Annotated Bibliography for Vaccines: Stay Safe, Save Lives

Introduction

The issue of vaccination has been a hot debate topic in recent decades with a significant segment of the population advocating for the vaccination with some part of the community rejecting the immunisation. Treatment aims to prevent the recurrence of epidemics such as Measles, polio, hepatitis B, Yellow fever, smallpox, tetanus, and rabies in the lives of people through the induction of the disease-causing antigen to boost the immune system of the individual. On the debate on vaccination, arguments from different scholars give ideas for and against vaccination can be claimed in the following argument statements to be analysed in this annotated bibliography. The following articles were explored to review the author's assertion on the vaccines campaign.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Anderson, V. (2015). Promoting Childhood Immunizations. The Journal For Nurse Practitioners, 11(1), 1-10.

The article, promoting childhood immunisation by Victoria Anderson is a credible source since Mrs. Anderson is a family nurse practitioner in the clinical Department of Radiology and Center of Oncology at the National Health Institute in Bethesda who has 16 years of vast experience in dealing with under-5 child-related health complication. She is also a parent of an autism child, who excludes claims that autism result from vaccination since her child's condition rose at the age of 12 years after immunisation. The article is a peer-review journal and a property of journal of health practitioners thus, it's accepted in the provision of guide on the importance of vaccines on children. The author, Mrs. Anderson, links immunisation with the number of deaths reported before the discovery of the vaccines in the 19th century and after the invention in the 20th century where the mortality rates have significantly reduced. Moreover, Anderson has visualised essential knowledge to the vaccine-hesitant and vaccine resistant parents on the precaution measures that align the administration of vaccines considering the reported risks associated with the vaccines. She claims that vaccines licensing is a procedural process that might take up to 10 years of rigorous review in which the Food and Drugs Authority monitors developmental steps in the formation of the vaccine. Even after licensing, the body takes parts in the strategic monitoring of the safety through the follow-up on the reported feedback from the population. Also, vaccines risks are monitored through a safety report from the manufacturer's inspection. Anderson asserts that the Congress mandated the FDA as the regulator of biologics that include the vaccines. In the regulation of vaccines, the licensure has been spell out in the state's code of Investigation of New Drugs (IND). According to Anderson, "the IND process begins with a sponsor's intention to investigate a substance for the prevention or treatment of human disease. An IND evaluation package includes; vital information on all investigators, initial information of drug, clinical survey design, data collection and analysis on substance in the medicine. The highlighted procedure deployed in the evaluation of the vaccine substances aims to eliminate the suspicion risk in people on the future effects on their children when they get vaccinated. The article's evidence will promote vaccination in children rejecting all false notion that vaccines have harmful substances induced in the bodies of children.

Yaqub, O., Castle-Clarke, S., Sevdalis, N., & Chataway, J. (2014). Attitudes to vaccination: A critical review. Social Science & Medicine, 112, 1-11.

The source on attitudes to vaccination fits to study since it's a work written by a team of experts; Yaqub, a health professor in the University of Sussex, Brighton, Castle-Clarke, a research expert from Rand Corporation. Also, Sevdav is health physician from St. Mary's hospital, Wright Fleming Wing in London, and Chataway a health professor from Sussex University who have written numerous publication in health-related fields. The article reviews the effects of attitudes of both practitioners and parents on vaccination and its implication on vaccination turnouts in hospitals. The authors, Yaqub, Castle-Clarke, Sevdalis, and Chataway assert that personal reason influencing the support for vaccination includes; health practitioners' advice on vaccination, self-protection, benefits from vaccines, prevention of illness susceptibility, and awareness of the vaccines. However, other personal reasons for hesitancy include; cultural norms, religious beliefs, false information and mistrust of pharmaceuticals which prevent people from accessing healthcare for their children. Moreover, the team of experts provides the healthcare profession's attitudes that govern improvement in vaccination which include; the protection of client's and owns health, belief in pros of the vaccine, prevention of risk of disease contraction and the accessibility to the health facility. The information from the article can be used establish models that can build trust in vaccinations eliminating reasons for hesitancy in vaccination. Thus more people will be vaccinated to improve the general health of the public.

Baumgaertner, B., Carlisle, J., & Justwan, F. (2018). The influence of political ideology and trust on the willingness to vaccinate. PLOS ONE, 13(1), e0191728.

The article, the influence of political ideology and trust on the willingness to vaccinate is a stable source of information of connecting the cultures, emotions, religion, and socio-political facets with the rising refusal of parents to protect their children. The authors are professors and social experts from the Department of Politics and Philosophy from the University of Idaho, the US who have studied and explored the relationship of political power in the change of perception of people towards health, specifically vaccination. Baumgaertner, Carlisle, and Justwan denote that the cultural theories, religious beliefs, and socio-political influence the attitudes people will pose governing their willingness to access health facility to vaccinate their children. In essence, decisions regarding vaccination are complex as communities Social and political setting shape their attitudes. Here, the source found differences in intentions to vaccinate among the conservatives and liberals whereby conservatives abide more with the communal verdict, whence would have less intent to treat. Seemingly, people with less trust in the in federal medical facilities won't vaccinate their children. The information provides valuable insight in tackling the growing vaccine refusal through connecting ideology and belief, denoting that there a scientific knowledge gap as people abide by social theories without a scientific proves. Thus, they likely to befell with repercussions from the rejection of vaccines.

Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. (2014). The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions. Plos ONE, 9(2), e89177.

The article, The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions is a credited source since its authors are Psychologists from the University of Kent, the UK who have published numerous peer-reviewed articles and publications in psychology and related medical arenas. The Jolley and Douglas have more than 15 years experience in writing papers that have an enormous acceptance in medics since the source in under the library site of PubMed. The article claims that conspiracy theories such as a belief that vaccine efficacy is configured to increase the manufacturer's profits have led to reduced intentions for vaccination. The approaches exhibit vaccines as a hazard to human health initiating rebellious thought for people to reject them. The authors assert that the vaccines are portrayed powerless in the prevention of the illness while reduction of trust levels in health professions, thus hesitance to vaccines. Furthermore, the article claims that the conspiracy allegations drive in mistrust in scientific knowledge by the provision of counter-claims against any scientific proof on a vaccine. For example, some conspiracy theories claim measles vaccine causes autism in children, a scientifically challenged argument. The misconception brought up by vaccine conspiracy theories can be solved through the establishment of counter-arguments to change the mind of victims of the theories to understand the essence of vaccinations better.

Conclusion

In conclusion, vaccines are scientifically developed to curb mortality rates from vaccine-preventable diseases. People are supposed to accept the vaccination campaigns since there is scientific empirical evidence to claim that the vaccine has had benefits on human health rather than risks. It is, therefore, necessary to inform the population that all arguments against vaccinations are common claims that must be wiped to save the human race from preventable mortality causes. Preferably, a person should take a personal stand and value its health and that of its family to take their children to vaccination. Therefore, it will be vital if decisions on immunization acceptance are made on a personal basis instead of a group's notion on the individual health consideration. Proclaiming a pluralistic thought on anti-vaccination can have profound health effects when the vaccines could have amicably sorted the health risk and saved your life.

References

Anderson, V. (2015). Promoting Childhood Immunizations. The Journal For Nurse Practitioners, 11(1), 1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.nurpra.2014.10.016

Baumgaertner, B., Carlisle, J., & Justwan, F. (2018). The influence of political ideology and trust on the willingness to vaccinate. PLOS ONE, 13(1), e0191728. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191728

Jolley, D., & Douglas, K. (2014). The Effects of Anti-Vaccine Conspiracy Theories on Vaccination Intentions. Plos ONE, 9(2), e89177. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089177

Yaqub, O., Castle-Clarke, S., Sevdalis, N., & Chataway, J. (2014). Attitudes to vaccination: A critical review. Social Science & Medicine, 112, 1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.04.018