. Univ of California Press.

Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one's own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of personality and social psychology, 77(6), 1121-1134.

Larru, B., & Offit, P. (2014). Communicating vaccine science to the public. Journal of Infection, 69, S2-S4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2014.07.009

Ministry of Health. (2017a). Immunisation Handbook 2017. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Health.

Ministry of Health, (2017b). National and DHB immunisation data. Retrieved from http://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/preventative-health-wellness/immunisation/immunisation-coverage/national-and-dhb-immunisation-data

Omer, S. B., Salmon, D. A., Orenstein, W. A., Dehart, M. P., & Halsey, N. (2009). Vaccine refusal, mandatory immunization, and the risks of vaccine-preventable diseases. New England Journal of Medicine, 360(19), 1981-1988. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa0806477

Orac, (2017). Medical exemptions to school vaccine mandates soar in California as SB 277 makes personal belief exemptions unavailable. Retrieved from http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2017/08/18/medical-exemptions-soar-in-california-as-sb-277-makes-personal-belief-exemptions-unavailable/

Parliamentary Council Office, (2013). New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. Retrieved from http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/DLM224792.html

PR Newswire Europe, (2017). Homeopathy Product Market is Expected to Reach US$17,486.2 Million by 2024; the Market is on a Favorable Growth Curve in Europe and North America. Retrieved from http://www.marketwatch.com/story/homeopathy-product-market-is-expected-to-reach-us174862-million-by-2024-the-market-is-on-a-favorable-growth-curve-in-europe-and-north-america-2017-01-11-62033139

Signorelli, C., Guerra, R., Siliquini, R., & Ricciardi, W. (2017). Italy's response to vaccine hesitancy: An innovative and cost effective National Immunization Plan based on scientific evidence. Vaccine, 35(33), 4057-4059. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.06.011

Taylor, L.E., Swerdfeger, A.L., & Eslick, G.D. (2014). Vaccines are not associated with autism: An evidence-based meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies. Vaccine, 32, 3623-3629.        https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2014.04.085

Tuteur, A., (2017) Vaccine refusal is the equivalent of drunk driving. Retrieved from http://www.skepticalob.com/2017/02/vaccine-refusal-is-the-equivalent-of-drunk-driving.html

United Nations, (2017) Conventions on the rights of the child. Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx

Week 11: Seminars

Hello everyone.

Well, this week, I will be talking about public speaking. Specifically, a public speaker I admire and why.

After considering scientists, such as Brian Cox or Neil De Grasse Tyson, and science communicators like Bill Nye, I have decided on Stephen Fry.

I have always admired him as a comedian and knowledgeable individual, especially after watching most episodes of Q.I. I enjoy watching him alongside Hugh Laurie in the sketch show, "A Bit of Fry and Laurie" and his fantastic characters in "Blackadder". His vocabulary is second to none, and his documentary series on the history of language, "Fry's Planet Word" is superb. Seeing him alongside Brian Blessed talking about swearing, is gold.

But, what really impressed me about this orator, was watching his presentation for his recent book, "More Fool Me". It was an interesting, thoughtful look into his past, with him reading excerpts from his book and telling stories of countries he's visited. It was performed live in front of the audience in the stadium, as well as being streamed live to different countries around the world.

He seemed to ooze confidence, but a short way into the proceedings, it became evident that he was feeling rather nervous. He was sweaty, he seemed awkward, and yet, he really pulled it off. I saw someone that I admired and wanted to be like. When I think about talking in front of an audience, I feel short of breath and my voice goes unusually deep. When he was nervous, he was still able to be entertaining and not lose the message at all.

Another public speech where he was admittedly nervous, was the debate on the importance of the Catholic Church. He was debating alongside Christopher Hitchens, another outspoken atheist. It's a wonderful, emotional speech that shows nothing but brilliance and the type of intelligence that only someone like Stephen Fry can get across. You can find this one here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SJ6AV31MxA 

He is a wonderful debater and defender of being gay and has even discussed "gay therapy conversion" with some severely misguided people. His famous answer to the existence of a god is the single greatest answer I've ever heard from anyone. You can find it here; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-suvkwNYSQo
The way he conducts himself when asked this question, which can be a tricky one for some atheists, is admirable. 

He is a man with a colourful, imperfect past, as he admits in his book and in his presentation. He has a history of drug abuse, and never seems to deny that. He is a wonderfully spoken man that gets his point across in a brilliant, intelligent, respectful, and most importantly, entertaining manner. 

I'll leave you with a quote. It's a quote that every person needs to embody, in science and the wider world. 

"The only reason people do not know much is because they do not care to know. They are incurious. Incuriosity is the oddest and most foolish failing there is" - Stephen Fry.

Week 9: Team Analysis

Introduction

This week, I will be going through team analysis. Working in a team has been a different experience for me. This is my first University paper and the other parts so far have been individual work. 

To our advantage, we formed our team early in the semester, so we've always been in contact, talking about our topics and how we were getting on with our work. For the past 3 weeks, we've been working together on the report. It's a much bigger task than the individual position paper, so working in a team has made it much easier.

Early on in the report, we decided to elect a leader and editor. We elected Jade as Leader and me as Editor. We shared our position papers and started allocating tasks.

Leadership

Coordinator

Nathan has taken the role of coordinator. Even though in the beginning we elected Jade as the official Leader of the team, as things changed, Nathan filled this role. Whether it's because of his time in the army or something else, Nathan has found it easy to find strengths in the team and use those to our advantage. He's found it easy to delegate tasks to everyone and generally take charge.

The allowable weakness for this role being manipulative or delegating personal work is not something I have noticed though.

Implementer

Nathan has come under the role of Implementer as well I've found. He is highly motivated and has had the task of completing this report in his focus the whole time. Even around the time of his wisdom teeth removal, he remained task-oriented and checked in with us to see where we were at. He also feeds off the guidance from the rest of the team, giving everyone's ideas merit.

Ryan also fits in with an Implementer role. He has been a strong leader alongside Nathan, both of whom are disciplined and hardworking. Ryan works well with guidance from the rest of the team and is always looking for ideas and input from the rest of us.

Again, the allowable weakness for this role, rigid and doesn't like change, doesn't really fit either, as they have both been happy to adapt to changing format within the report and differing information.

Team Roles

Resource Investigator

I would say that both Nathan and Ryan have taken the role of Resource Investigator. With Nathan's career in the army, he's had connections to resources, such as studies in areas applicable to us. Ryan, with his family's connection, was able to obtain information on certain sections of preventive health in the Ministry. They have both been great communicators, something I have trouble with at times. This has been an invaluable role for us, as having two such extroverted members has made it all work much better.

The allowable weakness for this role is considered to be "easily bored", but this isn't so much of a weakness, as there has been so much work to be getting on with, this has lead to the Resource Investigators communicating their boredom and motivating the rest of the team.

Team Worker

Jade and Bridget are both Team Workers, working alongside each other, as they both covered the same topic for the position paper, elderly well-being. As we are using this topic in our report, it has been both Jade and Bridget working together to mould their information into a workable format.

Ryan is also a Team Worker, being a very social part of the group. He has been aware of others needs, something that I consider valuable when working with other people.

The allowable weakness for this role being "indecisiveness", has been somewhat of a drawback, but, after reviewing the Belbin Team Roles subject, I consider the role of a Team Worker to be a valuable part of a team.

Plant

Bridget is someone who has been happy to go with the flow and see what others are thinking before contributing her ideas. She is then happy to do what needs to be done. She was allocated tasks for some of the harder topics for our Recommendations section and has brought forward some interesting ideas.

Jade is also a Plant. She has had some very creative ideas around a few of the topics we've worked on in our report. They both came up with good ideas for recommendations on hazardous drinking, which has helped immensely.

The allowable weakness for this role is described as "unrealistic", something I have not noticed of either Jade or Bridget yet.

Conclusion

One thing I have learned about myself doing this team analysis is that I seem to have trouble identifying weaknesses in people. Listening to the lectures on Belbin Team Roles, I was quick to assign people to roles in my head, but the allowable weaknesses left me indecisive.

Up until this point, I think our team has worked effectively together. Nathan and Ryan, in their combined roles as Implementers and Coordinators, have proven themselves valuable to our team. Ryan, Bridget, and Jade in their roles as Team Workers have kept everyone happy and working well together. Ryan initiated meeting in person and it was good to meet face to face and get to know the others a little better. Implementers and Plants work well together, swapping ideas and the rest of the team working through these.

My role as Completer Finisher is fitting, as I am the Editor for this report and will prove valuable in the days to come. This role has allowed me to work well with both Nathan and Ryan, in the writing and structuring of the report. 

I can see that too many Team Workers could be a problem, as not a lot of work would get done, but Ryan with his combined roles has proved himself a valuable member of this team. 

Week 8: Suggested Topics

This week for our blogs, we have been given free reign to write about something we have found interesting recently. I am always interested in reading about pseudoscience, science-denial and the fear-mongering that can come with it.

A couple of days ago while eating a bag of potato chips, I noticed a food label on the front of the bag, "GMO-free". This struck me as odd, seeing as how there are no GMO potatoes currently on the market in New Zealand. Our strict laws here in New Zealand don't allow for any GMO crops. These were chips from a New Zealand company called "Proper Crisps". They take pride in being organic and all the relevant buzz-words are there. Gluten, dairy, GMO-free and vegan-friendly, with no added MSG labels were all there.

Monosodium Glutamate was the old bogeyman before people were afraid of gluten. It's the sodium salt of the amino acid, glutamate, and occurs naturally in a lot of foods. People wrongly correlated it with a lot of health problems, such as headaches, after eating too much Chinese food. It's simply a misunderstanding. John Mahoney (2013), ex-head for popularscience.com wrote an interesting article on the history of MSG, which gives food "umami" or "fifth taste".

Gluten is another ingredient that is widely misunderstood and feared. It has lead to a craze of gluten-free diets and people thinking that gluten is actually unhealthy to eat. The truth is, it is only damaging to people with the autoimmune disease, coeliac disease, which affects about 0.5% of the population. Seeing as how gluten is present in wheat, it affects those with wheat allergies as well. Yet, gluten has been blamed for a range of problems, even as far as autism (Darling, 2014).
I think the single craziest food label I have ever seen is "Chemical free". I have seen it on bacon for sale here in New Zealand. Almost everything here in our universe is a chemcial, except for the obvious exception of pure elements or photons and other subatomic particles. Bacon contains quite a list of chemicals, no matter how natural or organic it is.
A lot of food lables are necessary. For reasons of faith, halal, kosher. For reasons of allergies, such as nuts, which can be life-threatening. But, when foods are labelled for silly things that don't need labelling, I'm left wondering where it ends. Do we label all food as being plutonium-free? Or labelling a bag of carrots as meat-free? Labelling something as GMO-free is just giving into fear-mongering and science-denial. GMOs are safe. They have been proven safe and are nothing to be feared (Entine, 2014).

Darling, W. M. (2017). Non-coeliac gluten sensitivity—a look at the evidence behind the headlines. Diabetic Foot, 11(27).

Entine, J. (2014). The debate about GMO safety is over, thanks to a new trillion-meal study. Science and Technology, Forbes. Retrieved from http://www. forbes. com/sites/jonentine/2014/09/17/the-debate-about-gmo-safety-is-over-thanks-to-a-new-trillion-meal-study.

Mahoney, J. (2013). The notorious MSG's unlikely formula for success. Retrieved from https://www.buzzfeed.com/johnmahoney/the-notorious-msgs-unlikely-formula-for-success?utm_term=.vwgevKERj#.rf9GLY47x

Week 7: Survey Design

Hello, everyone. This Week, we are writing about our surveys.

Our topic is preventive health, and our survey questions have focused on this. The aspect of preventive health we are focusing on for assignment 2, is the "nanny state". Nanny State here referring to the government being overprotective and interfering with individual choice. It is my opinion that it should be part of the government's responsibility to provide basic health care for all citizens. The aspects that we as a group have researched include compulsory immunisation, taxation/subsidising unhealthy/healthy foods respectively, and social well being of the elderly. These are areas that require attention from the government.

Our survey design has concentrated on these three topics in particular. We have included questions on age and income and whether they think it's the government's responsibility to ensure the health of their population.  I personally am interested to see any correlation, if any, between these. Obviously, with a small sample size, it will be hard to draw any definitive conclusions, but it will be interesting nonetheless.

It seems people have all sorts of different opinions when it comes to health care. Some claim that health care is not a human right, (Barlow, 1999). The World Health Organization Constitution (2015) enshrines "the highest attainable standard of health as a fundamental right of every human being".

We have decided to target the general public for our survey, so we can expect a range of answers. We decided to use an electronic source for our survey, through Survey Monkey. We thought this would keep with modern times and be the easiest, most effective way to distribute our survey to the widest possible audience.

While there is no perfect sample size or best practice when it comes to surveys, (McColl, Jacoby, Thomas, Soutter, Bamford, Steen, & Bond, 2001), we still have to be aware of the small sample size and any bias we may encounter. Biases that may come from the way we've distributed the survey, which is through Facebook, to our friends, some of which may think the same way as us. It's up to us to interpret the data in a responsible and critical way.

We have been advised by our tutors that typically, surveys will aim for roughly 100 answers per question, but we are to aim for 10-15. In science, more is always better, so hopefully we can get plenty of responses.

We will be interpreting the data with Excel, which will allow us to form relevant tables and graphs that we can then use in our report. The use of closed questions, with yes or no answers, alongside questions with agree or disagree answers, will allow us to form a pretty good picture of what our sample thinks.

This has been an interesting experience for me. Our team has worked well together to achieve it. I look forward to seeing the data.

References:

Barlow, P. (1999). Health care is not a human right. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 319(7205), 321.

McColl, E., Jacoby, A., Thomas, L., Soutter, J., Bamford, C., Steen, N., ... & Bond, J. (2001). Design and use of questionnaires: a review of best practice applicable to surveys of health service staff and patients. Health Technology Assessment 5(31). http://10.3310/hta5310

World Health Organisation. (2015). Health and human rights. Retrieved from
www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs323/en/

Week 6: Working in Remote Teams

This week, we are required to write about working in remote teams. We have all submitted our position papers, and now our research turns to the ethics of our topic, preventive health care.

We've had our team established since very early on in the semester, to our advantage I believe. We've been in contact with each other, thanks to Facebook Messenger, always asking questions and running things by each other. We've gotten to know each other quite well by now, as well as you can know someone these days without meeting them.

Susan Cain (2012), has written about the genius of the individual. Research has shown that some of the most creative minds of history have been loners. Sir Isaac Newton & Steve Wozniak, two undoubted geniuses of history.

I share this philosophy. I've always found it hard to talk to people face to face, and collaborate with people in person. I found it especially difficult when I was in a band, it proved easier and more productive for me to come up with things on my own, then present to the band as whole later on.

However, I see working in remote teams as a way of overcoming these problems. We are not working side by side with each other. We're not working in the same room or even the same building. The internet has given us the potential to work together without being together (Cain, 2012). Research has shown that teams in academia, not individuals, produced some of the most influential work. People working remotely, sometimes in different universities (Cain, 2012).

Working in this way requires strict deadlines and a team of people working for the same goals and objectives. We have all established that we all want A grades on this, so we all want the same outcome. We all seem to know our strengths and weaknesses, which I'm sure will all come to the fore when working on this report together.

Cain (2012) brilliantly points out what she calls "contradictory impulses"; "we love and need one another, yet we crave autonomy and privacy". This is what the internet can provide to creative people. Working in a remote team can be possible for even the most shy and private of us. We can all work for the same goals, while still retaining privacy.

In any case, I feel confident working in this team. We're all working toward the same goals and the same grade. We've all agreed to work on this report through Google Docs, which is very handy and easy to access.

"The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane" - Nikola Tesla.

Cain, S. (2012) The Rise of the New Groupthink. Retrieved from https://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/opinion/sunday/the-rise-of-the-new-groupthink.html?referer=http://t.co/QkQLEnzd

Week 4: Why the debate on vaccination is important

This week, I want to talk about why this topic is so important. Why does the debate matter? Why are vaccines so important to me?

Science clearly says why immunisation is important. There have been thousands of studies done on their safety, effectiveness and even the ingredients. Their importance is shown time and again when the coverage rate for a certain vaccine drops. Mumps outbreak in Auckland earlier this year. Numerous schools closed last year throughout New Zealand. Whenever an infant dies because of some unvaccinated child, the importance of immunisation is revealed.

However, the anti-science crowd somehow think there is a conspiracy. There are no reputable studies to be found to say why you shouldn't vaccinate. There are endless books, YouTube channels, websites funded by natural/alternative medicines to say why the pharmaceutical companies are all out to get them. Doctors are to be feared and mistrusted too, except for the ones that agree with them. Doctors like Mercola, Tenpenny, ex-doctor Wakefield.

The recent propaganda film, Vaxxed has been doing the rounds, with the tour bus following in its destructive wake. Australia has banned the pro-disease activist, Polly Tommey, who called doctors "murderers". Recently in Australia, they have passed a law that means you can't send your child to school unless they're fully immunized, the very topic I'm writing for. Their vaccination rates have increased to safer levels, much to the pro-diseasers' dismay. We may recall a few months back, when the Vaxxed film was screened here in New Zealand and they were met by 2014 New Zealander of the year, Dr Lance O'Sullivan's indignant response. He was invited to the event by a fellow doctor and was disgusted to see these people flouting such science denialism, endangering children's lives with their lies.

Anti-vaccine rhetoric is dangerous and a threat to our safety. We, as science enthusiasts, teachers, students or professionals, need to stand up against this abuse of science and keep arguing.