References

Cunningham AS Vaccine mandates in the US are doing more harm than good. BMJ. 2015; 351 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h4576

Dudley MZ, Privor-Dumm L, Dubé E, MacDonald NE Words matter: Vaccine hesitancy, vaccine demand, vaccine confidence, herd immunity and mandatory vaccination. Vaccine. 2020; 38:709-711 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.11.056

Pugh J, Savulescu J, Brown RCH, Wilkinson D The unnaturalistic fallacy: COVID-19 vaccine mandates should not discriminate against natural immunity. J Med Ethics. 2022; 48:371-377

Pugh J, Savulescu J, Brown RCH, Wilkinson D The ethics of natural immunity exemptions to vaccine mandates: the Supreme Court petition. J Med Ethics. 2024; 0:1-3 https://doi.org/10.1136/jme-2024-110034

Stead M, Ford A, Eadie D A ‘‘step too far” or ‘‘perfect sense”? A qualitative study of British adults' views on mandating COVID-19 vaccination and vaccine passports. Vaccine. 2022; 40:7389-7396

Vaccine mandates

02 September 2024
Volume 6 · Issue 9

Abstract

In this month's article, George Winter looks at the concept of mandatory vaccination and its role in future pandemics

Almost a decade ago, Cunningham (2015) acknowledged vaccination as one of the major medical advances of modern times but added that ‘public health officials have become intoxicated by success and have lost their sense of perspective.’ Cunningham (2015) not only highlighted ‘the professional and financial incentives that encourage strict adherence to the standard immunization schedule’, but also cited ‘the tendency for officialdom to report the good news about vaccines but not the bad news.’

In 2015, Cunningham's views seemed uncontroversial, including his reflections on mandatory vaccination, where he states that in Canada, in the absence of mandates, 96% of 2-year-olds in Newfoundland and Labrador received the MMR vaccine; however, in the United States ‘the figure is only 86% in West Virginia, which has rigid mandates and no non-medical exemptions’ (Cunningham, 2015).

Five years later the COVID-19 era revealed the fraught relationship between scientific reasoning and political expediency. If Cunningham (2015) had written his commentary in 2020 he would likely have been judged a so-called ‘anti-vaxxer’, despite informing vaccine-related debate with well-informed observations.

Register now to continue reading

Thank you for visiting Journal of Prescribing Practice and reading some of our peer-reviewed resources for prescribing professionals. To read more, please register today. You’ll enjoy the following great benefits:

What's included

  • Limited access to our clinical or professional articles

  • New content and clinical newsletter updates each month