Publication and Effect on Vaccine Hesistancy (Coursework Sample)

Wakefield et. al.13 published a paper in 1998 in the Lancet. The paper investigated the cause of abnormality in children who had been normal for a period but later developed some abnormalities in their development. Clinical and laboratory investigations were conducted on 12 children on admission at Royal Free hospital who had reported symptoms of autism and enterocolitis. The mean age of the children samples was 6 and made up of 11 boys. The study concluded that Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine was associated with autism. Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is pervasive among children aged 4 to 1021. These group of children are diagnosed with mild autism21. Boys are four times more likely to be diagnosed with autism compared to girls22.
According to Motta and Stecula5, the publication caused skepticism of MMR vaccine. They report that, the publication led to an increase in reports of adverse effect of the MMR each month and an increase in negative media coverage of the MMR vaccines weeks after. The media attributed the controversy of the MMR and Autism to Wakefield’s publication4. Mothers who are educated and exposed to negative information about the MMR vaccine delayed vaccination between 1998 and 2001 in the United States7,17. In the United Kingdom, parents forwent vaccination due to scare of autism, causing an outbreak of measles between 2010-201910. After reviewing data, documents and conducting interviews, Deer19 found Wakefield’s study to be fraudulent, unethical and saddled with conflict of interest. Scientific studies failed to identify link between MMR and autism18. Epidemiological studies found no link between MMR vaccine and autism20. The paper was partially retracted in 2004 and completely retracted in 201016.
Pseudoscience uses ad hoc hypothesis to account for negative research findings, emphasize on confirmation other than refutation, lack connection with basic applied research, over rely on anecdotal evidence, reverse burden of proof and lacks peer review1. Wakefield’s research lacked scientific basis to prove that MMR causes autism in the children investigated1. A good experimental design considers sample size, treatment and control and confounding variables1. The experiment by Wakefield et. al.13 had a small sample size (n=12), lacked group control and made hypothetical conclusions1. According to Bennet2, four groups of children should have been compared: children with autism, children without autism, children who have taken the vaccine and children who have not taken the vaccine2. This comparison could have helped to establish the probability of children whose conditions could have worsened with or without the vaccine. The study only investigated children with autism which makes it impossible to confidently draw conclusions. No hypothesis was tested, biased and non-random sample and anecdotal evidence replaced data2. Several calls were made for Wakefield et. al.13 to replicate the study but due to the bad experimental design, they did not heed to the call16.