The Vaccination Debate

A Scottish doctor, author, speaker and sceptic recently posted the following on his blog, drmalcolmkendrick.org, posing "forbidden" questions on vaccination.

- Dr Malcolm Kendrick

My Feelings About the Vaccine Debate

As readers of this blog will know, my primary area of interest is cardiovascular disease, which is a big and complex subject, where anyone questioning the "conventional" ideas gets ruthlessly attacked. However, in comparison to the area of vaccination, the battles in cardiovascular disease pale into insignificance. Mere squabbles in the nursery.

I am a member of an online doctors' community in the UK called Doctors Net, not open to the public. Whenever any story about vaccination emerges, the vitriol, anger and naked rage is quite scary to observe.

Whenever the issue of MMR raises its head on Doctors Net, doctors have stated that Andrew Wakefield should be thrown in jail, and never allowed to earn any money ever again, that he is a crook and a criminal—and those are the nicer comments.

It is clear that, in the medical profession, there is an unquestioned faith in vaccination—that is, all vaccinations, for all diseases, everywhere—for everyone.

Anyone who dares to hint that, ahem, there could be some negative issues associated with vaccination is subjected to withering contempt. "You will be responsible for killing millions of children. You don't understand science." And suchlike.

When it comes to the science, it does amuse me that vaccination began before anyone understood any of the science—of anything to do with microbes and the immune system. It all began, so it is recorded, with the observation that milkmaids were much less likely to get smallpox.

This led to the idea that you should deliberately infect people with a bit of cowpox, to prevent them getting smallpox. Bold.