• Reflection prompt 1. Did your article, or things you saw in your search for articles, change the way you think about science? Did you see evidence of scientists actively engaged in public policy debates, and were you surprised by their level of advocacy?
  • To be honest, not much about my views changed while looking for articles. I’ve never been an anti-vaxxer, and I’ve always known that scientists tend to engage in policy debates that reflect their field. My only worry is that when you have a scientist advocating for a non-scientific policy, like a climate scientist arguing for tax reform. It isn’t that those issues cannot be tangential, but if the scientist leans too far away from their expertise and into regular debate, it can undermine the knowledge they do have.
• Reflection prompt 2. Discuss how your article made connections to another discipline, like business, government, politics, economics, or humanities. If it didn’t make any connections to other disciplines, discuss a connection it could have made.
  • I didn’t connect to any other disciplines by choice. There is a need to have more scientific information out in the world, without a political opinion thrown in. I think that the science sounds strong enough on its own, and should be used to inform public debate. I do have an opinion, but I think if I had stated it, it would have detracted from the piece by forcing the reader to focus more on it than the facts. Once they acknowledge the facts, then we can talk policy.
• Reflection prompt 3. Describe how the class as a whole has impacted your views on science, the human body, and human impacts on the planet.
  • To be honest, it hasn’t changed much. I have a little more specific knowledge on some things I only had a surface understanding of. But my opinion hasn’t really changed. Maybe if I had taken this class when I was younger it would have had more of an impact. But I’m older and I believe learning is a lifelong task, not just something done for a grade. Not that I regret this class; it was good refresher on many topics.

Vaccinations are safe for human use, and it is in a person’s best interest to make sure that they are up to date on their vaccinations. Whether or not we should make vaccinations mandatory is a legal issue. But from a scientific standpoint there are no issues with vaccines as a whole. They have been vetted, and no legitimate study has shown any correlation between them and Autism.

According to the CDC, there is no link between vaccines and autism. This myth stems from a now retracted 1998 study in The Lancet by a now discredited doctor. The study had numerous flaws, and should not have been published. There have been numerous studies looking into the link between vaccines and autism, and they have not been able to replicate the results found in that first study. They all show that there is now correlation between vaccines and autism.

Additionally, some detractors of vaccines will claim that although some vaccines may be fine, the ones containing thimerosal are harmful due to thimerosal being a mercury-based preservative. This stems from a misunderstanding of chemistry. Although it contains mercury, the compound does not react with the body the way pure mercury metal. Due to its composition, thimerosal doesn’t stay in the body, and thus is safe for human use. Even if it was risky, thimerosal is no longer used in children’s vaccines. So, even if a link were found, any children now getting vaccinated should still be safe to get needed vaccinations.

I am not going to touch on the public policy aspect on this. There are arguments that can be made for making vaccines mandatory, as well as arguments against that position. That conversation needs to be had. However, we cannot have that conversation until we can get everyone on the same page with the scientific consensus. Otherwise, they will obfuscate the issues with facts not based in science. The science is clear: vaccines do not cause autisms, and are safe for both children and adults to use.

Works Cited:

“Vaccine Safety.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. August 28, 2015. Accessed July 22, 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/thimerosal/faqs.html#4A.

“Thiomersal controversy.” Wikipedia. July 12, 2017. Accessed July 22, 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal_controversy.

“Thiomersal.” Wikipedia. July 09, 2017. Accessed July 22, 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal.

Eggertson, Laura. “Lancet retracts 12-year-old article linking autism to MMR vaccines.” CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association Journal. March 09, 2010. Accessed July 22, 2017. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2831678/.

“Vaccine Safety.” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. November 23, 2015. Accessed July 22, 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/autism.html.