How do I talk to someone who is vaccine reticent?

[tjg_marantz]

Mrs tjg and I are visiting my brother and his common law. We see them about twice a year due to distance.

He's a push over and pretty much has no say in anything. It's who he is and has always been. He's 48, has a 17 year old who lives here. She's got her own set of problems but we're trying to be there for her and encourage to be her own woman.

His common law is 42, the baby is now 8 or so months old and it's clear he's her baby. She knits, she hugs trees, she has put herself on gluten free stuff because she's sure she's got intolerances. Tons of vitamins and essential oils and all that natural stuff. A real Calgary (Portland north) tree hugger.

I'm sure this kid will develop allergies from being shielded from a bunch of stuff but I guess that's the least of my worries.

I made the offhand comment of make sure to keep him away from unvaccinated children. And off we go. Long story short, she says she's not anti vaccine but I'll bet anyone a dollar that her search history is not when should I vaccinate my child but rather why shouldn't I vaccinate my child. She says she just reads a lot about problems and deficiency this and deficiency that. We asked her to talk to her pediatrician but we don't think she has one and she believes they're all there to promote big Pharma. I don't disagree that some are but vaccines aren't the same game.

How do I talk to her? I don't want to lose our relationship but this is a pretty fucking big hurdle. I don't want to make her feel like an idiot. I don't want to push her away. But there need to be consequences.

Anyone going through this with someone not completely lost but sceptic?

[Isgrimnur]

Healthy Debate.ca

Bombarding them with facts isn't going to work. You have to tackle it from their viewpoint and lead them to their own conclusions. If you want to take the time and effort, risk failure, and losing contact with your brother over her anger of it.

[Anonymous Bosch]

Tread carefully.

[Kraken]

I read a column by a doctor who encounters anti-vaxxers. He observed that most of them believe in multiple conspiracy theories (because once you accept one, it's a small step to believe another, and so on). Once he gently establishes that a patient also believes that contrails are chem trails, fluoridated water is a commie plot, the media is fake news, etc., he asks them if they've ever considered that anti-vax might be a plot by America's enemies to spread diseases among our population. More than once he's had a parent go wide-eyed and change their mind. His point was that you can't change their beliefs, but sometimes you can use them to your advantage.

[funnygirl]

I read a column by a doctor who encounters anti-vaxxers. He observed that most of them believe in multiple conspiracy theories (because once you accept one, it's a small step to believe another, and so on). Once he gently establishes that a patient also believes that contrails are chem trails, fluoridated water is a commie plot, the media is fake news, etc., he asks them if they've ever considered that anti-vax might be a plot by America's enemies to spread diseases among our population. More than once he's had a parent go wide-eyed and change their mind. His point was that you can't change their beliefs, but sometimes you can use them to your advantage.

Brilliant!

[Moat_Man]

Healthy Debate.ca

Bombarding them with facts isn't going to work. You have to tackle it from their viewpoint and lead them to their own conclusions. If you want to take the time and effort, risk failure, and losing contact with your brother over her anger of it.

I read that page. It makes a lot of sense. I think this is a good mind set to go into the conversation with:

1. Stop thinking of all people who don’t vaccinate as anti-vaxxers
“The anti-vaxxer is a specter,” says Greenberg. “It’s character in a narrative. We often inflate the degree of that problem.” Instead, researchers separate them into two groups: anti-vaxxers, who make up 1 to 3 percent of the population, and the vaccine hesitant, a category up to 30 percent of Canadians fall into. Anti-vaxxers are very hard, if not impossible, to convince, but the vaccine hesitant do seem to change their minds.

[$iljanus]

My mother is about to have her last round of chemo and a few weeks later wanted to go see really close friends in Rockland County NY who are celebrating their 50th anniversary. Rockland County is also a measles hot spot with 254 confirmed cases. Due to the chemo depressing her lymphocyte count she is not able to get a measles vaccine booster shot and is prone to infections. I had to have a gentle argument with her saying that her job was to fight cancer, not cancer and measles. She's rather depressed about not going since it probably would have been a great way to celebrate her fight against cancer and to show that she's still standing.

This is part of the cost of non vaccination. There's no reason why my mom has to fight both breast cancer and a childhood disease that was practically non-existent years ago.

[gameoverman]

This is a tough one for me because I respect the concept of parental rights. Most times it's obvious what stuff should be left to the parents, but this issue is one of those in the grey area. It's very close, in my opinion, to interfering with parental rights for no reason other than disagreeing with the parent's decision. If we are going to do that then we are going to need to step into hundreds of thousands of family lives.

"But there need to be consequences" - what do you mean by that? You see them about twice a year. Your ability to inflict consequences is very limited, unless you have other leverage on them that you didn't mention. At most you can play the "We won't be able to see you" card, which works for her since you're not on her side anyways.

If you mean society should provide the consequences I think that's fair. Something like you don't have to vaccinate your child but if you don't then a lot of places and services are locked off to you. I'm not sure how practical something like that would be, enforcement would be tricky. Not allowing the kids to go to public schools would be an easy one, but I think most of these kinds of parents would be okay with not sending their kid to a public school. Also it's counterproductive to do that, since we want kids in school, not out of it.

My advice is to proceed with the expectation that you will not change her mind and you cannot do anything about this. If society can't strongarm her into doing the right thing, you alone will not be able to do it.

[Pyperkub]

Healthy Debate.ca

Bombarding them with facts isn't going to work. You have to tackle it from their viewpoint and lead them to their own conclusions. If you want to take the time and effort, risk failure, and losing contact with your brother over her anger of it.

I read that page. It makes a lot of sense. I think this is a good mind set to go into the conversation with:

1. Stop thinking of all people who don’t vaccinate as anti-vaxxers
“The anti-vaxxer is a specter,” says Greenberg. “It’s character in a narrative. We often inflate the degree of that problem.” Instead, researchers separate them into two groups: anti-vaxxers, who make up 1 to 3 percent of the population, and the vaccine hesitant, a category up to 30 percent of Canadians fall into. Anti-vaxxers are very hard, if not impossible, to convince, but the vaccine hesitant do seem to change their minds.

The other thing to mention is that the MMR vaccine also serves to boost the immune system against a lot of other issues. It's like steroids for the immune system

[Zarathud]

My father-in-law pointed out the reason why we hear about allergies and intolerances is because science has been able to pinpoint causes and people now talk about their health. Children used to die of unknown causes, known disease or were just "sickly." Children with severe disabilities were sent away or hidden.

[Kasey Chang]

I've been Twitter debating a couple antivaxxers. I know, waste of time. But the arguments pretty much boils down to two things

A) Antivaxxers believe the danger of the vaccines is VASTLY worse than it actually is. Instead of one in a million (or even worse odds), they believe there are tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of "vaccine injured" people out there, with more added daily.

B) Antivaxxers believe that vaccine's effectiveness was exaggerated by "Big Pharma" (aka "vaccines didn't save us") and covered up by medical institution and various governments.

When you combine the two, you get "the alleged benefits of vaccines pales when compared to the potentially deadly risks from vaccine injury".

ALL talking points essentially boil down to these two. All the blab about aluminum adjuvants, ethylmercury (thimerasol), "dead baby DNA", and so on are all basically justifications for (A), and then it's full fact denial mode for (B) (much like Holocaust deniers try to argue their alternate history).

My suggestion is ask about WHY she's reticent / hesitant, then address each of the concerns by listing the pros and cons, with measured odds.

For example: You have a 1 in a million chance of catching encephalopathy from MMR vaccine, or you can take the chance of NOT getting the vaccine and bet on never getting infected, knowing that if you *do* get infected, chances of dying is 1 in 1000, and other complications are much better odds.

[Jaymann]

Ask her if she remembers Shazam starring Sinbad.

[hitbyambulance]

Ask her if she remembers Shazam starring Sinbad.

ok, that's funny

(and i hadn't heard of this one before)

[Alefroth]

I'm sure this kid will develop allergies from being shielded from a bunch of stuff but I guess that's the least of my worries.

I can't help you talk to her, I was just wondering if there was any science behind this.

[Smoove_B]

I can't help you talk to her, I was just wondering if there was any science behind this.

Quite a bit, yes.

According to the ‘hygiene hypothesis’, the decreasing incidence of infections in western countries and more recently in developing countries is at the origin of the increasing incidence of both autoimmune and allergic diseases. The hygiene hypothesis is based upon epidemiological data, particularly migration studies, showing that subjects migrating from a low-incidence to a high-incidence country acquire the immune disorders with a high incidence at the first generation. However, these data and others showing a correlation between high disease incidence and high socio-economic level do not prove a causal link between infections and immune disorders. Proof of principle of the hygiene hypothesis is brought by animal models and to a lesser degree by intervention trials in humans. Underlying mechanisms are multiple and complex. They include decreased consumption of homeostatic factors and immunoregulation, involving various regulatory T cell subsets and Toll-like receptor stimulation. These mechanisms could originate, to some extent, from changes in microbiota caused by changes in lifestyle, particularly in inflammatory bowel diseases. Taken together, these data open new therapeutic perspectives in the prevention of autoimmune and allergic diseases.

The new theory is trending toward the microbiome and I personally find it the most fascinating:

Evidence suggests a combination of strategies, including natural childbirth, breast feeding, increased social exposure through sport, other outdoor activities, less time spent indoors, diet and appropriate antibiotic use, may help restore the microbiome and perhaps reduce risks of allergic disease. Preventive efforts must focus on early life. The term ‘hygiene hypothesis’ must be abandoned. Promotion of a risk assessment approach (targeted hygiene) provides a framework for maximising protection against pathogen exposure while allowing spread of essential microbes between family members. To build on these findings, we must change public, public health and professional perceptions about the microbiome and about hygiene. We need to restore public understanding of hygiene as a means to prevent infectious disease.

[Alefroth]

That was fast. Thanks.

[Smoove_B]

On topic: I wish I had helpful advice. I don't have (that I'm aware of) family members that are against (completely or hesitant) vaccination and I'm not quite sure how I'd handle it if they were. Like Siljanus, my mother also just finished chemo and radiation treatments for breast cancer and thankfully there weren't any issues with illness (above and beyond the treatments). She seemed to understand that avoiding people and places was smart but I also think not feeling great helped.

I have a hard time relating to or understanding those that have issues with vaccines (as you can imagine). I've learned they're more likely to believe some random weirdo on Youtube than an NIH scientist or the CDC with respect to the science of vaccinations - and I don't know how to deal with that.

Good luck.

[Smoove_B]

That was fast. Thanks.

It's something I've been following for the past few years, so yeah. I don't know how much reading you do but there's two great books I've read (well, I'm halfway through the second one) - but they touch on these topics.

I Contain Multitudes by Ed Yong and Never Home Alone. The first one is a bit science-y, so depending on your tolerance or background it might be overwhelming. I really like the second one. Again, neither is specifically about allergies or vaccinations, but they do cover the ideas of disease, illness and the interactions we have with the environment. And there's where I can relate to some of the woo woo I hear from these "all natural" types. I don't use antimicrobial soaps or products in my home; I have been avoiding triclosan for a decade now (because of the antimicrobial issues). I avoid taking antibiotics unless a doctor's tests and DX demand it. But vaccination? No hesitation. None.

[Kraken]

On topic: I wish I had helpful advice. I don't have (that I'm aware of) family members that are against (completely or hesitant) vaccination and I'm not quite sure how I'd handle it if they were.

[Kasey Chang]

FWIW, hygiene hypothesis was proposed like almost 30 years ago. And it's worth pointing out that food allergy remains a first-world problem (as high as 10% in Western societies, while remains 2% or so in rapidly advancing countries like China). Modern theory is the gut biome is a regulator for the immune system. And gut biome imbalance (due to excessive cleanliness) is likely the rise of allergies (which is basically an autoimmune condition).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5320962/

Well, at least that's what I got from reading that article linked.

[gameoverman]

I have a hard time relating to or understanding those that have issues with vaccines (as you can imagine).

I can understand them from one angle- distrust. The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment and the Swine Flu fiasco of the '70s are two items that come to mind. Anyone who approaches anti-vaxxers from the blind trust angle is naive at best. I was a kid for the flu thing but I remember my parents being unimpressed with what went down. They weren't anti-vaxxers but they didn't like the insistence on getting an unnecessary shot and the fact that people got sick from it. Everyone knows the authorities, medical and otherwise, have done experiments on people without the consent of the people. They have lied about what's necessary and what isn't. They have lied about possible dangers.

Now whether, today, you have faith in the medical establishment or not is a decision every adult makes for their self or their kids. For those of us who get vaccinated because we trust them, that's fine. But let's not pretend that the medical establishment hasn't given anti-vaxxers good reason to be distrustful. That's why it's so critical for authorities to not fark the people over, the authorities are going to need that credibility later and they won't have it.

[Kraken]

I read a column by a doctor who encounters anti-vaxxers. He observed that most of them believe in multiple conspiracy theories (because once you accept one, it's a small step to believe another, and so on). Once he gently establishes that a patient also believes that contrails are chem trails, fluoridated water is a commie plot, the media is fake news, etc., he asks them if they've ever considered that anti-vax might be a plot by America's enemies to spread diseases among our population. More than once he's had a parent go wide-eyed and change their mind. His point was that you can't change their beliefs, but sometimes you can use them to your advantage.

Brilliant!

I found the post. I got the gist of it right but misremembered some details.

[dbt1949]

Steal their children and vaccinate them on your own and then sell them to somebody who has common sense.

[tjg_marantz]

Thank you all. Still not sure what I'll do but lots of insightful stuff.