[ad_1]
Despite a slight rise in anti-vaccine legislation proposed by state legislators in recent years, pro-vaccine bills were more likely to be promulgated, according to a new study by researchers from the United States. Drexel University. The results were published this week in the American Journal of Public Health.
"It is rebaduring to know that the legislative process works in favor of public health." It is worrying to see the large number of anti-vaccination bills presented, but our study shows that these bills are rarely adopted. " said the principal investigator of the study. Neal D. Goldstein, PhD, Adjunct Research Professor at Dornsife School of Public Health, Drexel.
The use of non-medical exemptions from vaccination requirements increased by 19% nationwide between 2009 and 2013, which resulted in a resurgence of the disease in communities in the United States . However, anti-vaccination policies and anti-vaccination policies vary considerably from one state to the other. The Drexel study, which badyzed all of the proposed and promulgated state-level vaccines legislation between 2011 and 2017, offers one of the first detailed pictures of the immunization policy climate. from the country.
"If you only look at the laws in force, that's history." But the badysis of the bills gives us an idea of what is happening now and perhaps of what is coming soon, are we seeing trends that could be of concern for the future? " Said Goldstein.
During the seven-year review period, 175 draft laws on immunization exemptions were introduced in state legislatures, their volume having increased significantly over time. In 2011, a total of 14 bills were proposed, compared to 41 in 2017.
The researchers found that the bulk of immunization legislation between 2011 and 2017 had been grouped into four states: New Jersey (29 bills total), New York (28), West Virginia ( 15) and Mississippi (12). New Jersey introduced the largest number of anti-vaccination bills (24), while New York and West Virginia introduced 14.
Of the 175 vaccination bills introduced, 92 (53%) were clbadified as anti-vaccine and 83 (47%) as pro-vaccine. Thirteen of the invoices (7%) were adopted.
Although the majority of proposed laws have expanded access to vaccine exemptions, the draft laws that limit these exemptions (ie, they remove or more difficult to prevent parents from subtracting from school immunization requirements) are significantly more likely to be adopted. law. A single anti-vaccination bill, the 2011 SB5005 bill in Washington, has finally become law. The law has expanded the types of health care providers, beyond the licensed doctors, who could sign a form of immunization exemption.
According to Goldstein, vaccination laws are an important public health protector because so much of the population needs to be vaccinated to prevent outbreaks of contagious diseases. Measles, for example, requires the immunization of about 95% of the population. Those who choose not to immunize their children for non-medical reasons put communities at risk, as evidenced by the country's states experiencing record disease outbreaks this year, said Goldstein.
The recent anti-vaccination movement has grown after a study published in The Lancet in 1997, suggesting a link between MMR (measles, mumps and rubella) and autism spectrum disorder. The study was later debunked and retracted, and its author, Andrew Wakefield, lost his medical license.
However, this has not prevented a small vocal minority of Americans from continuing to spread misinformation about the perceived health risks of vaccines. And Goldstein's recent study shows that this dangerous rhetoric has infiltrated the state legislatures.
The New Jersey Assembly Bill 497, for example, would have exempted children under the age of six from the need to be vaccinated against hepatitis B if the mother of the child had given a negative result. to test for hepatitis B during pregnancy. The bill explicitly linked "multiple sclerosis, chronic arthritis, autism spectrum disorder and diabetes" to "unexpected diseases or unintended consequences badociated with the administration of the hepatitis vaccine B. " There is no scientific evidence to support the claims of the bill, Goldstein said.
"Many of the invoices we saw were clearly not evidence-based," he added. "This gives the opportunity to immunizing constituents to participate in the legislative process and to ensure that state laws reflect the state of science."
Jonathan Purtle, DrPH, Assistant Professor at the Dornsife School of Public Health at Drexel, and Joanna S. Suder, JD, Deputy Attorney General at the Delaware Department of Justice, co-wrote this article.
Source link
