What do you think?
Rate this book
Vaccine: The Controversial Story of Medicine's Greatest Lifesaver
A fascinating account of vaccination's miraculous, inflammatory past and its uncertain future.
In 1796, as smallpox ravaged Europe, Edward Jenner injected a child with a benign version of the disease, then exposed the child to the deadly virus itself. The boy proved resistant to smallpox, and Jenner's risky experiment produced the earliest vaccination. In this deftly written account, journalist Arthur Allen reveals a history of vaccination that is both illuminated with hope and shrouded by controversy—from Jenner's discovery to Pasteur's vaccines for rabies and cholera, to those that safeguarded the children of the twentieth century, and finally to the tumult currently surrounding vaccination.
Faced with threats from anthrax to AIDS, we are a vulnerable population and can no longer depend on vaccines; numerous studies have linked childhood vaccination with various neurological disorders, and our pharmaceutical companies are more attracted to the profits of treatment than to the prevention of disease. With narrative grace and investigative journalism, Allen explores our shifting understanding of vaccination since its creation. 16 pages of illustrations.
In 1796, as smallpox ravaged Europe, Edward Jenner injected a child with a benign version of the disease, then exposed the child to the deadly virus itself. The boy proved resistant to smallpox, and Jenner's risky experiment produced the earliest vaccination. In this deftly written account, journalist Arthur Allen reveals a history of vaccination that is both illuminated with hope and shrouded by controversy—from Jenner's discovery to Pasteur's vaccines for rabies and cholera, to those that safeguarded the children of the twentieth century, and finally to the tumult currently surrounding vaccination.
Faced with threats from anthrax to AIDS, we are a vulnerable population and can no longer depend on vaccines; numerous studies have linked childhood vaccination with various neurological disorders, and our pharmaceutical companies are more attracted to the profits of treatment than to the prevention of disease. With narrative grace and investigative journalism, Allen explores our shifting understanding of vaccination since its creation. 16 pages of illustrations.
512 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2007
32 people are currently reading
1903 people want to read
About the author
Arthur Allen
17 books10 followersArthur Allen, a former Associated Press foreign correspondent, has written for The New York Times Magazine, The New Republic, The Washington Post, The Atlantic Monthly, and Salon. He lives in Washington, D.C., where he is an editor and writer for POLITICO.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews
January 2, 2010
This book was at different times: boring, informative, interesting and confusing. Certain chapters focused on science, others on public health & science policy, and others on the drawbacks of the ease of communication made by the internet.
Ultimately I didn't feel that Allen was presenting a completely objective perspective, but this may be fair considering the statistics he presents do reveal that vaccinations are ultimately effective and have increased the safety of the population - though there are still risks involved.
I watched Food Inc. a few weeks ago and was rather compelled as the mother of a son who died from e. coli poisoning lamented how the food industry never apologized or even acknowledged their fault. I can easily imagine how the diptheria vdo that was released, or if one were to be released by Jenny McCarthy or other parents of autistic children could be just as convincing. However, as Allen described, 13 parents with similar experiences barely qualify as a statistic out of the millions who get vaccinated every year.
Ultimately I didn't feel that Allen was presenting a completely objective perspective, but this may be fair considering the statistics he presents do reveal that vaccinations are ultimately effective and have increased the safety of the population - though there are still risks involved.
I watched Food Inc. a few weeks ago and was rather compelled as the mother of a son who died from e. coli poisoning lamented how the food industry never apologized or even acknowledged their fault. I can easily imagine how the diptheria vdo that was released, or if one were to be released by Jenny McCarthy or other parents of autistic children could be just as convincing. However, as Allen described, 13 parents with similar experiences barely qualify as a statistic out of the millions who get vaccinated every year.
March 10, 2012
When I finished Vaccine, it seemed like I’d been reading it for months. In fact, I had been-this book took me forever and a day to finish and if it weren’t my intense fascination with the subject material, I don’t know if I would have made it through. That’s not necessarily a dig at the book, but many parts of it were definitely more exhaustive than I was looking for at the moment. It’s apparent that Arthur Allen spent a great amount of time and effort writing this book and although it’s more of a popular narrative history, it’s also much more in-depth and occasionally dry than many other history books intended for a general audience.
I think what I appreciated most about this book was how clearly it illustrated that the arguments for and against vaccination haven’t changed that much since the debate began with cow pox vaccination. The logic against vaccines (polluting the blood, not as good as “natural immunity” etc.) are arguments I see over and over again at the anti-vaccine sites on facebook, mostly declared without much background knowledge of how these arguments were developed and used through time. I also appreciated Allen’s coverage of how many pro-vaccine advocates were more than willing to overlook possible negative reactions attributed to their vaccines and I feel that this part of the story needs to be told as well. If those who speak up for vaccines' safety and importance seek to counteract the anti-vaccine crowd's accusations, we must have an accurate understanding of where pro-vaccine scientists and policy-makers have messed up in the past.(That said, I feel completely confident that the current system of vaccine regulation in the United States may not be perfect but it protects citizens-I don’t believe there are hidden legions of “vaccine injured” children suffering in silence.)
I also liked Allen’s detailed accounting of the vaccine industry in America. One of the most common arguments I see is that vaccines are a Big Pharma cash cow but it’s obvious that pharmaceutical companies are by and large not profiting from developing and producing immunizations. I was often bored and overwhelmed by the hundreds of people Allen talks about as I’m not that interested in who developed which vaccine but on the flipside, I did appreciate his exhaustive research about individuals because I was very intrigued by what seemed like rather high numbers of women working to develop vaccines, particularly in the twentieth century. I wonder if vaccinology had more women in its ranks because vaccines are primarily developed for and given to children, who are often seen as part of women’s realm.
Vaccine isn’t a page turner but it is an interesting and worthwhile read for anyone looking to gain a broad understanding of immunization’s history, both how the vaccines themselves were developed as well as the minority reactions to the practice of immunization through time.
I think what I appreciated most about this book was how clearly it illustrated that the arguments for and against vaccination haven’t changed that much since the debate began with cow pox vaccination. The logic against vaccines (polluting the blood, not as good as “natural immunity” etc.) are arguments I see over and over again at the anti-vaccine sites on facebook, mostly declared without much background knowledge of how these arguments were developed and used through time. I also appreciated Allen’s coverage of how many pro-vaccine advocates were more than willing to overlook possible negative reactions attributed to their vaccines and I feel that this part of the story needs to be told as well. If those who speak up for vaccines' safety and importance seek to counteract the anti-vaccine crowd's accusations, we must have an accurate understanding of where pro-vaccine scientists and policy-makers have messed up in the past.(That said, I feel completely confident that the current system of vaccine regulation in the United States may not be perfect but it protects citizens-I don’t believe there are hidden legions of “vaccine injured” children suffering in silence.)
I also liked Allen’s detailed accounting of the vaccine industry in America. One of the most common arguments I see is that vaccines are a Big Pharma cash cow but it’s obvious that pharmaceutical companies are by and large not profiting from developing and producing immunizations. I was often bored and overwhelmed by the hundreds of people Allen talks about as I’m not that interested in who developed which vaccine but on the flipside, I did appreciate his exhaustive research about individuals because I was very intrigued by what seemed like rather high numbers of women working to develop vaccines, particularly in the twentieth century. I wonder if vaccinology had more women in its ranks because vaccines are primarily developed for and given to children, who are often seen as part of women’s realm.
Vaccine isn’t a page turner but it is an interesting and worthwhile read for anyone looking to gain a broad understanding of immunization’s history, both how the vaccines themselves were developed as well as the minority reactions to the practice of immunization through time.
December 11, 2021
This was a really, really thorough discussion of the cultural and political pressures that affected the development of vaccines, starting with smallpox variolation and moving on through to the early 2000s (the book was published in 2007). I think what was most eye-opening about the history was the following three facts:
(1) Vaccines were always political, even back when people were sending cow-udder pus through the mail to get cowpox protection from smallpox (some good stories there--doctors would bring cowpoxy cows into inner London to reassure residents that the cowpox vaccine was all natural, freshly scraped from a pus-covered cow udder).
(2) Vaccines were most definitely not always safe and effective, especially pertussis, which had some really severe side-effects right around the time I was getting the shots in the 1980s.
(3) Vaccines are terrible business for vaccine-manufacturers, especially as more and more regulations were put in place to address (2) above. Governments should definitely take over the job of manufacturing vaccines so that the manufacturers themselves don't quit the business and leave the country high and dry.
Of course, vaccines have taken on a new importance in the public eye recently, so maybe the manufacturers of other vaccines will feel more confident entering that market, but even so: I was really struck by how political resistance had dogged vaccine development and distribution for the entire history of the practice. It's not new to Wakefield and the autism hoax.
(1) Vaccines were always political, even back when people were sending cow-udder pus through the mail to get cowpox protection from smallpox (some good stories there--doctors would bring cowpoxy cows into inner London to reassure residents that the cowpox vaccine was all natural, freshly scraped from a pus-covered cow udder).
(2) Vaccines were most definitely not always safe and effective, especially pertussis, which had some really severe side-effects right around the time I was getting the shots in the 1980s.
(3) Vaccines are terrible business for vaccine-manufacturers, especially as more and more regulations were put in place to address (2) above. Governments should definitely take over the job of manufacturing vaccines so that the manufacturers themselves don't quit the business and leave the country high and dry.
Of course, vaccines have taken on a new importance in the public eye recently, so maybe the manufacturers of other vaccines will feel more confident entering that market, but even so: I was really struck by how political resistance had dogged vaccine development and distribution for the entire history of the practice. It's not new to Wakefield and the autism hoax.
August 31, 2011
Gah! I don't give a toss about how this or that researcher look like or how he's driven his wife mad to the point that she's comitted suicide!
Neither do I care much about the vaccines developers'politics if it has nothing to do with the outcome of the vaccine's safety/ efficacy.
I want to read about how the vaccines are developped, what were the pitfalls & side effets, how they were tested & whether or not I can trust the ones that are used now. Internationally. Not just in the USofA.
I still have about a quarter of the book to go. It has been such a hard work so far.
Waaay too much faff & unnecessary details about how this and that researcher look like, all the details that are too distracting and to be frank are just plain annoying! Grrr!
Neither do I care much about the vaccines developers'politics if it has nothing to do with the outcome of the vaccine's safety/ efficacy.
I want to read about how the vaccines are developped, what were the pitfalls & side effets, how they were tested & whether or not I can trust the ones that are used now. Internationally. Not just in the USofA.
I still have about a quarter of the book to go. It has been such a hard work so far.
Waaay too much faff & unnecessary details about how this and that researcher look like, all the details that are too distracting and to be frank are just plain annoying! Grrr!
December 19, 2017
Highly intriguing read! From the initial work of Jenner and variolation to the contemporary (unfounded) controversy surrounding autism, Allen takes an honest look at the History of Vaccination.
He looks at the personal stories behind some of the pillars of vaccination thereby illuminating some of the darker sides behind this particular scientific enterprise. It might seem a bit lengthy and detailed in its narrative on occasions, but is nevertheless a fantastic read.
If you stick at it, you will have a better overall understanding of the Vaccine field.
He looks at the personal stories behind some of the pillars of vaccination thereby illuminating some of the darker sides behind this particular scientific enterprise. It might seem a bit lengthy and detailed in its narrative on occasions, but is nevertheless a fantastic read.
If you stick at it, you will have a better overall understanding of the Vaccine field.
September 10, 2020
The book is more on the heavy side to read which is obvious given the subject and the length of the book. However, I must say the last chapters I read in two nights not wanting to stop as it gives a lot of information about the development since approx. the 1960s. The Author is totally right saying to look at vaccines one need to look at the history of vaccines. I had the impression the Author tried to keep a rational/neutral position and stuck to facts. A book about the subject that differs to fiction would be a waste of time to read, hence a good choice.
Apart from many new aspects, different opinions, viewpoints etc, there seems to be one consistent fact, true throughout all times:
Hastily produced vaccines mostly fail (not enough test, side effects, contamination etc). To rush in over a fear, that might be not even justified, can not be an informed decision.
And one case worthwhile revisiting: The Prince v Commonwealth of Massachusetts 1944 case (p.295): it was judged that:
parents may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow that they are free…to make martyrs of their children. I would rephrase this to: Politicians may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow that they are free…to make martyrs of the people.
The history of Vaccine can be divided into three phases.
Phase 1: when disease as a passive experience was overcome and doctors started trying to prevent diseases on a larger scale. These were very lethal diseases that killed as much as 1 in 4 of the population (pls don’t hold me accountable on the exact numbers, I quote as I remember which is approximate) and tough living conditions. The Pox being the most prominent one. It shows that the approach was if we look at it in retrospective, very cowboy-style, but wonderful for humankind as they managed to almost vanquish dreadful diseases that claimed lives regardless of age, background etc.
The Author also points out there was a significant positive influence eradicating sickness by the second movement that took place parallel to vaccination: more clean milk and water and better living conditions. Absence of clean water and filth creates epidemics. This remains very relevant for discussions about vaccines today and the third world.
Phase 2 starts with the victory over smallpox.
Vaccines against illnesses with high case-fatality ratio such as Diphteria, Tetanus, Polio, Hepatitis and Meningitis were still found in the 1920s/60s.
However, running out of germs, research in this period shifted towards viruses with a lower fatality ratio (provided clean conditions) such as measles, pertussis, rubella, whooping cough.
Before the vaccines, these sicknesses were something unpleasant, the child contracted once and then was immune. In spite of the low fatality rate these vaccines became mandatory for children in the US and EU in the 1980s.
This is where the controversy starts becoming multi-layered.
In brief: the benefits lower and the risks remain or even increase.
There is:
- Vaccine-induced cases (polio e.g.)
- Side and long-term effects
- new research shows obesity, diabetes 2, metabolic syndrome are inflammatory conditions and vaccines are inducing inflammation and therefore the epidemic of these diseases (not in the book but worth mentioning)
- sicknesses lesser people are prone to get and/or less dangerous, but still necessary to vaccinate all (aka exposing them to the risks) to benefit those very few. FDA approval of varicella after only 1000 tests (p314)
- importance of maternal antibodies
- chicken pox vaccine pro argument: most women work and can not afford to stay home for a week. Is a society truly advanced when a Mum can not afford to stay home with her child even when it is sick?
- Vaccine-induced immunity is imperfect
- Argument of bioterrorism I found not legitimate as terrorist can always find another way
Phase 3: after 2000
It gets very political:
Who should put up with the complications and who should be saved?
Furthermore - Who should decide this?
Here some vs the book shows:
The Developed World vs the Third World:
Fatality rates differ wildly within the first and third world countries, but the risks remain. Another interesting aspect is that the success of the vaccine/number of shots necessary can be different for people on different continents.
Since there is a lot of research money out there, scientists focus on vaccines. This takes the money away though from other, maybe more efficient measures that should be undertaken in the Third World first, namely our Phase 1 cleaner living conditions should be implemented first before one thinks of vaccines?
More money in vaccine research than in cleaner living conditions is not ideal as well as the fact that companies often only get the development costs back if the vaccine is in universal use in first world countries (e.g. Rotavirus nearly no death in the developed world). Hence one could say the US /Western population is used as guinea pigs for vaccines that are not necessary for them by calling them “pioneers”. Here is played on the moral duty to help the less fortunate and react with compassion and generosity rather than protect themselves, their families, society and country. However, wouldn’t one think the government should put their own people first? Or would we vote for a government that puts worldwide health before the countrywide health? Or would it be ok for the minority to participate if the majority would vote for such a government? Society is based on trust in the government to safeguard each individual.
Majority vs Minority:
return is limited and the risk stays, longer trials should be mandatory if a vaccine then drops out hence not profitable maybe focus on other fields.
Children vs Old People:
Vaccinate the young - and thereby let them cope with the risks - to keep the old health even if the health of the young determines the future?
The book uses flu vaccination as an example. It lists data according to which the best solution would be to vaccinate the young who are not at risk and expose them to the vaccine risks. Here danger to the kids/young people is accepted to safe the old and weak.
This is a new trend, very much in the limelight now because of covid. It is simply an act against nature and the arrogance of a few people in power to decide whose life/quality of life is more important. Here a line should be drawn for medicine to interfere with nature (my opinion, don’t blame the author).
A second aspect is: vaccinate the kids so they are safe in their childhood, but might not as adults as the vaccine wears off. Children illnesses now are contracted as adults. So kids are exposed to the risk of vaccine, then get it anyways as an adult when possibly they can cope less well, plus no maternal immunity.
The Holy vs the Unholy:
Ideological blinders were totally understandable in the Middle Ages but in an educated information society?
Epidemics as a divine judgement and an opportunity for repentance, e.g. self-flagellation of traveling rich men during the pest. Is there an element of this in the lockdown and fun-limiting measures imposed on everyone against covid? Is it still today difficult to acknowledge rationality.
If sickness and suffering is seen subconsciously still as a way to spiritual development and purity isn’t wearing a mask and a restricted life style a welcome act of repentance? A holier than thou (I am better than you statement).
The Worthy vs the Unworthy:
The Hepatitis vaccine an example for people not wanting a vaccine for certain clearly more dangerous diseases than the whooping cough as it affects mostly people with life-style choices they don’t condone. Here the Author rightly states that Public Health has to deal with the society how it is and not how it ought to be. Stigmatizimg groups and denial is not a base for Public Health decisions.
Progress vs Stagnation:
The book also points to the Future and the author hints that there is room for improvement of Public Health beyond vaccines.
The visionary is Pasteur who regretted not to have done more research on his silk worms; meaning research on the impact of environmental conditions with the goal to increase vigour and resistance of the population.
A modern society shouldn’t stop progressing. A future goal could be healthy immune systems of the individuals and mental regress. Developed Countries are far from perfect and have the option to look beyond simple survival towards creating a base for lives worth living.
With modern technology, systems can be adapted much faster than ever. There is no forever routine: Once the illness is vanquished, stop the vaccination, closely monitor and revise if necessary.
Cost-benefit analysis should be made and one point is particularly mentionable: Is it worth the risks of a vaccination when at stake there are simply the costs of more doctor visits and hospital stays, but no fatalities and very low long-term effects on the sick person? In a modern society with high taxes maybe we should be entitled to that privilege? Or it could be a goal? As well as housing that improve ones health (materials, isolation, lightning), a clean sewage system, easy admin etc.
Apart from many new aspects, different opinions, viewpoints etc, there seems to be one consistent fact, true throughout all times:
Hastily produced vaccines mostly fail (not enough test, side effects, contamination etc). To rush in over a fear, that might be not even justified, can not be an informed decision.
And one case worthwhile revisiting: The Prince v Commonwealth of Massachusetts 1944 case (p.295): it was judged that:
parents may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow that they are free…to make martyrs of their children. I would rephrase this to: Politicians may be free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow that they are free…to make martyrs of the people.
The history of Vaccine can be divided into three phases.
Phase 1: when disease as a passive experience was overcome and doctors started trying to prevent diseases on a larger scale. These were very lethal diseases that killed as much as 1 in 4 of the population (pls don’t hold me accountable on the exact numbers, I quote as I remember which is approximate) and tough living conditions. The Pox being the most prominent one. It shows that the approach was if we look at it in retrospective, very cowboy-style, but wonderful for humankind as they managed to almost vanquish dreadful diseases that claimed lives regardless of age, background etc.
The Author also points out there was a significant positive influence eradicating sickness by the second movement that took place parallel to vaccination: more clean milk and water and better living conditions. Absence of clean water and filth creates epidemics. This remains very relevant for discussions about vaccines today and the third world.
Phase 2 starts with the victory over smallpox.
Vaccines against illnesses with high case-fatality ratio such as Diphteria, Tetanus, Polio, Hepatitis and Meningitis were still found in the 1920s/60s.
However, running out of germs, research in this period shifted towards viruses with a lower fatality ratio (provided clean conditions) such as measles, pertussis, rubella, whooping cough.
Before the vaccines, these sicknesses were something unpleasant, the child contracted once and then was immune. In spite of the low fatality rate these vaccines became mandatory for children in the US and EU in the 1980s.
This is where the controversy starts becoming multi-layered.
In brief: the benefits lower and the risks remain or even increase.
There is:
- Vaccine-induced cases (polio e.g.)
- Side and long-term effects
- new research shows obesity, diabetes 2, metabolic syndrome are inflammatory conditions and vaccines are inducing inflammation and therefore the epidemic of these diseases (not in the book but worth mentioning)
- sicknesses lesser people are prone to get and/or less dangerous, but still necessary to vaccinate all (aka exposing them to the risks) to benefit those very few. FDA approval of varicella after only 1000 tests (p314)
- importance of maternal antibodies
- chicken pox vaccine pro argument: most women work and can not afford to stay home for a week. Is a society truly advanced when a Mum can not afford to stay home with her child even when it is sick?
- Vaccine-induced immunity is imperfect
- Argument of bioterrorism I found not legitimate as terrorist can always find another way
Phase 3: after 2000
It gets very political:
Who should put up with the complications and who should be saved?
Furthermore - Who should decide this?
Here some vs the book shows:
The Developed World vs the Third World:
Fatality rates differ wildly within the first and third world countries, but the risks remain. Another interesting aspect is that the success of the vaccine/number of shots necessary can be different for people on different continents.
Since there is a lot of research money out there, scientists focus on vaccines. This takes the money away though from other, maybe more efficient measures that should be undertaken in the Third World first, namely our Phase 1 cleaner living conditions should be implemented first before one thinks of vaccines?
More money in vaccine research than in cleaner living conditions is not ideal as well as the fact that companies often only get the development costs back if the vaccine is in universal use in first world countries (e.g. Rotavirus nearly no death in the developed world). Hence one could say the US /Western population is used as guinea pigs for vaccines that are not necessary for them by calling them “pioneers”. Here is played on the moral duty to help the less fortunate and react with compassion and generosity rather than protect themselves, their families, society and country. However, wouldn’t one think the government should put their own people first? Or would we vote for a government that puts worldwide health before the countrywide health? Or would it be ok for the minority to participate if the majority would vote for such a government? Society is based on trust in the government to safeguard each individual.
Majority vs Minority:
return is limited and the risk stays, longer trials should be mandatory if a vaccine then drops out hence not profitable maybe focus on other fields.
Children vs Old People:
Vaccinate the young - and thereby let them cope with the risks - to keep the old health even if the health of the young determines the future?
The book uses flu vaccination as an example. It lists data according to which the best solution would be to vaccinate the young who are not at risk and expose them to the vaccine risks. Here danger to the kids/young people is accepted to safe the old and weak.
This is a new trend, very much in the limelight now because of covid. It is simply an act against nature and the arrogance of a few people in power to decide whose life/quality of life is more important. Here a line should be drawn for medicine to interfere with nature (my opinion, don’t blame the author).
A second aspect is: vaccinate the kids so they are safe in their childhood, but might not as adults as the vaccine wears off. Children illnesses now are contracted as adults. So kids are exposed to the risk of vaccine, then get it anyways as an adult when possibly they can cope less well, plus no maternal immunity.
The Holy vs the Unholy:
Ideological blinders were totally understandable in the Middle Ages but in an educated information society?
Epidemics as a divine judgement and an opportunity for repentance, e.g. self-flagellation of traveling rich men during the pest. Is there an element of this in the lockdown and fun-limiting measures imposed on everyone against covid? Is it still today difficult to acknowledge rationality.
If sickness and suffering is seen subconsciously still as a way to spiritual development and purity isn’t wearing a mask and a restricted life style a welcome act of repentance? A holier than thou (I am better than you statement).
The Worthy vs the Unworthy:
The Hepatitis vaccine an example for people not wanting a vaccine for certain clearly more dangerous diseases than the whooping cough as it affects mostly people with life-style choices they don’t condone. Here the Author rightly states that Public Health has to deal with the society how it is and not how it ought to be. Stigmatizimg groups and denial is not a base for Public Health decisions.
Progress vs Stagnation:
The book also points to the Future and the author hints that there is room for improvement of Public Health beyond vaccines.
The visionary is Pasteur who regretted not to have done more research on his silk worms; meaning research on the impact of environmental conditions with the goal to increase vigour and resistance of the population.
A modern society shouldn’t stop progressing. A future goal could be healthy immune systems of the individuals and mental regress. Developed Countries are far from perfect and have the option to look beyond simple survival towards creating a base for lives worth living.
With modern technology, systems can be adapted much faster than ever. There is no forever routine: Once the illness is vanquished, stop the vaccination, closely monitor and revise if necessary.
Cost-benefit analysis should be made and one point is particularly mentionable: Is it worth the risks of a vaccination when at stake there are simply the costs of more doctor visits and hospital stays, but no fatalities and very low long-term effects on the sick person? In a modern society with high taxes maybe we should be entitled to that privilege? Or it could be a goal? As well as housing that improve ones health (materials, isolation, lightning), a clean sewage system, easy admin etc.
March 17, 2021
This book helped me continue to flesh out my own opinions about vaccines. It was hard to get through at times and some concepts I didn’t feel were fully explained but overall a lot of history was covered, a lot of research was done, and the bias was fairly objective.
June 17, 2008
I was told to read this book by a professor whose current research is focused around creating a vaccine against tropical helminth disease. I'm preparing to join her research team in the fall so she wanted me to read this book in order to get an introduction on the history and controversies surrounding vaccines. While this book is probably a brief summary of the history of vaccines, I found it a little tedious to get through. The author did a great job explaining certain controversies but I feel as though it went a little too far in depth about vaccine legislation is some places. However, I did learn a lot and found the majority of the book to be interesting!
June 25, 2008
An intriguing history of the controversy over vaccines--from smallpox to modern day. A fast read for non-fiction, but I would still recommend going straight the chapters on modern day controversies over the benefits vs. the risks of vaccination, the speculation about autism and vaccination, and the most recent attempts to mass vaccinate the US.
February 27, 2008
Great insight into the pros/cons of public health requirements on the community
August 23, 2008
definitely read if you are a science nerd or are interested in some of the history behind vaccinations
Read
December 7, 2008The history of vaccination in the the western world has displayed the driving force in medical advancements as mans' fight against disease and at times the not so noble intentions that back it.
May 14, 2021
Vaccines have always been controversial. Starting with the earliest Western experiments against smallpox in the 18th century, the story of vaccination has been muddied by politics, personal beliefs, and profits.
Using arguments remarkably like those still used today, anti-vaxxers were there from the get-go, opposing the 18th-century efforts of Cotton Mather and Edward Jenner. Initially, smallpox vaccination (variolation) was opposed mainly by physicians, since the advice arose from such clearly untrustworthy sources as milkmaids, old women, and slaves employing African folk practices.
The early years were extremely rough since governments took their sweet time getting around to regulating the quality of vaccine production and administration. A golden age followed World War II, with the vaccination of millions of soldiers, a general increase in the public repute of medicine, and the development of many effective vaccines.
While the greatness of these advances is beyond doubt, it was also a period of growing personal, economic, and political opportunity, characterized by professional jealousies, harms caused by pig-headed certitude, unethical experimental treatments administered without consent, political hay-making and rapid about-faces, and injuries caused by pharmaceutical companies cutting corners and worse.
As the mandated vaccination schedules for infants and children grew steadily, so did anti-vaccination sentiments, including death threats against vaccination researchers. Allen reviews the controversies over polio vaccines, pertussis vaccines, rotavirus, the rise of autism, and the availability of vaccines in the developing world. The stories are interesting, eye-opening, and will give anyone living through the COVID-19 pandemic a strong sense of plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
Using arguments remarkably like those still used today, anti-vaxxers were there from the get-go, opposing the 18th-century efforts of Cotton Mather and Edward Jenner. Initially, smallpox vaccination (variolation) was opposed mainly by physicians, since the advice arose from such clearly untrustworthy sources as milkmaids, old women, and slaves employing African folk practices.
The early years were extremely rough since governments took their sweet time getting around to regulating the quality of vaccine production and administration. A golden age followed World War II, with the vaccination of millions of soldiers, a general increase in the public repute of medicine, and the development of many effective vaccines.
While the greatness of these advances is beyond doubt, it was also a period of growing personal, economic, and political opportunity, characterized by professional jealousies, harms caused by pig-headed certitude, unethical experimental treatments administered without consent, political hay-making and rapid about-faces, and injuries caused by pharmaceutical companies cutting corners and worse.
As the mandated vaccination schedules for infants and children grew steadily, so did anti-vaccination sentiments, including death threats against vaccination researchers. Allen reviews the controversies over polio vaccines, pertussis vaccines, rotavirus, the rise of autism, and the availability of vaccines in the developing world. The stories are interesting, eye-opening, and will give anyone living through the COVID-19 pandemic a strong sense of plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.
March 12, 2021
3.5 stars. This text is well-researched and written and gives a great overview of the history of vaccines and the anti-vaccination movement in the US. The key word is the US - this book's weaker sections are the historical section prior of the 20th century and anything that exists outside the United States, as Allen tends to lean towards journalist narrative rather than historical analysis for that section. That being said, Allen does a great job at presenting a balanced view of vaccines without taking the hysterical "reasoning" of the anti-vaccination movement seriously. The biggest highlight for me is the last few chapters where Allen demonstrates how self-centred and nonsensical the anti-vaccination movement's thinking is. Hearing about the damage and cost the anti-vaccine movement has had on a small Colorado town was heart-breaking.
November 25, 2024
This was a well-researched book. Only problem was author jumped around a lot from topic to topic. Although published in 2007, the information in this book is valuable, and will be into the foreseeable future. This book clearly demonstrates the difficulty in producing safe and effective vaccines on a massive scale and illustrates in vivid detail how Big Government repeatedly tried to hide information from the public to protect their vaccine programs. It is a recommended read.
May 5, 2017
Very good overview of vaccines from their origins to today. A book that needed to be written.
March 13, 2019
Good overview, engagingly written
July 12, 2020
Solid, honest, accessible history of vaccination.
April 5, 2021
Well researched, but too detailed. Easy to get lost. Easy to set aside.
July 10, 2021
Timely and interesting. Moral dilemmas, successes and failures, good to know background information and history.
March 1, 2016
Walking past the book shelf that we have in our office, I stumbled upon a book that seemed kind of dull at first due to the blank cover and large thickness it showed. Who would have known I was in for a surprise? The book Vaccine is really well written by Arthur Allen and he describes the pros and cons of vaccines in a perspective which is far greater than what I had settled for previously. Allen does this in such a way that properly convinces the reader to ultimately choose between the risk of receiving a vaccine, and it compares it with the benefits of being vaccinated.
Ultimately, he is able to underline the importance in the benefits of being vaccinated and then places statistics to support his arguments that vaccines are important medical advancements that have allowed the human immune system to synthesize pieces of a bacteria and create a natural resistance to it. Allen outlines multiple times throughout his book that the benefits of vaccines in the modern age have allowed humanity itself to persevere through many deadly outbreaks as well as increase the amount of time that we live.
There are 2 well developed reasons as to why this book is extremely well written. First, it is a non-fictional book that relates to many people’s concerns and it informs the reader of the risks as well as the benefits of vaccines. The second is that this issue is really important. As vaccines are being developed, there might always be the risk of a human error. 1 incorrect proportion and another human will pay for the mistake. Ultimately, this book is life changing and it has definitely changed my opinion on vaccination.
Ultimately, he is able to underline the importance in the benefits of being vaccinated and then places statistics to support his arguments that vaccines are important medical advancements that have allowed the human immune system to synthesize pieces of a bacteria and create a natural resistance to it. Allen outlines multiple times throughout his book that the benefits of vaccines in the modern age have allowed humanity itself to persevere through many deadly outbreaks as well as increase the amount of time that we live.
There are 2 well developed reasons as to why this book is extremely well written. First, it is a non-fictional book that relates to many people’s concerns and it informs the reader of the risks as well as the benefits of vaccines. The second is that this issue is really important. As vaccines are being developed, there might always be the risk of a human error. 1 incorrect proportion and another human will pay for the mistake. Ultimately, this book is life changing and it has definitely changed my opinion on vaccination.
February 11, 2015
If you want to read a 400-page New Yorker article, this is the book. It was fascinating and mind numbing due to the sheer amount of information. I learned things such as more WWI soldiers died from preventable infections than the war itself. George Bush was instrumental in not only the war on terror and fear mongering, but at the same time the possibility of bio-terrorism. If he got all the vaccines in 2002 that Saddam did not use against us, why didn't the rest of America's citizens get the same vaccines?
The political, religious and scientific struggles remain the same to this day. I was sad to read measles had been eradicated by 1998 but is now back in this the year 2015. The parents of autistic children have a right to be upset, but to blame vaccines is very strange after reading this book. The same vaccines given to children in Denmark have not resulted in the number of autistic children in America. The cause is not known. The parents marching and suing is not helping the advancement of finding a scientific reason for autism.
FDR has always been a hero to me but his fight to find a vaccine for polio made me more proud than ever. The greater good was always his political position. What did I learn overall? History repeats itself. Now in 2015 the hysteria has started all over again. I am glad I live in these modern times. I did not get polio. I do have MS, but it is not due to any vaccine as the disease has been documented since the 1300s.
I rated it with three stars only because it was just too much all packed into one book.
The political, religious and scientific struggles remain the same to this day. I was sad to read measles had been eradicated by 1998 but is now back in this the year 2015. The parents of autistic children have a right to be upset, but to blame vaccines is very strange after reading this book. The same vaccines given to children in Denmark have not resulted in the number of autistic children in America. The cause is not known. The parents marching and suing is not helping the advancement of finding a scientific reason for autism.
FDR has always been a hero to me but his fight to find a vaccine for polio made me more proud than ever. The greater good was always his political position. What did I learn overall? History repeats itself. Now in 2015 the hysteria has started all over again. I am glad I live in these modern times. I did not get polio. I do have MS, but it is not due to any vaccine as the disease has been documented since the 1300s.
I rated it with three stars only because it was just too much all packed into one book.
September 5, 2015
I had to read this for a course I'm teaching on bioethics and epidemics. It's a good book and an interesting story, but it could have been more. At times, there's more attention to the what happened when than to what the events meant, and to how they fit together. His best section is his portrait of Neal Halsey, debating what to do about thimerosal in vaccines - a crisis in what should have been an issue that could have been resolved more slowly. Nevertheless, it's a book that's still worthwhile for those interested in vaccination and the public policy side of making people accept an immunization they don't want. It strives to be balanced, which may mean it leans a little too far to being polite about people willing to accept wild theories as science. He presents the theories and lets you judge. When people claim mercury is the reason vaccines cause autism, and then cite a series of vaccines their child received, none of which had any mercury, the point of the storytelling is still pretty clear. Recommended if the topic interests you; not a necessary book otherwise.
September 11, 2014
Immunization like all other medical practices has evolved over the past two centuries based upon the works of many of the pioneers like Pasteur,Jenner and others .These practices evolved mainly as a result of many bold trial and error methods.These methods when compared to present day practices were rather crude and certainly far from immunization standards of today.This book is certainly helpful for all those who think that immunization like all other medical practices has to be followed blindly.After reading this book i as a medico have started to think the utility of some vaccines and their dose schedules (eg ,hepatitis 0 dose) .
June 23, 2011
This book provides a great history of vaccine from its inception. You'll not find this book impartial, but I would call it informative. Unlike many books about vaccination, I appreciated that this author cites references throughout each chapter!!! IT was a pleasure to be able to look up the information that he used in his book.
The book is not made to be a reference book, but instead tells the story of vaccination. Everything from its dirty history to how the minds of those who practiced medicine have changed.
I couldn't say it any better than to say that this book was fun.
The book is not made to be a reference book, but instead tells the story of vaccination. Everything from its dirty history to how the minds of those who practiced medicine have changed.
I couldn't say it any better than to say that this book was fun.
November 16, 2012
A very informative and honest book about the history of vaccine development, the impact vaccines had on modern medicine & life expectancies, and a look at the current controversies. I can also say it was inspiring: after reading the chapter "People Who Prefer Whooping Cough", I was inspired to get my overdue tetanus & diptheria vaccination & made sure I got the version that also included pertussis (TDaP). Good timing to, seeing as how this year saw a huge spike in the number of pertussis/whooping cough cases...
August 16, 2014
This was an excellent book for presenting the long history of vaccine development and controversy. It is probably the most comprehensive book I've read on the subject, covering everything from the mishaps with early polio vaccines to the internal politics of vaccine development. It serves as the background for Seth Mnookins book "The Panic Virus" which picks up where Arthur Allen left off. I definitely recommend Mnookin's book as a follow-up, although the first few chapters seem to come straight from Arthur Miller's book.
Read
February 4, 2011Vaccine is a well-researched history of both sides of the vaccine wars, where proponents are motivated by fear of disease, and the opponents by fear of the vaccines themselves. Beginning with 18th century work on smallpox vaccines by Cotton Mather and Edward Jenner, it chronicles the 20th century successes with vaccines for polio and other diseases, and concludes with some discussion of the current debate about vaccines.
February 22, 2009
Great overview of how vaccines came to be. Did you know, for instance, that the word vaccine comes from the Latin vacca, because the first vaccine came from scraping cowpox virus off of cow udders and then using the pus to innoculate people against smallpox? If you want to know more fascinating and disgusting facts to use at cocktail parties, this is the book for you.
February 2, 2010
Covers this complex topic thoroughly and quite objectively. Not a fast read but the slower sections give the scientific and policy history so that current issues can be understood. A more balanced journalistic approach that is a good comapanion to more inflammatory treatments from all sides of the public health debate.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 44 reviews