Scan barcode
ginny17's review against another edition
4.0
Science. Science. Science. This book explains how people can get caught up in an idea that has been scientifically disproven again and again. Despite the evidence, I doubt this book will change anyone's mind. People have chosen sides and those who believe vaccines cause autism will likely continue to believe that regardless of the science.
seclement's review against another edition
4.0
When I got this book, I was surprised by how long it was because I naively thought you couldn't write that much just about MMR and autism. Well, of course it turns out that the book was broader than that, and it was such a fascinating read that I flew through it! I thought the author made a really good case, right up front, about why vaccines are important and why there's a particular demographic of people who oppose vaccines (well-educated, middle class or affluent, mistrust of 'the establishment', believers that our health can be cured by will and spiritual healing, etc.). This book is really well-written and researched, and I thought it was a fair account of past and present vaccine controversies. I wish that more people would read it, particularly those on the fence about whether or not to give their kids vaccines. The book reminded me why I despise Oprah so much as well, and the fact that she takes no responsibility for the charlatans she had on her program is infuriating. The book left me with a knot in my stomach, but he did a good job of keeping it on an intellectual level throughout, and I was not nearly as upset while reading most of it as I had anticipated. Still, don't expect a happy ending. If you're living in the world today, you know there isn't a happy ending to this story.
captkaty's review against another edition
5.0
Really excellently researched account of how the supposed link between autism and the MMR vaccine or thimerosal caught on and what the public health repercussions of that are. The author does talk about some mistakes that public health officials made, but does not hold back his fury towards those scientists who completely formulated results for their own financial gain, nor to the media who gave this completely fringe, scientifically unsupported viewpoint a lot of airtime because it made for an interesting story. Also has really interesting stuff about the history of inoculations and vaccinations.
slackermd's review against another edition
5.0
I applaud Mnookin's strenuous research on this subject. I commend his courage to write a book that holds popular Autism organizations and mass media outlets accountable to high standards of scientific research rather than the unprecedented speculations of fringe doctors, "expertise" of celebrities, and emotional accounts of anti-vaccine parents who were promised causes and cures of their children's afflictions.
laurapk's review against another edition
4.0
I listened to the audiobook and found it very easy to follow and overall well written. I wonder if more examples of children injured by vaccine withdrawal would have made the book even more powerful (I always wonder if undecided parents who read these books will be swayed away from the pseudoscientific theories). The author was very good at being brief, although at times I felt like he was also brief with empathy. For example, as much as I'm frustrated with the anti-vaccine movement, I'm also very frustrated with medical indifference. It is a modern problems that doctors are too pressed for time to care, and female patients are often dismissed (and mothers as advocates for children are sometimes dismissed as well). This should be acknowledged, because it takes being very sick to understand how unhelpful doctors can sometimes be, and how tempting it is to turn to the non-medical side for help. Here, the story of parents embracing dieting therapies who discovered that their child's accidental ingestion of gluten had no impact on his progress was very powerful; it showed both the desperate need of parents to improve their children's well being with the tricky business of recognizing what really works and the natural ups and downs of a chronic condition.
If the book suffers somewhere is in the scientific domain. Fortunately the author staid away from hard scientific facts as much as he could, and he usually used explanations provided by specialists. When he tried to explain things himself, he didn't do a very good job. Forget his description of what an antibody is and how it's made. Antibodies don't mold themselves as a mirror to a pathogen. Antibodies also don't have memory, the cells making them (B cells) do. Here's how an antibody is actually made:
B-cells are white blood cells which travel around the body, carrying big proteins on their surface, which are a form of antibody called IgM (M for membrane). These early antibodies are generated at random, kind of like a randomly generated password when you try to setup an account. If the IgM on the surface of a B-cell binds a piece of a potential pathogen (the piece they bind to is often called an antigen), then the cell receives a signal that it's doing a good job, kind of like a job promotion. The B-cell starts to shed IgM (which are big and bulky); the cell also divides and makes more copies of itself. Once a B-cell receives the signal that it bound something well, it triggers a program inside the cell that allows the gene coding the antibody to start mutating randomly. That sounds like a bad idea, but these random mutations will often lead to the creation of new antibodies that bind the antigen even stronger! The stronger the new antibodies bind, the more the B-cell receives signals to keep dividing. Eventually the B-cell gets a promotion and it switches from making bulky antibodies (IgM) to making more slender antibodies (IgG, also known as memory antibodies). The memory is held in the DNA of the B-cell, which becomes a memory B-cell. What about those randomly generated mutations that didn't produce better antibodies? Those B-cells don't receive the nurturing messages to keep making more antibodies and they die within a few days. In order for a B cell to survive and become a memory B-cell it needs to encounter the pathogen/antigen many more times. In case of a real pathogen infection, this happens naturally for a few days/weeks while the immune system clears the pathogen out of the body. With vaccination the repeat exposure is achieved using two methods: 1)ingredients added in the vaccine (also known as adjuvants) that prevent the antigen from being immediately flushed by the body (remember, vaccines are usually made with killed pathogens or pathogens which are so weakened they usually can't make the recipient sick); 2) a booster shot is administered after a few weeks/month to retrain the B-cells.
If the book suffers somewhere is in the scientific domain. Fortunately the author staid away from hard scientific facts as much as he could, and he usually used explanations provided by specialists. When he tried to explain things himself, he didn't do a very good job. Forget his description of what an antibody is and how it's made. Antibodies don't mold themselves as a mirror to a pathogen. Antibodies also don't have memory, the cells making them (B cells) do. Here's how an antibody is actually made:
B-cells are white blood cells which travel around the body, carrying big proteins on their surface, which are a form of antibody called IgM (M for membrane). These early antibodies are generated at random, kind of like a randomly generated password when you try to setup an account. If the IgM on the surface of a B-cell binds a piece of a potential pathogen (the piece they bind to is often called an antigen), then the cell receives a signal that it's doing a good job, kind of like a job promotion. The B-cell starts to shed IgM (which are big and bulky); the cell also divides and makes more copies of itself. Once a B-cell receives the signal that it bound something well, it triggers a program inside the cell that allows the gene coding the antibody to start mutating randomly. That sounds like a bad idea, but these random mutations will often lead to the creation of new antibodies that bind the antigen even stronger! The stronger the new antibodies bind, the more the B-cell receives signals to keep dividing. Eventually the B-cell gets a promotion and it switches from making bulky antibodies (IgM) to making more slender antibodies (IgG, also known as memory antibodies). The memory is held in the DNA of the B-cell, which becomes a memory B-cell. What about those randomly generated mutations that didn't produce better antibodies? Those B-cells don't receive the nurturing messages to keep making more antibodies and they die within a few days. In order for a B cell to survive and become a memory B-cell it needs to encounter the pathogen/antigen many more times. In case of a real pathogen infection, this happens naturally for a few days/weeks while the immune system clears the pathogen out of the body. With vaccination the repeat exposure is achieved using two methods: 1)ingredients added in the vaccine (also known as adjuvants) that prevent the antigen from being immediately flushed by the body (remember, vaccines are usually made with killed pathogens or pathogens which are so weakened they usually can't make the recipient sick); 2) a booster shot is administered after a few weeks/month to retrain the B-cells.
danchibnall's review against another edition
4.0
Seth Mnookin wrote a tremendous book and I am so happy to have read it. This book stands up for science and shows, in great detail, how there are no links between vaccines and autism. The author does a great job of showing the evidence for the benefits of vaccines and how groups claiming vaccines are bad have no evidence at all. The book covers the international epidemiological studies, the Special Masters decision of 2008, the decades of disease prevention, and many, many other examples of science working for the benefit of people.
The author also does an excellent job of highlighting the problems, errors, willful ignorance, and lack of scientific expertise and knowledge of many so-called "experts" on the side of the anti-vaccine crowd. The one figure who needs to apologize to families everywhere is Jenny McCarthy, who continues to spout myths and people believe her.
I'm glad I read this book. I sympathize greatly with families who have autistic children and I hope that they one day find out why their children have this disorder and that they may find a cure or method of prevention. However, until that day arrives I believe that scientific knowledge has shown that there is no link between one of our great achievements, vaccines, and autism.
The author also does an excellent job of highlighting the problems, errors, willful ignorance, and lack of scientific expertise and knowledge of many so-called "experts" on the side of the anti-vaccine crowd. The one figure who needs to apologize to families everywhere is Jenny McCarthy, who continues to spout myths and people believe her.
I'm glad I read this book. I sympathize greatly with families who have autistic children and I hope that they one day find out why their children have this disorder and that they may find a cure or method of prevention. However, until that day arrives I believe that scientific knowledge has shown that there is no link between one of our great achievements, vaccines, and autism.
aubreystapp's review against another edition
5.0
Really excellent, it's soooo nice to have this vaccine controversy cleared up for me, finally. I really love how in depth it goes with all the history and the science behind it all. A must read for everyone!!
kimberly_b's review against another edition
2.0
I wouldn't ordinarily pick up a book like this to read, but I became involved in a vaccine debate with my friend. I read [b:The Vaccine Book: Making the Right Decision for Your Child|779230|The Vaccine Book Making the Right Decision for Your Child|Robert Sears|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1255831544s/779230.jpg|765257] and recommended that she read it, but her child's pediatrician told her to shred it and read this instead. That, of course, piqued my interest so I decided to check out the 'opposition' myself. Let me briefly outline my vaccine beliefs: I don't believe they cause autism per se, I believe in fully vaccinating children (that means having them get ALL the vaccines), BUT I do believe in spreading out the shots so children aren't getting so many all at once (some of them contain a lot of chemicals and regardless of whether they could trigger a neurological or developmental problem I don't think it's healthy to bombard a body with all of that all at once). Back to the book, Mnookin basically presents his research on the vaccine debate to debunk the theory that vaccines are related to autism. He covers from the history of vaccinations to the "mommy wisdom" of Jenny McCarthy and everything in between.
Mnookin is well-written and clearly educated and he presents himself well. His basic stance is that no scientific studies have proven there is a link between vaccines and autism and any individual or societal beliefs otherwise are due to logical fallacies and vaccine related confusion caused by the popular media. Overall, I can't dispute the facts that Mnookin presents, but I did have problems with some of what he writes. For instance, he attacks Dr. Sears and gives an example of one of his patients who brought the measles virus to the US. I'm sorry but last I checked a doctor isn't responsible for a patient's decision, including one not to vaccinate a child even if that does support Mnookin's negative opinion of Dr. Sears. Apparently, the measles outbreak was entirely Sears' fault. I found it ironic that Mnookin talks about how we don't even know what polio is as a society anymore since vaccinations have basically eradicated it, which is the exact same thing that Sears says in The Vaccine Book. Mnookin also talks about an outbreak of pertussis caused by a lack of vaccinated individuals in the region, but he fails to acknowledge that pertussis isn't strictly a childhood illness and that it's equally important for adults to be vaccinated to prevent the spread of the disease (I know first hand how important vaccinating against pertussis is as the child of a preemie who is particularly susceptible to the illness). In the book, Mnookin talks about how shaky case studies are to use in studies (which is true), but he presents case study after case study throughout his book as examples of the tragedies that have occurred when children have caught vaccine preventable diseases. And, to make it more dramatic, he uses case studies where the child dies or falls ill right when they were due for the vaccine that would have prevented them from catching the disease. Despite his efforts, the book certainly has a biased tone. I don't know if all of the autism advocates are as illogical and backwards as the ones he uses examples of, but I doubt it. I wish there were some more moderate people included rather than just the fanatics. Finally, and this is a small gripe, he lumps new carpet and flame retardant in children's clothes with the safety of vaccines. It's a leap. There are issues with both of the former and he shouldn't label them as innocuous unless he wants to back it up with research.
So, after reading both The Vaccine Book and The Panic Virus my opinion on vaccines remains unchanged. I don't see how it can possibly be dangerous to spread out vaccines (weeks or months) and if there is a possibility that it makes it easier on the child then I'm all for it. My daughter has never had a reaction, including a fever, to any vaccines and I personally feel it is due in part to not getting 5 vaccines all at once. I have to give kudos to Mnookin for his research and his well-written text, but I wish he didn't make so many generalizations.
This is a difficult book for me to rate. At first I thought 3 stars would be appropriate because Mnookin has put together a well-written, comprehensive book, but I don't think I can quite say that I 'like' the book. It falls somewhere between 2 and 3 stars for me, but I'm rating it 2.
Mnookin is well-written and clearly educated and he presents himself well. His basic stance is that no scientific studies have proven there is a link between vaccines and autism and any individual or societal beliefs otherwise are due to logical fallacies and vaccine related confusion caused by the popular media. Overall, I can't dispute the facts that Mnookin presents, but I did have problems with some of what he writes. For instance, he attacks Dr. Sears and gives an example of one of his patients who brought the measles virus to the US. I'm sorry but last I checked a doctor isn't responsible for a patient's decision, including one not to vaccinate a child even if that does support Mnookin's negative opinion of Dr. Sears. Apparently, the measles outbreak was entirely Sears' fault. I found it ironic that Mnookin talks about how we don't even know what polio is as a society anymore since vaccinations have basically eradicated it, which is the exact same thing that Sears says in The Vaccine Book. Mnookin also talks about an outbreak of pertussis caused by a lack of vaccinated individuals in the region, but he fails to acknowledge that pertussis isn't strictly a childhood illness and that it's equally important for adults to be vaccinated to prevent the spread of the disease (I know first hand how important vaccinating against pertussis is as the child of a preemie who is particularly susceptible to the illness). In the book, Mnookin talks about how shaky case studies are to use in studies (which is true), but he presents case study after case study throughout his book as examples of the tragedies that have occurred when children have caught vaccine preventable diseases. And, to make it more dramatic, he uses case studies where the child dies or falls ill right when they were due for the vaccine that would have prevented them from catching the disease. Despite his efforts, the book certainly has a biased tone. I don't know if all of the autism advocates are as illogical and backwards as the ones he uses examples of, but I doubt it. I wish there were some more moderate people included rather than just the fanatics. Finally, and this is a small gripe, he lumps new carpet and flame retardant in children's clothes with the safety of vaccines. It's a leap. There are issues with both of the former and he shouldn't label them as innocuous unless he wants to back it up with research.
So, after reading both The Vaccine Book and The Panic Virus my opinion on vaccines remains unchanged. I don't see how it can possibly be dangerous to spread out vaccines (weeks or months) and if there is a possibility that it makes it easier on the child then I'm all for it. My daughter has never had a reaction, including a fever, to any vaccines and I personally feel it is due in part to not getting 5 vaccines all at once. I have to give kudos to Mnookin for his research and his well-written text, but I wish he didn't make so many generalizations.
This is a difficult book for me to rate. At first I thought 3 stars would be appropriate because Mnookin has put together a well-written, comprehensive book, but I don't think I can quite say that I 'like' the book. It falls somewhere between 2 and 3 stars for me, but I'm rating it 2.