Vaccines are actually very safe, despite implications to the contrary in many anti-vaccine publications (which sometimes contain the number of reports received by VAERS, and allow the reader to infer that all of them represent genuine vaccine side-effects). Most vaccine adverse events are minor and temporary, such as a sore arm or mild fever. These can often be controlled by taking acetaminophen before or after vaccination. More serious adverse events occur rarely (on the order of one per thousands to one per millions of doses), and some are so rare that risk cannot be accurately assessed. As for vaccines causing death, again so few deaths can plausibly be attributed to vaccines that it is hard to assess the risk statistically. Of all deaths reported to VAERS between 1990 and 1992, only one is believed to be even possibly associated with a vaccine. Each death reported to VAERS is thoroughly examined to ensure that it is not related to a new vaccine-related problem, but little or no evidence suggests that vaccines have contributed to any of the reported deaths. The Institute of Medicine in its 1994 report states that the risk of death from vaccines is "extraordinarily low."
One myth that won't seem to go away is that DTaP vaccine causes sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). This belief came about because a moderate proportion of children who die of SIDS have recently been vaccinated with DTaP; and on the surface, this seems to point toward a causal connection. But this logic is faulty; you might as well say that eating bread causes car crashes, since most drivers who crash their cars had probably eaten bread within the past 24 hours.
If you consider that most SIDS deaths occur during the age range when 3 shots of DTaP are given, you would expect DTaP shots to precede a fair number of SIDS deaths simply by chance. In fact, when a number of well-controlled studies were conducted during the 1980s, the investigators found, nearly unanimously, that the number of SIDS deaths temporally associated with DTP vaccination was within the range expected to occur by chance. In other words, the SIDS deaths would have occurred even if no vaccinations had been given. In several of the studies, children who had recently gotten a DTaP shot were less likely to get SIDS. The Institute of Medicine reported that "all controlled studies that have compared immunized versus nonimmunized children have found either no association . . . or a decreased risk . . . of SIDS among immunized children" and concluded that "the evidence does not indicate a causal relation between [DTaP] vaccine and SIDS."
Even one serious adverse event in a million doses of vaccine cannot be justified if there is no benefit from the vaccination. If there were no vaccines, there would be many more cases of disease, and along with the more disease, there would be serious sequelae and more deaths. But looking at risk alone is not enough - you must always look at both risks and benefits. Comparing the risk from disease with the risk from the vaccines can give us an idea of the benefits we get from vaccinating our children.
Measles
Pneumonia: 6 in 100
Encephalitis: 1 in 1,000
Death: 2 in 1,000
Rubella
Congenital Rubella Syndrome: 1 in 4 (if woman becomes infected early in pregnancy)
MMR
Encephalitis or severe allergic reaction:
1 in 1,000,000
Diphtheria
Death: 1 in 20
Tetanus
Death: 2 in 10
Pertussis
Pneumonia: 1 in 8
Encephalitis: 1 in 20
Death: 1 in 1,500
DTaP
Continuous crying, then full recovery: 1 in 1000
Convulsions or shock, then full recovery: 1 in 14,000
Acute encephalopathy: 0-10.5 in 1,000,000
Death: None proven
The fact is that a child is far more likely to be seriously injured by one of these diseases than by any vaccine. While any serious injury or death caused by vaccines is too many, it is also clear that the benefits of vaccination greatly outweigh the slight risk, and that many, many more injuries and deaths would occur without vaccinations. In fact, to have a medical intervention as effective as vaccination in preventing disease and not use it would be unconscionable.
Research is underway by the U.S. Public Health Service to better understand which vaccine adverse events are truly caused by vaccines and how to reduce even further the already low risk of serious vaccine-related injury.
Institute of Psychiatry, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
OBJECTIVE: A link has been postulated between measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and a form of autism that is a combination of developmental regression and gastrointestinal symptoms that occur shortly after immunization. This hypothesis has involved 3 separate claims: 1) that there is new phenotype of autism involving regression and gastrointestinal symptoms, 2) that this new variant is responsible for the alleged rise of autism rates, and 3) that this phenotype is associated with biological findings suggestive of the persistence of measles infection. We tested the first of these claims. If this new "autistic enterocolitis" syndrome had some validity, then 1 or several of the following 6 predictions should be supported by empirical data: 1) childhood disintegrative disorder has become more frequent, 2) the mean age of first parental concern for autistic children who are exposed to MMR is closer to the mean immunization age than in children who are not exposed to MMR, 3) regression in the development of children with autism has become more common in MMR-vaccinated children, 4) the age of onset for autistic children with regression clusters around the MMR immunization date and is different from that of autistic children without regression, 5) children with regressive autism have distinct symptom and severity profiles, and 6) regressive autism is associated with gastrointestinal symptoms and/or inflammatory bowel disorder. METHODS: Three samples were used. Epidemiologic data on 96 children (95 immunized with MMR at a median age of 13.5 months) who were born between 1992 and 1995 and had a pervasive developmental disorder diagnosis as reported in a recent UK survey (post-MMR sample) were compared with data from 2 previous clinical samples (1 pre-MMR [n = 98] and 1 post-MMR [n = 68]) of autistic patients. All patients were assessed with the standardized Autism Diagnostic Interview (ADI), allowing rigorous comparison of age at first parental concerns and rates of regression across samples. Reliability was excellent on ADI scores, age of parental concern, and developmental regression. Furthermore, data on bowel symptoms and disorders were available in the epidemiologic survey from both pediatric and parental sources, and immunization dates were obtained from computerized records. RESULTS: The prevalence of childhood disintegrative disorder was 0.6/10 000 (95% confidence interval: 0.02-3.6/10 000); this very low rate is consistent with previous estimates and is not suggestive of an increased frequency of this form of pervasive developmental disorder in samples of children who are immunized with MMR. There was no difference in the mean age at first parental concern between the 2 samples exposed to MMR (19.3 and 19.2 months) and the pre-MMR sample (19.5 months). Thus, MMR immunization was not associated with a shift toward an earlier age for first parental concerns. Similarly, the rate of developmental regression reported in the post-MMR sample (15.6%) was not different from that in the pre-MMR sample (18.4%); therefore, there was no suggestion that regression in the developmental course of autism had increased in frequency since MMR was introduced. In the epidemiologic sample, the subset of autistic children with regression had no other developmental or clinical characteristics, which would have argued for a specific, etiologically distinct phenotype. Parents of autistic children with developmental regression detected the first symptoms at a very similar age (19.8 months) to those of autistic children without regression (19.3 months). Moreover, the mean intervals from MMR immunization to parental recognition of autistic symptoms were comparable in autistic children with or without regression (248 vs 272 days; not significant). In the epidemiologic sample, gastrointestinal symptoms were reported in 18.8% of children. Constipation was the most common symptom (9.4%), and no inflammatory bowel disorder was reported. Furthermore, there was no association between developmental regression and gastrointestinal symptoms (odds ratio: 0.63; 95% confidence interval: 0.06-3.2; not significant), and only 2.1% of the sample experienced both problems, a rate that did not exceed chance expectations. CONCLUSIONS: No evidence was found to support a distinct syndrome of MMR-induced autism or of "autistic enterocolitis." These results add to the recent accumulation of large-scale epidemiologic studies that all failed to support an association between MMR and autism at population level. When combined, the current findings do not argue for changes in current immunization programs and recommendations.
PMID: 11581466 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]