DrEllenV

I think if it conflicts with their religious beliefs, that is their belief and should be respected, but they should find another profession which does not conflict with their religious beliefs. Remember that if they get the flu they will spread it through an entire hospital population of already sick patients. A key feature of religious freedom and tolerance is not to force the consequences of your religious beliefs on others.

Jenny McCarthy should take an immunology course. Vaccines are the most effective way to protect against deadly diseases. Prevention of disease is ALWAYS far better than treatment. Vaccines don't cause autism, although some people do have mild side-effects. These side effects are due to your immune system and are a good sign. People who claim that vaccines are bad simply don't know what they're talking about. In my mind, the question is really how early to start vaccinations in children, and there is some controversy in this area. For example, it could be argued that vaccines given too early are not as effective on the developing immune system, and could predispose a child to allergy (although this too is controversial). A much bigger problem, though, is all the anti-vaccine hype in the media, which causes parents to wait far too long to vaccinate their children (or not vaccinate at all)... this puts their children at huge risk of infection.

Most memorable project... probably the one that everyone said wouldn't work, and then I proved did! Scientists are notorious nay-sayers, until something is accomplished, and then they say it was obvious anyway! :-)

We already have them in the form of nasal sprays (influenza) and sugar-cubes (polio). Trans-dermal patches are not far away. It may be possible in the future to put vaccines in food!

There is too much pressure on scientists to publish in order to get funding and promotion. I've been seeing an increase in the incidence of scientific fraud as funding dries up and grants become more competitive. Therefore, they often will take shortcuts in reproducing their own experiments, publish too early, or cherry-pick data to support their claims. This wastes money and time, since others can't reproduce their work, and this gives false hope to the American public. If nothing else it is better to be thorough and honest rather than famous.

I would point out that there is no advantage for scientists or pharma or government to lie to people about vaccines. Vaccines, if you pull a big-pharma financial statement and look at it, are not big money-makers. In fact the government often has to FIND and PAY companies to make vaccines AT ALL, because they're not otherwise profitable. By contrast, the people who trash vaccines are generally benefiting from the media exposure. That's the best non-science argument I can make.

In general, if a vaccine has been approved by the FDA and used in the population for several years, you can say it is safe. There is always the possibility that in 30 years your ear will turn purple and if/when that happens the vaccine will be withdrawn.