Anti-vaccination misinformation
The anti-vaxxers are without a doubt the low-hanging fruit here. The fact of the matter is that they are a very small, but very loud minority of zealots who use exaggerated methods to push their agenda. However, while their methods may be exaggerated, one should keep in mind that similar methods of misinformation are employed by other peddlers of pseudoscience on a regular basis, though oftentimes with more subtle execution.
It’s hard to pinpoint where to start with anti-vaccination arguments because there are just too many, and in true conspiracy theory fashion, if you were to take them all and hang them on a wall you would find contradictions abound. So let’s start with the very common tactic of evoking chemophobia. This usually starts with using either: (1) the most scientific — and thus unfamiliar — names someone can find for certain ingredients (e.g. aluminum phosphate, thimerosol); (2) very familiar sounding ingredients that have become buzzwords due to unwarranted bad press or negative ‘common knowledge’ (e.g. MSG, formaldehyde); or (3) the weirdest or most transgressive sounding ingredients (e.g. mouse brain, aborted fetuses).
Chemophobia works because it is the most honest way to misinform laymen. In most cases that I have come across, the ingredients that anti-vaxxers like to name are, in fact, technically true. It’s the way in which they are presented that is disingenuous and misleading. Memes and ‘infographics’ are passed around the internet identifying certain ingredients as neurotoxins, for example. What they don’t mention, though, is that there are thousands of known neurotoxins, many of which humans ingest rather safely every day (wine, anyone?). It is the dose that makes the poison, and all of the ingredients that are currently used in vaccines have been tested to insure that they are at levels considered safe for human consumption.
Another common trope from anti-vaxxers is quoting doctors or other perceived authority figures that are also anti-vaccination. The truth is, anyone can find an “expert” in a field who holds beliefs considered unconventional by their peers. Climate scientists have climate change deniers, biologists have creationists, historians have holocaust deniers…the list goes on. A classic example of this in the anti-vaxx community is the citing of Andrew Wakefield’s research purporting a link between the MMR vaccine and autism. Despite the paper being retracted in light of cherry-picking data and conflict-of-interest issues (Wakefield’s research was funded in-part by lawyers involved in suits against vaccine manufacturers), this unfounded link between vaccines and autism is still touted by many anti-vaxxers as gospel.
What is especially noteworthy about anti-vaxxers’ appeal to authority is that it is highly selective, and often contradictory. For example, I came across two images on an anti-vaxx Pinterest board, side by side with two very different messages. The first one states:
“Just so we’re clear, I get my vaccine information from the following: Center for Disease Control, Food and Drug Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, American Academy of Pediatrics, National Institute of Health, World Health Organization, immunologists, toxicologists, accredited scientists. ALL PUBLIC RECORDS.”
The image next to it read:
“Imagine if…Thousands of people were diagnosed with e. coli after eating at McDonald’s. But McDonald’s was allowed to investigate itself and claimed there was no link. Would you still trust McDonald’s after this? THAT’S HOW WE FEEL ABOUT THE CDC.”
I’m getting mixed signals here. Should I trust the CDC and the other organizations mentioned in the first image? All of whom, by the way, stress the safety and importance of vaccination. Or should I go with the McDonald’s analogy and reject them because they’re all just shills getting paid by big pharma? The answer from anti-vaxxers is simple. If it’s a doctor or organization making a statement against vaccines, clearly we should accept their authority on the subject. However, when any doctor or organization claims that vaccines are safe, we should remember that they are all conspirators being paid off by vaccine manufacturers to do their bidding.
Of course, when all else fails, if you can’t scare people with ingredients or convince them there is a global conspiracy, you can always double-down and just flat out lie. Ever hear the claim that doctors make big bonuses just for vaccinating your kids? Well, they don’t. This ‘fact’ is so often repeated that even some pro-vaccination folks believe it and actually try to craft arguments of justification. It’s a perfect example that if you say something enough times, people will stop questioning and just accept it.
The truth is that there is incentive for doctors to vaccinate children, but it’s not coming from vaccine manufacturers. The incentive to vaccinate children comes from insurance providers through a form of fee schedule payout for routine, preventative care. So why would insurance companies incentivize vaccination? Because vaccines work! Insurance companies don’t want you to get sick. When people get sick, they have to pay out more money, and that is not good for profits. So it is in the insurance companies’ best interests that you stay healthy. This means providing incentives for doctors to do regular preventative care including weight assessments, counseling, breast cancer screenings, and yes, vaccinations.
