Why do people hate anti-vaxxers?

The rest of your untrue statements and claims I have already debunked and have no interest in dealing back and forth with your boring frothing “You’re the puppet!” diatribes. But you really do not have the foggiest idea of how my business works.

For most pediatricians discharging parents of unvaccinated (and/or the more common under-vaccinated) kids from their practices would have either no or a positive impact on our bottom lines. It is understandable that you do not understand the economics of primary care pediatric practice. You should however not presume to be expert on the many things that you are far from one in.

Complete vaccine refusers are a small number. Nationally they less than 1% and I do not know of even one currently in my practice (again, a few who started out that way and who have shifted away from that). Still those few take up an inordinate amount of time and we in pediatrics do not have many procedures … time is all we have. Continuing the discussion with the selective refusers (trying to bring them closer to staying on schedule for all vaccines, inclusive of influenza, HepA, HPV, and such), the delayers, and the splitters, also takes time invested that does not pay off every time.

If all someone cared about was their income getting rid of all of 'em would allow them to see more of the less time demanding rooms in the same number of hours worked. And job satisfaction would be improved by avoiding this aggravating population as well. They are, in many ways, a burden to a practice.

I know of few who are desperate for patients and those who are have … other factors … in play. The short version for a pediatrician’s bottom line (assuming you have an organization behind you that has contracted well with the payers) is your reputation in the community. And that follows from enjoying what you do, caring about your patients and the community, and actually listening and responding to patient family concerns. Most pediatricians actually do those things fairly well.

Anyway, if our main concern had been maximizing our incomes we probably would have chosen a different specialty than peds!

All I know is, I’d rather live in a neighbourhood where the GPs try to persuade the vaccine doubters/refusers than in one where they tell them to fuck off. Because more people in the first neighbourhood are going to end up vaccinated.

My kids spend the vast majority of their time *not *in the doctor’s waiting room. They’re far more likely to be exposed to something in the shops, or at school, or in the park, or at a party, because they spend more time there, and because school and the park and parties are where they’re all coughing straight in each other’s face from a distance of three inches and smearing their snotty hands all over each other and finishing off each other’s half-eaten carrot stick. (They’re fully vaccinated and then some, but we all know that’s not 100% effective, and the small one is only three so she hasn’t had all her boosters yet…) If my doctor can cut down their risk of being exposed to a preventable disease in all of those places, I’m willing to accept a slightly increased risk of them being exposed in the waiting room.

I appreciate your appreciating that eclectic wench.

I also want to make one more point. IF one’s concern was the risk of contact with the underimmunized in the waiting room, then the thing to pay attention to is not if they dismiss those who will not fully comply but what sort of Quality Improvement (QI) Program they are part of.

Remember my offhand comment a few posts back about not worrying about my hitting the metrics? The reason my metrics are fine is because our metrics are fine. “Our” refers to the larger group practice I am part of. We have long had QI projects in place aimed at optimizing our immunization rates for all age groups and we work not as just as individual providers but as part of a team. Most of those not hitting full hitting full compliance are not intentional refusers or delayers, they are just families that missed a well care appointment or two for various reasons and fell behind, or who declined (or were told by a provider to hold off) at the well visit needlessly because the kid had a cold that day and fell behind and forgot to come back in when better or just got off schedule and had one or two get missed in the process. Opportunities to catch up at minor illness visits missed. A group can improve across the board. A group can emphasize to its providers that minor illnesses are no reason to not go ahead with the routine immunizations. It can have systems built in (inclusive now automatic built into the EMR) that remind a provider what vaccines are due inclusive of when someone has gotten off-schedule either unintentionally or by choice. It can, using EMR, run reports identifying those who have not completed the series due by 15 month for those who had turned 16 months that quarter and reach out to those families to schedule the extra nurse only visit(s) if needed to catch them up and make sure those appointments are available at convenient times. Pediatricians can ask about parents’ (and grandparents’) status on pertussis and flu and offer to immunize them while they are there and can have extra times open to run “family flu shot clinics.” They should try to figure out for their specific community what the barriers are to getting fully immunized and address them.

These sorts of interventions have much bigger impacts on whether the population in the waiting room is or is not fully immunized than dismissing patients does, and has its eye on the ball that matters: community level risk.

From a pediatrician who does not accept vaccine refusers (one of those “unethical” docs DSeid has contempt for):

*"I never want to have to explain to the parents of a kid with leukemia that their child was exposed to measles during a check-up. I don’t kid myself that I can keep my office totally free of risk, but insofar as I have any capacity to mitigate it, I will make it as safe as possible.

I often wonder why a parent who believes vaccines are harmful would want to bring their children to a medical doctor at all. After all, for immunizations to be as malign as their detractors claim, my colleagues and I would have to be staggeringly incompetent, negligent or malicious to keep administering them.

If vaccines caused the harms Jenny McCarthy and her ilk claim they do, then my persistence in giving them must say something horrifying about me. Why would you then want to bring your children to me when you’re worried about their illnesses? As a parent myself, I wouldn’t trust my children’s care to someone I secretly thought was a fool or a monster.

It’s not merely that I don’t want to have to worry that the two-week-old infant in my waiting room is getting exposed to a potentially-fatal case of pertussis if these parents bring their children in with a bad cough. It’s not just that I don’t want their kid to be the first case of epiglottitis I’ve ever seen in my career. Those are reasons enough, to be sure. But they’re not all.

What breaks the deal is that I would never truly believe that these parents trust me. Giving kids vaccines is the absolute, unambiguous standard of care, as easy an answer as I will ever be able to offer.

If they don’t trust me about that, how can I hope they would if the questions ever got harder?"*

And from another pediatrician, Charles Goodman, who has a similar policy, letting antivax parents know that they need to find another doctor:

*"But while it’s been drama-free in his office, the Internet is another story. People who are against vaccines have found him on Facebook and called his office to speak their minds. Although he said he responded to them with studies and science, he hasn’t been able to convince them that vaccines are safe and life-saving.

“No amount of reason, argument, science or logic, no amount of that will change the minds of these staunch anti-vaxers,” he said. “I’m not going to respond to them. It’s a waste of time.” *

These docs (and an increasing number of pediatricians) are not kidding themselves that the risk to other patients in their practices is “essentially zero” from unvaccinated children, or that they can convince antivaxers over time.

As mentioned before, I would not want members of my family exposed to preventable dangers in the pediatrician’s office. And it’s evident more and more responsible parents feel the same way.

No Jackie, like much else that has come from your fevered imagination, I have never expressed “contempt” for that minority of pediatricians who have given up what I see as their ethical obligation to our communities to keep working on getting these families to get fully vaccinated. No more than I have contempt for those who honestly support Trump’s travel ban because they are afraid of the terrorists getting in and the massacres at Bolling Green, and who want extreme vetting in place. Or contempt for the parents who “have heard” and are fearful of various rare to non-existent vaccine harms. Doctors are also human and poor comprehension of risks is a common human trait. It is impressive to me that the solid majority has not gone that way.

I would be curious though if their “combo 3” rates exceeds ours. “Combo 3” is the HEDIS measure for full protection with DTap IPV MMR VZV Hib HepB and Prevnar by age 2 years. Do they even track it? Do they have any QI in place to improve it? Our group, which does not dismiss refusers or delayers or splitters but instead keeps building the relationship that often (but far from always) does lead to the trust that leads to better compliance, does quite well. In our region our group, using QI methods like the ones I listed above, far exceeded the combo 3 (and 10 for that matter) rate of another group in the region that had adopted the dismissal policy. Yup, patients are LESS likely to come in contact with someone not completely protected to those conditions in our offices than in theirs.

It does not surprise of course. A group that consists of doctors who are unwilling to make the effort of trying to get the refusers and and delayers to comply, “knowing” that they cannot do what most can do at least a third of the time and some quite a bit more, who think that what others like me succeed at a fair fraction of the time is just us “kidding ourselves” and not what we actually experience, “knowing” that they will fail (I have a fair fraction of the time too before and it is frustrating), is likely to be a group that that does not have doctors as willing to look at those QI system approaches and deal with the population as a whole. QI? Measurement of their group performance? Reports? Thinking about the delivery systems as complete wholes and how to improve upon them? These are just not tools they like using. It smacks of … sociology.

I have a cousin who does family practice, and takes it very literally. He likes to see whole families. He did a pediatric rotation, and has a waiting room that is set up to get babies into the exam rooms immediately to lessen their chances of exposure to something. He has toys for small children that get played with and then put in a “used” bin and run through a dishwasher before they get put in the “clean” bin again.

He won’t see families who don’t vaccinate, because of the risk they present, but also because he caught one trying to leave anti-vax pamphlets in his waiting room, and that was when he purged them, and gave up on the idea that he could change their minds, and that was worth keeping them in his practice.

He sees families with a member who can’t receive a vaccine because of allergies, who won’t hold a titer even with full shots, or with a member with cancer who keeps the other members from receiving new vaccines. (He remembers a mother dutifully bringing her other three children in to get their vaccinations up to date just a couple of days after their brother had died of leukemia-- she said she had nightmares about losing another one every time there was a story about an outbreak.)

He says he feels like he has a contract with his existing patients to do every possible thing to ensure their safety, and having unvaccinated children violates that contract.

I respect him for it.

I feel the same way.

For an all-purpose concise and comprehensive debunking of antivax myths, this article by Vincent Iannelli M.D. is the best I’ve ever seen (note that myths #2, #4, #27 and #29 are ones that DSeid has been helping to promulgate).

While there are lots of serious problems facing this country under the new Administration, we need to be watchful for resurgence of antivax sentiment (aided by a sympathetic President). Airily dismissing the problem is not an option.

Rivkah I respect his intent and the frustration he experiences but the best of intentions sometimes cause more harms than goods.

Fulfilling his “contract” is best served by expanding his field of vision beyond his waiting room. In the last decade many thousands* (actually tens of thousands) have caught pertussis and measles and mumps outside of traditional providers’ waiting rooms as a consequence of outbreaks that could only occur because of a community failure to meet the herd immunity threshold. To the best of my knowledge not one has occurred from exposure in a traditional provider’s waiting room. The reasons for not meeting a community-wide herd immunity threshold includes the refusers, the delayers, to splitters, and those who intend to vaccinate on time not being up to speed for a variety of reasons many of which can be addressed.

For my curiosity though could you find out for me what he refuses to see? Those “who don’t vaccinate” means different things to different people. Does he mean the complete refusers only, or does he include the delayers and the splitters? Does he kick out those who refuse influenza? Those who refuse or delay HPV? (Last good data was that 25% of FPs don’t even discuss the HPV at the 11 to 12 year old visit.) The current recommendation for HepB is to give the first dose before newborn hospital discharge, just moved to within 24 hours of birth. Does he refuse to see those who fail to comply?
Jack I am really get effing fed up with you saying that I have said things that I have not said.

I am saying “2 No one else is at risk if I don’t vaccinate my kids”? Like hell. Not said not implied. Not true. I have been clearly saying that the exact opposite is true. Those who are not vaccinated and those who are inadequately vaccinated put all the rest of us at risk to the degree that more of us end up suffering for it than “them.” That’s why we healthcare providers have to work to keep community herd immunity levels high as frustrating as that effort may be.

Which is 4. Which is simply not a myth. The significance of that fact is often distorted by anti-vaxxers. Vaccines are highly effective and the attack rate for the vaccinated is a small fraction of the attack rate for those not. The reason for the fact that of the tens of thousands of people impacted by these diseases during outbreaks most have been vaccinated is the relative size of populations. The significance of the fact that most people who get sick during outbreaks are vaccinated is that the harm they do is not borne by their kids alone but impacts the rest of us too. The kids who die of pertussis in outbreaks are most often exposed by previously immunized family members, maybe caught up as adults maybe not, in an outbreak enabled by those who are refusers and those otherwise not up to date. The truth of facts does not depend on who says it and how they distort their significance.

I’ve said “27 Vaccinated kids are the cause of most outbreaks.”?? Absolute bullshit.

29? Yup. That’s fair charge. The facts on the ground demand we do our best to get everyone vaccinated for chickenpox but a concern that many pediatricians had before it came out was the lack of adult natural re-exposure to chickenpox and the booster effect such re-exposure has would increase the rate of shingles in adults who had had natural chickenpox at younger ages and, lo and behold, the rate of shingles in younger adults has increased since. Maybe it is just a coincidence and there are good arguments that it might be. And no question that those vaccinated will themselves be at lower risk of shingles as they get older. But yes I was one of those with that concern and am not yet convinced that the rise is just coincidental.

100% agreed that we need to fight against a resurgence of anti-vax sentiment aided by a sympathetic president. Airily dismissing the problem (which I believe is done by dismissing the kids) is not an acceptable option as tempting as it may be.

*Measles cases with a significant outbreak of 667 in 2014, otherwise fortunately significantly less. That year’s outbreak mostly within an largely unvaccinated Amish community. 188 cases in 2015 across multiple states linked primarily to a Disneyland exposure.

Pertussis, a majority of cases occurring in those vaccinated, with infants, who are at most risk, most commonly exposed by previously vaccinated household members who caught it in the community, running between 10,454 to 48,277 cases a year. Refusers driving it but also failure to fully get adults to keep up with their immunizations. “From 2000 through 2014, there were 277 deaths from whooping cough reported in the United States. Almost all of the deaths (241 of the 277) were babies younger than 3 months of age” again, most if not all catching it from previously vaccinated household members who caught it in the community and may not have even thought of themselves as sick. The risk to those babies was not a few minutes in a standard doctor’s waiting room; it was the community level of protection not being high enough.

Mumps 5,311 cases in the outbreaks of 2016 alone. Most of those impacted also those who have been vaccinated. High herd immunity level is critical.

Fortunately the improvements in the rate of childhood invasive pneumococcal disease (down to 2/100K) and of Hib diseases (decreased 99%) have been stable. Rotavirus has been stably impressive too.

I think it’s just the hard-core refusers who refuse all vaccinations and deny that they work. IIRC, he doesn’t personally do delaying and splitting, and won’t see those kids until their vaccinations are up-to-date. I’m not sure about flu shots, but I know he absorbs the cost for people whose insurance won’t pay for them. He offers single shots (not from vials) for people who are fussy about preservatives, even though he counsels that they are harmless. He also informs people about the adult booster for DPT, and finds out most people are surprised it exists.

I know that anyone who tries to talk other people out of vaccinations or leave pamphlets isn’t welcome in his office. When he told me that story, that’s the only time in my life I ever saw him really mad.

Thank you for the additional information Rivkah. I would react the same way to someone who did that pamphlet crap.

Look up images for small pox victims, or congenital syphilis victims, life before vaccines and penicillin. It will horrify and disgust you. Even chicken pox can have terrible consequences. don’t play roulette with young lives!

Her latest post is about how terrible the California government is for bullying people into vaccinating their kids and setting up Sanctuary cities. The rest of the time, she’s posting about babies, kids, babies, families, the Bible, God, Church, babies, breastfeeding, kids, Families, how terrible abortions are, and evil vaccines.
So…she really cares a lot about kids, don’t you see? Well, except when they are the kids in the sanctuary cities.

Some quotes that, sadly, are not from my “fevered imagination”:
[QUOTE=DSeid]
You do appreciate, I am sure, that in outbreaks a majority of those infected are those who have been vaccinated?
[/quote]

Here’s what Dr. Iannelli (see previous link for antivax myth #2) has to say about this:

*"Most people who get sick during outbreaks are not vaccinated when you consider the percentage of vaccinated and unvaccinated in the outbreak.

Although the absolute number of cases in some outbreaks might include many people who have been partially or completely vaccinated, that is simply because so many more people have received all of their vaccines as compared to those who have skipped one or more vaccines. It is much more important to look at the attack rate in vaccinated and unvaccinated people in an outbreak.

Consider a school of 1000 kids and 44 of them get mumps during an outbreak, 29 are vaccinated and 15 aren’t. If 95% of the people in the school are vaccinated, then even though it seems like far more vaccinated than unvaccinated kids got mumps, since there were far fewer unvaccinated kids in the school (50 unvaccinated kids vs 950 vaccinated kids), the attack rate is far higher among those who didn’t get a vaccine. In fact, in this example, those were not vaccinated had a 10 times higher chance of developing mumps than those who were vaccinated, even though more vaccinated kids got sick (remember that only 35 unvaccinated kids didn’t get mumps, while 921 vaccinated were protected and didn’t get the mumps) and their vaccine was about 90% effective at keeping them from catching mumps.

You clearly have to research the numbers on these outbreaks a little before believing that most of the people are vaccinated."*

Antivax myth #27 (that vaccinated kids drive disease outbreaks) flows from myth #2 (that most of those infected in outbreaks are vaccinated). Antivax myth #29 (about chickenpox vaccine causing elevated shingles rates, which you acknowledge pushing), has scant evidence to support it. The most “convincing” argument I’ve seen is a recent study reporting that a theoretical model linked vaccination to a temporary rise in shingles cases in a single adult population (between ages 31-40). And there is other evidence against a connection between the vaccines and shingles rates, since the latter were rising before the vaccine was introduced. In his discussion of the chickenpox-vaccine-causes-more-shingles-cases myth, Dr. Iannelli further point out that shingles cases have been rising in other countries that do not routinely vaccinate against chickenpox, and that there’s evidence the chickenpox vaccines lowers the risk of contracting shingles later on.

It is not helpful when health professionals give aid and support to antivax beliefs, to suggest that those who debunk them view vaccine-hesitant parents as “scum”, and attack pediatricians who aim to protect their patients by discharging antivax parents from their practices as “unethical”.

Indeed. The absolute number of cases is very different than the attack rate. The attack rate among the vaccinated is very low and the absolute number of those impacted are mostly the vaccinated. In his example what part of 29 being more than 15 is too complex for you to understand?

And the risk in a regular doctor’s waiting room is so far measurably zero. The risk in the community, in schools, at say Disneyworld, and so on, as a consequence of failure to achieve community level herd immunity to a large degree because of vaccine refusers, is significant, tens of thousands of cases, and hundreds of deaths. They are putting us all at risk and the measure of the degree of that risk is captured primarily by community level vaccine completion numbers.

Saying more to you about this and your approach truth and facts is both a waste of pixels and not permissible outside of the Pit and possibly not even there.

What’s really sickening is that a lot of complications from the measles and such can CAUSE brain damage and other things that people attribute to vaccinations.

Back in the day before vaccination was widely available, my great-grandparents lost two children to disease we can now prevent (whooping cough and tetanus). My grandmother was five when her older brother died-- tetanus is an agonizing way to go. (He was only seven) If your child is injured and possibly needs a tetanus shot – fucking GET IT.

I have done that math for anti-vaxxers multiple times. It never sinks in.

My great-grandmother bore six children. One died a day after birth, possibly as a result of the scarlet fever my great-grandmother had while carrying him. Another child died of diptheria, and one of whooping cough. The pain of losing children that way could have been prevented if the vaccines had been available.

I just saw an article on how anti-vaxxers in Texas feel they’ve had a boost of support, because our Pumpkin-in-Chief has made statements supporting the anti-vax point of view. MSN

Yes, Texas is one state that could be at the forefront of new outbreaks. Another is California.

We now have a group calling itself (in Orwellian fashion) Physicians for Informed Consent, which declares its opposition to mandatory vaccination laws and includes a number of pediatricians in southern California (another high-risk area for preventable disease outbreaks given spotty vaccination coverage).

A new strategy is developing among antivaxers. Many have presented themselves as strongly pro-vaccine but “pro-vaccine safety” (like RFK Jr.). The latest meme seems to be that pro-immunization advocates are conducting a witch hunt against the poor maligned pro-safety crowd.

Concern about antivax resurgence goes along with awareness of anti-science sentiment in general. This would be a bad time to pat ourselves on the back and conclude that the problem is being solved, nothing to see here, move along. :dubious:

Here is an interesting article on how anti-vaccine sentiment killed a vaccine for Lyme disease several years ago:

And of course there is Trump on the link between vaccines and autism: