IMMUNIZATION
Article about dangers cherry-picked its facts
A Sept. 26 Short Take regarding the human papillomavirus vaccine ("Media should take a closer look") did more to incite hysteria than to inform readers of the vaccine's negative effects.
The article's author provided statistics about complaints related to the HPV vaccine without any context and with a clear bias.
For example, she failed to mention that the vaccine has been given an estimated 40 million times. Only one in every 2,000 persons being vaccinated reported adverse effects, and fewer yet reported severe effects.
The article provided no context for the chances of the vaccine and the adverse effects simply occurring at the same time with no causal medical relationship.
A 2009 article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association concluded that the vaccine did not result in higher adverse effects rates than did most other vaccines, except in two categories, ones that the article did not mention at all.
Some of the deaths reported after the vaccines were conclusively attributed to other issues (such as prescription-drug abuse).
Any scientific and medical misinformation that is provided to the public is a great disservice.
But biased and deliberately misleading medical information, provided by someone who clearly has all of the facts and chooses to omit some of them, is an especially egregious and sinister means to achieve a dubious goal.