When first thinking about science and democracy, my mind goes to the anti-vaccination movement. Since the invention of the first vaccine (which was for smallpox) people have been hesitant to get immunizations. At the conception of vaccinations, people were rightfully cautious about using the new scientific and medical discovery. The vaccine for smallpox was created in the late 18th century, and since then vaccines have undergone appropriately organized skepticism and have been proven to be safe and effective. Yet today, there is this movement that vaccines should be optional. The foundations of the contemporary anti-vaxxing movement started when a British doctor named Andrew Wakefield published a study that has since been discredited. His study drew a connection between the M.M.R. vaccine and autism. Wakefield’s paper continued gaining popularity in the media even after the study was discredited and his doctorate was taken away. A disconnect between science and perception of the truth has enabled a society where anti-vaxxing can gain support. One reason is that the M.M.R vaccine is so effective that most people do not know anyone who has had measles, mumps, or rubella. So, when faced with the prospect of their children either getting one of these seemingly obsolete illnesses or their child developing autism, parents pick the former. Additionally, famous people supported the movement in the media. One example is actress Jennifer McCarthy claimed vaccines are what caused her son’s autism. Another reason that anti-vaxxing took hold is that the internet has, in some ways, enabled everyone to think they are a doctor. With the invention of the internet and websites like WebMD, it can be easy for even the most highly educated people to fall victim to internet scams. Parents are just trying to do the best for their children and keep them safe and healthy. This can be difficult when the onus of differentiating between what’s real and fake is placed on internet consumers rather than trained medical professionals.
In the United States specifically, democracy has given fuel to the anti vaxxing movement because people have the right to choose if and when they vaccinate their children. The problem with this democratic freedom is that it is starting to hurt other children. Some children can not get immunizations because of other underlying health issues that suppress their immune systems. The children who are medically unable to get vaccinated rely on herd immunity to protect them from getting illnesses such as measles, which would likely be more harmful to them than their healthy peers. Since the anti-vaxxing movement has gained so much popularity since the early 2000’s, herd immunity has been dropping, which enables outbreaks to occur. As a result, some states, including Maine and New York, have imposed requirements for children who attend public schools to be up-to-date on vaccinations. While some may see this as impeding on their rights the same could be said about unvaccinated children, impeding on their immunocompromised peer’s safe access to education. The anti-vaxxing movement is one example of how science is subjective as a result of the high value placed on personal freedoms in America.
Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/23/health/anti-vaccination-movement-us.html