Story and science

Abstract

With little or no evidence-based information to back up claims of vaccine danger, anti-vaccine activists have relied on the power of storytelling to infect an entire generation of parents with fear of and doubt about vaccines. These parent accounts of perceived vaccine injury, coupled with Andrew Wakefield’s fraudulent research study linking the MMR vaccine to autism, created a substantial amount of vaccine hesitancy in new parents, which manifests in both vaccine refusal and the adoption of delayed vaccine schedules. The tools used by the medical and public health communities to counteract the anti-vaccine movement include statistics, research, and other evidence-based information, often delivered verbally or in the form of the CDC’s Vaccine Information Statements. This approach may not be effective enough on its own to convince vaccine-hesitant parents that vaccines are safe, effective, and crucial to their children’s health. Utilizing some of the storytelling strategies used by the anti-vaccine movement, in addition to evidence-based vaccine information, could potentially offer providers, public health officials, and pro-vaccine parents an opportunity to mount a much stronger defense against anti-vaccine messaging.

Keywords: :

• vaccines
• anti-vaccine
• social media
• Facebook
• immunization
• vaccine hesitancy
• Andrew Wakefield
• autism

Conflict Of Interest and Financial Disclosure Statement

The authors have no financial relationships with any pharmaceutical company or government agency.

Endnotes

^aBy counter-commentary, we mean specific responses to the individual narrative.

^bThis censorship is in noted contrast to the administration of pro-vaccine pages, which, in general, leave anti-vaccine comments posted in order to allow pro-vaccine parents and individuals with scientific background to correct the misinformation.

^c“Web 2.0 may influence vaccination decisions by delivering information that alters the perceived personal risk of vaccine-preventable diseases or vaccination side-effects. It appears useful for public health officials to put effort into increasing the effectiveness of existing communication by implementing interactive, customized communication. A key step to providing successful public health communication is to identify those who are particularly vulnerable to finding and using unreliable and misleading information.” Betsch, Cornelia, et. al. “Opportunities and challenges of Web 2.0 for vaccination decisions^.” Vaccines. Vol. 30, Issue 25, 28 May 2012, 3727–3733.

^dIt’s worth noting that sometimes such approaches can backfire with anti-vaccine parents, who may characterize such narratives as “bullying.” An anti-vaccine website, The Healthy Home Economist, even offers parents tips on “How to Resist Pediatrician Pro-Vaccine Tactics”: http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/how-to-resist-pediatrician-pro/. We believe storytelling works best with the vaccine-hesitant, not the staunchly anti-vaccine.