Andrew Wakefield’s made convictions which described 12 children showing signs of autism, after being vaccinated for measles, mumps and rubella. During the uproar of the controversy, Brain Deer a medical journalist uncovered the scientific forgery of Andrew Wakefield’s research paper. According to Brain Deer’s investigate against the claim of Wakefield’s accusation, he disclosed “Wakefield had been secretly pay rolled to create evidence against the MMR-vaccine shot and while planning extraordinary business scheme meant to profit from the scared, he had concealed, misreported and changed information about the children to rig results published in the journal.” Although, Andrew Wakefield’s research paper on vaccinations and autism, exposed as a scientific fraud. Obviously, proving his research study to be rejected and his medical license to be revoked, but he flourish in introducing terror, panic and distrust into millions of parents. This would seem like a controversy battle between parent’s bias judgements against scientific research. The world is filled with countless scientific claims, but not all scientific claims can be consider reliable. For example, the Wakefield’s false claims, which caused parents endless fear for their children’s health. Due to the scare of the scientific fraud by Wakefield’s study, how can we distinguish the difference, between scientific claims? For many, the answers is to relay on sensory observation. In fact, for many people a theory is scientific to the extent that is it’s based on sensory observations; these empiricists claim that we are justified in believing a theory if sensory observations show that it is true. (Velasquez) In recent, research there have been evidence indicating there is no connection between vaccines and autism. In a 2013 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study, displayed vaccines are safe and do not cause autism syndrome. The study looked at the number of antigens (substances in vaccines that caused the body’s immune system to produce disease-fighting antibodies) from vaccines during the first two years of life. The results showed that the total amount of antigen from vaccines received was the same between children with autism syndrome and those that did not have autism syndrome. (CDC) Immunizations are a pathway towards protecting against dangerous diseases and ensure the health of communities. The decision to immunize a child, can aid to shield entire communities from viruses, scattering from person-to-person. When immunization programs achieve high levels of "community" immunity—or what scientists sometimes refer to as "herd" immunity (the indirect protection of a community, including unvaccinated individuals), the likelihood that an infected person will transmit the disease to a susceptible individual is greatly reduced. (Satcher) Even with the many, new research outcomes of autism syndrome being unrelated to vaccines, there are still many unconvinced parents, …show more content…
Jenny McCarthy is only going on assumptions of a superstition or bias claim to her argument. (Velasquez) McCarthy is creating a hypothesis from a parent’s prejudice without the actual scientific aspect to support her statements. According to Lees Sanders, MD, MPH, Associate professor of pediatrics, “there’s a lot of emotions around the issue of autism now. It engenders a lot of fear in parents and clinicians alike.” As parents fret over the lives and health of their children, I would understand their concerns and fears. However, people should consider all the facts, source and results before getting consumed in their bias hypothesis. There are a lot of fear revolving around the autism issue, which needs to be looked at carefully with the right scientific assessment, not only on bias judgements out of