News

Vaccine opponents - between madness and science


"Cotton Mather, you dog! You should be cursed! Better put a fire in your veins! ”In 1721, this news flew together with a fire bomb through the window of the priest who discovered the smallpox vaccine. Vaccine opponents consider vaccinations against diseases to be poison, which doctors, pharmaceutical companies and WHO spread. With Donald Trump you are now in the most powerful office in the world.

An old story

The hostility to vaccinations is as old as vaccinations themselves. In 1796, the British doctor Edward Jenner experimentally demonstrated that cowpox, a disease that is harmless to humans, prevents smallpox in humans. He got the English term for vaccination, “vaccination”, because he got the vaccine from Kuheuter. The udder is called vacca in Latin.

In Germany, resistance to vaccination meant that smallpox vaccination was slow to become established - until it became a legal requirement in 1874.
In fact, around 1800 there was still little technical means to identify how diseases develop and how vaccinations work. For example, science has only recently become aware that bacteria exist, and doctors at the universities discussed hypotheses that we can falsify today.

Even more: experimental science, empirical studies and esoteric speculation sometimes went into a lively synthesis.

Non-medical professionals, for example, got excited about the fact that "disgusting" pathogens obtained from animals should protect them from diseases.
The opponents of the smallpox vaccination did not fall silent, but lost their importance when the vaccinations started. Around one in five children died of smallpox in Germany in the 19th century. After vaccination was introduced, the number of sick fell rapidly.

Where does the fear of vaccinations come from?

In her book “Immun”, Eula Biss writes about fear of vaccination: “A needle pierces the skin - a process that is so fundamental that some people faint when it is seen - and a foreign substance is injected directly into the flesh. The metaphors that describe this process are mostly fearful and almost always resonate with the hurtful, falsifying and contaminating. ”

In essence, vaccination means to infect a person with a pathogen in a controlled manner so that he becomes immune to that pathogen in a dangerous form of the same disease.

Medical laypeople were and are skeptical of the method of protecting a healthy person from an illness by making him sick. This goes until the suspicion that the vaccination triggers the disease. There were also accidents in the case of early vaccinations: for example, in 1930 in Lübeck, 77 previously healthy children died from a tuberculosis vaccination.

Wrong representations

Vaccines are generally weakened pathogens. The vaccinated do not get sick, as many opponents claim, but their immune system reacts to the pathogen in a harmless manner. If the pathogen now appears "fully armed", the body's protective forces are alarmed and effectively ward it off.

Vaccination critics believe there is no evidence of this. This may seem plausible at times to laypeople, but it is just as inaccurate as the mock arguments with which creationists want to demonstrate "gaps" in evolutionary science. Vaccines in Germany go through meaningful efficacy studies before they are approved. PVC7 vaccination, for example, was tested on 40,000 children and was successful in 97%.

Vaccination opponents international

Opponents in the states that carry out regular vaccinations focus on different vaccinations. It is popular in France that the hepatitis B vaccine triggers multiple sclerosis; in Great Britain, the idea keeps arising that vaccination against measles, mumps and rubella leads to autism. Italian opponents of vaccination blame vaccinations for sudden child death.

Critical patients?

While vaccination skeptics do not generally reject vaccinations, opponents see them as a general danger. Vaccination critics consider certain vaccinations to be useful, but question methods, times or effectiveness. Well-known skeptics are often medical students with a tendency to “alternative medicine”.

An example of a vaccination critic is a mother who writes on the NDR website: “Personally, I didn't have to think long about measles. The decision to have a vaccination was clear. But what about all the other vaccinations a toddler receives in the first few weeks? Why? Are they all really necessary? What are other countries doing? What about statistics? Who creates them and which figures are used? These are interesting questions. That would be really worth researching. "

She asks for information. That is their right. However, the valid data is published.

Eula Biss sees today's vaccine criticism above all in the fiction of the responsible patient who relies on self-treatment: "In today's medicine, sometimes described with the 'restaurant model', medical paternalism has been replaced by the patient's consumerism. The patient orders tests and treatments that are on a menu based on market research. The doctor who was a father in the paternalistic model is a waiter today. ”

The criticism mixes with self-developed knowledge, which, however, unintentionally amounts to semi-knowledge and mixes with mistrust of the pharmaceutical industry. As a woman writes on the NDR website: “Multiple vaccines create an artificial multiple infection that overwhelms the child's immune system. But there are hardly any single vaccines left. Vaccines contain additives that can have greater side effects than the active ingredients of the vaccine. "

The spectrum of rejection ranges from people who do not want to be vaccinated because they think there is no risk for them, but generally do not want vaccinations, to radical opponents who believe that their child develops autism if they are against it Get measles vaccinated.

Vaccination skepticism is increasing

Vaccination skepticism is increasing again in western countries. One reason for this is the social networks, in which vaccine enemies as well as the supporters of the idea of ​​a "doctor's conspiracy", often associated with them, appear particularly massively. In general, everything is well received, which suggests "uncovering scandals" and stirs up an existing skepticism with alleged background information.

The current state of science is generally unknown to internet consumers who “independently inform themselves”, and conspiracy theories seem plausible because they appear logical in themselves - they use a false logic by integrating complex findings, in this case medical ones, into one transform simple story with heroes and villains.

Then vaccinations offer an area of ​​attack precisely because they are so successful. A doctor from Hanover, for example, reports that he became a supporter when he saw Ebola patients in Africa.

The green middle class

Vaccination criticism in Germany and Austria is most widespread among an “somehow alternative” academic middle class - mostly without a migration background. Refusing vaccinations is proof that they have seen through “the machinations of the pharmaceutical industry”.

The “Kurier”, for example, quotes doctor Reinhard Mitter, who is based in this milieu: “Eradicating diseases cannot be a health goal. Wherever we intervene in an ecosystem (...), problems arise. (...) No lowering a fever, giving the body time to recover, holistically - for example with homeopathy and naturopathy - strengthening the immune system. "

Like anthroposophists, Mitter also assumes that illnesses have a message: "In addition, illnesses always have a purpose: they should calm us down, draw attention to something, and strengthen our immune system comprehensively."

It is a pseudo-intellectual animism in which a hidden will is ascribed to nature. However, the postmodern middle class is too educated to simply speak of God. Unfortunately, this fantasy has nothing to do with real nature. It knows neither guilt nor morality: viruses, bacteria and parasites are life forms that spread in a suitable environment. Not more.

Ecosystems are not "balanced", but, like all of nature, extremely dynamic, and if we did not intervene in nature, humans would be like wild wolves, of which around every second puppy dies of parasites in the first year of life - and so do those Rabies disappeared due to the vaccination of dogs and vaccine bait for foxes.

The forgotten horror

In Europe, old "curses of nature" such as smallpox, polio or plague have long disappeared and rabies is under control. People lack the impression of the horror they would be exposed to without vaccinations. This carelessness affects some vaccine critics who mainly refuse to let the state dictate how, when and against what they have to vaccinate their children.

An intuitive fear of vaccinations is just as understandable as the fear of the dentist. We consciously or unconsciously resist artificial interventions in our body. Here it helps to educate yourself and assess what the real risks of a vaccination could be - compared to what the disease has caused.
About 3-5% of Germans are opponents of vaccination, especially from religious and esoteric milieus or from the "alternative medicine" scene.

Arguments of the opponents of vaccination

The opponents usually argue according to a certain pattern: they accuse supporters of concealing the side effects of vaccines, they coincide with each other in time, that is, they make vaccinations responsible for diseases that broke out at the same time as vaccinations, and they report to doctors who did so to want to make profits against better knowledge.

The breeding ground for this propaganda is skepticism about evidence-based medicine. Common topoi of the opponents of vaccination such as "the pharmaceutical industry poisons us for their profit" are based on ideas that are widely used in the esoteric scene. The opponents like to pose themselves as martyrs among this clientele, who would wear themselves out against the "scientific community". In addition, large parts of the population hate the political establishment. They generally consider the established politicians to be puppets of large corporations.

So they mistrust the institutions anyway - why should they trust the authorities when substances are injected into their bodies?

Myth of naturalness

They also charge the debate emotionally and throw terms like “naturalness” and “enlightenment” into the room. Opponents of vaccination see childhood vaccinations as the cause of allergies, but also cancer and epilepsy in adults. The myth of naturalness, on which "alternative medicine" is based, is linked to fears in postmodernism, in which individuals no longer have the given framework of earlier societies, which defined correctly and incorrectly.

An unease breaks out, a “return to nature” is supposed to eliminate alienation and to curb the helplessness of being dependent on abstract constraints over which one's own way of life has no influence.

General vaccinations, like “conventional medicine”, appear as the implementation of a technical apparatus in which the feelings of the individual are not valid. “Alternative medicine” is largely based on the promise to give the patient back autonomy.

Buddy tuber agaric?

Postmodernly turned, everyone can look for the medicine that "fits him". Such promises tie in with a symbolic culture that individuals have to design themselves more and more. As much as an individual approach is justified when it comes to psychosomatic illnesses, it is fatal when it comes to vaccinations.

Because nature has neither a goal nor a will, and it is not interested in humans. Nature is not "good" either, the tuberous leaf fungus poisons us as naturally as sage works against hoarseness. The “argument” that vaccinations are unnatural is just as widespread as the misconception that we can leave medicine to nature - and thus also to plague and cholera.

Healing breast milk?

Vaccination critics often argue that healthy children do not need vaccinations because breast milk contains enough antibodies. A balanced mother's diet is therefore important. This is a half-truth. If mammals were not supplied with antibodies through breast milk, they could not survive. The mother's blood passes antibodies to the embryo in the womb. However, these do not prevent all infections.

Resilience due to illness

Especially in Germany there is a widespread idea that the best way to protect yourself from an illness is to live through it yourself at an early age. This idea of ​​keeping yourself healthy through toughening was one of the main myths of the National Socialists. For them, dying from diseases was even considered a "natural selection" that "steals the race".

In the 1960s, a "radical vaccination" was popular. Parents brought their healthy children together with children who had measles to infect them. The right idea is: The onset of the disease leads to the same result as a vaccination. After that, the person no longer gets the disease. That was correct with measles, but irresponsible. After all, one in a thousand children who develop measles contract brain inflammation. Untreated measles remains one of the leading causes of death, according to the WHO.

Viruses don't ask about sensitivities

Viruses spread regardless of any subjective sensation, and our mental health only tends to interfere when it affects our immune system. With aggressive viruses, it doesn't even matter whether our immune system is stable or not. We also become infected when our organism is in excellent condition.

Conversely, vaccinations work regardless of whether we find them subjectively good or not. Flawlessly proven facts are one thing, subjective fears are another pair of shoes.

Biss writes: “There are metaphors in circulation that address our deepest fears. And the language of alternative medicine has understood that when we are bad we want something unequivocally good. Giving children the opportunity to 'naturally' immunize themselves against contagious diseases without vaccination is an appealing model for some. Much of its appeal comes from the assumption that vaccines are unnatural per se. ”

Conspiracy fantasies

Hans Tolzin runs the website impfkritik.de. Here he claims that vaccinations can trigger autism, writes that there is no HI virus and Ebola is propaganda from the pharmaceutical industry.

A Thommy G links typical conspiracy fantasies on the NDR website: "Too bad that I have never seen the image of a measles virus in my research (there are only fantasy graphics), even though the electron microscope has been around for 100 years."

It is not enough for him that the measles virus allegedly does not exist, he also considers AIDS to be an invention of the pharmaceutical companies: "And yes, HIV has never been proven, only consensus of all involved so-called" scientists "and only a smorgasbord of defined symptoms. A really big scam to maximize profit but to the detriment of the population! "

A lore writes: "My child died of vaccine damage because the vaccine destroyed his immune system."

Conspiracy theories explain individual fears in a great narrative. Fear takes on a face in the form of powerful cliques that work in secret. The actors, doctors, the pharmaceutical industry or Angela Merkel pursue a secret plan and proceed without any scruples.

Alone against the mafia?

If the argumentative wrong conclusions of the opponents of vaccination are shown, this reinforces their self-perception as fearless lone fighters who stand "alone against the mafia". Vaccinations not only appear to be wrong measures in conspiracy theory, as in vaccination reviews, but the motives for vaccinations are criminal. For example, politicians want to control the population or make profits from the pharmaceutical industry.

Since the counterpart, i.e. doctors, scientists and authorities who advocate vaccinations, are considered villains, any rational discussion is pointless. The opponents of vaccination confirm themselves among themselves. They belong to an enlightened group that has seen through “the machinations”.

Scientology, anthroposophists and homeopaths

Jehovah's Witnesses faithful to the Bible traditionally refused vaccinations, leaving the decisions about them to their individual members today. The sect Universal Life is just as opposed to vaccinations as some homeopaths.

One of the most avid vaccine enemies is the homeopath Johann Loibner from near Graz. He sees himself as an alternative doctor and blames vaccinations for multiple sclerosis, allergies and brain infections. He says, according to time: "I have seen the most serious diseases and damage from vaccinations."

Most homeopaths, however, advocate vaccinations for one simple reason. Samuel Hahnemann's wrong concept that a disease could only be combated by triggering a similar but more severe disease was confirmed in the smallpox vaccine of his time. For homeopaths, vaccination refusal obviously has a lot to do with their medical background. A study in the UK found that only one in three homeopathic doctors refused vaccinations, in contrast to more than twice as many non-medically trained homeopaths.

The German Central Association of Homeopathic Doctors e.V. made a clear statement in 2003: "Vaccine-preventable diseases should be prevented by lege artis vaccinations after appropriate information and with an appreciation of individual living conditions. Vaccination against homeopathy can neither be derived from Hahnemann's original statements nor from the latest statements from homeopathic societies. "

According to anthroposophists, in the tradition of the esoteric Steiner, who rejected scientific explanations for diseases, diseases generally arise from a negative karma that should be removed. An illness is therefore a process of knowledge and this would block the vaccination.

An opponent in the vaccination committee

Donald Trump literally wrote in March 2014: “Healthy young child goes to doctor, gets pumped with massive shot of many vaccines, doesn’t feel good and changes - AUTISM. Many such cases! ”In German: Healthy children go to the doctor, are pumped full of vaccines and change - autism. The American president did not think up himself that vaccinations lead to autism, but rather quoted Andrew Wakefield's thesis from the 1990s. According to Wakefield, a vaccine against mumps, measles and rubella triggered. This fantasy was refuted shortly afterwards.

Fraud and alternative facts

The specialist magazine "Lancet" withdrew a contribution to Wakefield’s thesis after it was convicted of fraud. The charlatan had not even spoken out against vaccination out of deep conviction, but wanted to bring his own “vaccine” onto the market. As a result, he was willing to sacrifice human lives.

The world writes: “Years later, Wakefield was exposed as a lobbyist. At the time of the Lancet study, he had received £ 55,000 in third-party funding from lawyers who wanted to link autism to the MMR vaccine. Wakefield's medical license was withdrawn. ”

Trump is now hiring the anti-vaccine Robert F. Kennedy Jr. He also represents Wakefield's web of fiction, going forward as head of a “Vaccine Safety and Scientific Integrity Commission.” This gives an opponent of vaccination political power to influence medicine in the United States, and someone who believes that minimal mercury builds up Leading to Autism in Vaccines: Wakefield's idea was refuted after 31 hours when study results emerged that showed that vaccinated children did not develop autism more often than unvaccinated.

A mother struggles

Trump has become known for fake news, that is, that he does not care whether "facts" that he delivers are true. It is similar with the opponents of vaccination to which he belongs. It didn't matter whether Wakefield's thesis was disproved or not. Kennedy shares alternative facts: According to him, health authorities and research institutes, together with the pharmaceutical industry, are hiding the damage caused by vaccinations.

Not only scientists turn against these fantasies. An angry mother writes on the Buttercup Land blog: “Opponents of vaccination, stop abusing my child! Yes, I mean you. To you who fussed over and over again that vaccinations would trigger autism. Despite all the refutations, despite all the explanations and despite all requests to finally stop this anti-disabled scaremongering. Even a study you paid for opponents of vaccination showed that there is no connection between vaccination and autism. ”

Emotions instead of facts

Hillary Clinton made it explicitly clear: "The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue and vaccines work". The fact that vaccinations work and the earth is not a disk did not play a role in the election campaign. On the contrary: the less Donald Trump respected facts, the more sympathy he had for his followers.

Opponents of vaccination are stronger in the United States than in Germany and are in a large milieu between fundamentalist Christians who attack evolutionary science and claim that humans and dinosaurs lived together and chauvinistic nationalists. Some of the right-wing religious conspiracy fans believed that Obama was hostage to extraterrestrials.

Why are vaccination opponents dangerous?

Radical opponents of vaccination often operate in a milieu that considers the moon landing a staging of the CIA, believes that the contrails of airplanes are “chemtrails” to poison people, or that Helmut Kohl was actually a Jew by the name of Henoch Cohn be. Some of these fantasies appear to be spinning. Conspiracy myths about vaccinations are anything but harmless.

Alexander Marguier writes: “But there is still a serious difference between the claim that the earth is flat and the organized fear of vaccines with pseudo-scientific reasons. Because while the former can be dismissed as a harmless spinning mill, the latter is at risk of widespread fear of vaccination, with potentially devastating consequences for public health. ”

A world without vaccinations?

In the early 1950s, around 50 million people died of smallpox every year, in other words 30% of all infected people. Those who survived mostly scarred or went blind. 30 years later, the WHO had completely wiped out the disease - first, second, and third through vaccination.

In 1988 there were still 350,000 cases of polio, in 2008 there were fewer than 1,700. In Europe there is no polio anymore, the few cases today come from countries where the children are not (!) Vaccinated. The reason for the decline was: vaccinations.

Infectious diseases such as diphtheria and measles also decreased worldwide due to vaccinations. Before global vaccinations, 2.6 million children died of measles every year. If the opponents prevailed, millions of people would die again from diseases that keep vaccinations at bay.

Arguments against vaccination?

There are no scientific arguments against vaccinations in general. It is the medical measure that has saved most human lives globally and throughout history.

The historian Malte Thießen says: “Hardcore opponents of vaccination had and still have a closed worldview that does not recognize scientific knowledge. The larger part of the mere vaccination skeptics compared to the opponents of the vaccination, however, is driven by fears that are rooted in the nature of vaccination. "

This includes not having freedom of choice about mandatory vaccinations. These include the side effects, which are very rare today. However, this also includes a lack of transparency by the authorities in educating people about how vaccinations work, what they have achieved and why they do not constitute an assault.

The "racial body" of the Nazis

Leading Nazis believed vaccinations to poison the body and an "invention of Jewish doctors" to weaken the "Aryans". The racial ideology of the Nazis countered this by strengthening their strength.

In 1933, the "Reichsdeutsche vaccination opponents" warned: "Friends of the people, see what the smallpox 'protection' vaccination holds for our children and our public health." Whoever gets vaccinated is in the hands of "far from nature and therefore strayed doctors ”.

They use an ancient stereotype of the Jewish Oriental doctor who poisoned white Christians and used their blood for magic rituals.

In the Middle Ages the delusion had spread that the Jews had poisoned the wells and thus caused the plague, and they were also in league with the devil. The contemporaries sought the cause of death and agony in a scapegoat.

Propaganda of the pharmaceutical industry

After 1945, the vaccine opponents got a new boost because companies that produce vaccines, for example, dramatically exaggerated the extent of polio. To the opponents, the state appeared as a lackey of the pharmaceutical industry, which at best wanted to sell useless funds, but worse, poisoned people to make profits. This distrust of the state and corporations says nothing about the effects of vaccines, but is generally justified.

Right-wing populists in the US and Europe exploit mistrust and use skepticism about vaccinations to "hurt" those up there, Jews, Chinese, Muslims or immigrants.

Are vaccinations dangerous?

Vaccination is not pleasant, and trust is particularly lacking when it comes to compulsory vaccination: How should a citizen know whether a doctor he does not know injects something into the body of this citizen that does not harm him?

The risk-benefit calculation clearly speaks for vaccinations. Only the scientifically clear facts have to reach people emotionally.

Science in duty

Hardly anything in medicine is as fully documented as the effectiveness of vaccinations, and the claims of the vaccine enemies have long since been refuted. The Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) writes: “Based on these studies, we now know that whooping cough vaccination does not lead to“ sudden infant death ”or causes permanent brain damage; that hepatitis B vaccination is not the cause of multiple sclerosis; the measles vaccine does not cause autism, that the vaccination against meningitis does not lead to diabetes and that vaccinations are not responsible for the worldwide increase in allergic diseases. "

The fear of vaccinations is not scientifically based, but emotional. Therefore, many scientists do not take them seriously or try to appease them with scientific explanations.

But that cannot work. Epidemiological studies rarely reach medical laypersons, YouTube videos of vaccination opponents often. Science is not asked to find even better reasons for vaccinations, it has to be presented in the media - in a generally understandable and interesting way.

The anchoring effect

The so-called anchoring effect generally occurs in humans. That means that the information that we get first is most firmly anchored in our brain. This leads to cognitive bias when this information is incorrect.

Our brain does not ask for "wrong" or "right", but forms patterns in the brain within which we orient ourselves. It is therefore important for the education about vaccinations that the layperson receives the factual-scientific information first.

The anchoring effect has nothing to do with intelligence. We all think our ideas are objective and put new information in the existing ones.

Confirmation errors

Added to this is the confirmation error. Nothing disturbs people more than cognitive dissonance, i.e. enduring ideas that contradict each other. This also explains why medically uneducated people have less vaccination criticism than the “alternative” middle class.

Those who mistrust “the pharmaceutical industry” or “conventional medicine” have already invested a lot of energy to come to this assessment. But once a worldview is established, thinking motivated by this attitude works better than thinking that contradicts it.

However, the reverse also applies. Ärzte, die voll hinter Impfungen stehen, wären demzufolge auch wenig bereit, auf Zweifel hinsichtlich des Procederes einzugehen und verwendeten dann keine Mühe darauf, dem Patienten die Impfung sachlich zu erklären. Damit wiederum brüskieren sie einen Menschen, der zum kritischen Denken in der Lage ist und schüren die Skepsis.

Ein Problem für die Aufklärung ist der Wert von Anekdoten. Impfgegner und allgemein Verschwörungsideologen argumentieren selten im luftleeren Raum. Im Unterschied zu wissenschaftlichen Studien arbeiten sie narrativ. Sie konzentrieren sich also auf Anekdoten. Solche einzelnen Geschehnisse knüpfen an unser assoziatives Denken an und wirken deshalb erst einmal viel überzeugender als valides Datenmaterial.

Assoziationen wirken

Mit einer Anekdote lässt sich jede beliebige Geschichte aufbauen, ohne, dass sie mit der Wirklichkeit irgend etwas zu tun haben müsste. Das weiß jeder Student im kreativen Schreiben, der die Aufgabe bekommt, aus einer beliebigen Überschrift in der Zeitung eine Geschichte zu erzählen. Zusammen mit formalen Logik- und Bestätigungsfehlern läuft so jede Anekdote darauf hinaus, dass vermittelt wird, wovon der Verschwörungstheoretiker überzeugt ist.

Umgekehrt lässt sich aber an Anekdoten und Narrative anknüpfen, um den Wert von Impfungen zu zeigen – zum Beispiel, indem Ärzte, die Webseiten betreiben, die Krankheitsgeschichten von Kindern erzählen, die an Pocken starben.

Solche plastischen Darstellungen sind wichtig, um ein Risiko einzuschätzen. Impfkritiker stellen die Risiken, die Impfungen wie alle medizinischen Eingriffe haben, maßlos übertrieben dar. Zugleich sind die schlimmsten Krankheiten, die Impfungen zurück drängten, aus unserem Alltag verschwunden. Dadurch verzerrt sich das Abwägen des Risikos zwischen einer Impfung und dem Ausbruch der Erkrankung.

Soziale Medien

Die sozialen Medien verstärken die Illusion, auf Gebieten Fachwissen zu haben, für die wir uns interessieren. Das Internet fördert Halbwissen: Wer regelmäßig Archäologie online liest, bekommt zwar mehr News aus der Archäologenszene mit als jemand, der davon überhaupt keine Ahnung hat – er ist aber kein Archäologe und weiß nichts von archäologischen Methoden und Beweisführungen.

Selbst ernannte Experten

Ähnlich verhält es sich mit Impfgegnern. Auch wenn sich unter ihnen Ärzte befinden, sind die meisten Laien, die aber einen Großteil ihrer Freizeit in Gedanken zum Thema investieren. So schätzen sie zu Unrecht ihre eigene Kompetenz als hoch ein.

Sie glauben nicht nur, dass „die Ärzte“, die Impfungen befürworten „von der Pharmaindustrie gekauft“ sind, sondern sie denken auch, sie würden mit der evidenzbasierten Medizin auf gleicher Augenhöhe diskutieren.

Das ist vergleichbar mit jemand, der meint, er könne als Architekt arbeiten, weil er ein schönes Gartenhäuschen gebaut hat. Während aber für Außenstehende die materiellen Ergebnisse beim Gartenhausbauer das Gegenteil belegen, fällt das Fehlen von objektiven Belegen und Argumenten bei Impfgegnern für Laien nicht sofort ins Auge.

Zeitgemäße Aufklärung

Die Aufklärung über Impfungen, auch in spielerischer Form, gehört bereits in den Kindergarten und die Grundschule. Unzählige Kinder lernten mit der Geschichte von Karius und Baktus, warum es wichtig ist, sich die Zähne zu putzen.

Dazu müssten Webpräsenzen in den sozialen Medien kommen, die sich explizit an Laien richten und genau die Fragen beantworten, die die Menschen sich stellen. Die Texte müssen auch ausdrücklich die Nebenwirkungen von Impfungen aufzeigen.

Außerdem müssten Ärzte, Apotheker und Hebammen systematisch geschult werden, um Patienten genau über die Wirkung und die Sicherheit der verabreichten Impfstoffe zu informieren. Das bedeutet auch, sie speziell in der Kommunikation zu trainieren.

Kurz gesagt: Wenn jemand sich über Impfungen bisher kein Urteil gebildet hat, ihm Ärzte nicht erklären, wie Impfungen wirken, oder, schlimmer noch, Mitarbeiter der Gesundheitsbehörden skeptische Fragen abwürgen, dann informiert er sich vermutlich bei Freunden und Bekannten oder im Internet. Wenn Menschen schlechte Erfahrung mit Ärzten und Behörden machen, steigert das die Kritik, und die Betroffenen werden empfänglich für die Impfgegner.

Aufklärung muss in jeglicher Hinsicht durch unabhängige Gruppen und Institutionen erfolgen, die keine materiellen Interessen bei Impfungen verfolgen. (Dr. Utz Anhalt)

Author and source information


Video: The Science of Anti-Vaccination (November 2021).