In my lifetime I have observed with a lot of keenness the as

In my lifetime I have observed with a lot of keenness the aspect of vaccine refusal take a recurring model in the society (Smith, 2017). Although, there has been scant evidence that such rejection is growing in the population, many researchers have reported on the concerning trends of decline of confidence in vaccines, the medical professionals who administer vaccines, and perhaps the scientist involved in the study and development of the vaccines (Smith, 2017). As specialist in immunology and infectious diseases, I can say boldly that scientists are genuinely content developers who lack the direct relationship with people considering undertaking vaccination or their children who are always with the healthcare professionals. I have witnessed the growing concerns and the resurgence of the anti-vaccine movement. These are groups with strong held doubts mostly under the guise of culture, religion or other traditional practices that vaccines are not effective and secure (Smith, 2017). This very scare can sometimes be traced back to the authorship of Andrew Wakefield’s which connected the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine to autism in the 1998(Smith, 2017). Some of the rejections even historically date back to 18th century in the variolation of reducing smallpox mortality and morbidity. However, the argument against vaccine keeps on changing from time to time. Some have held that vaccines are toxic and contain dangerous elements like antifreeze, mercury, aluminum, ether, among others (Smith, 2017). Some suggests that a child immune system is somewhat immature to handle vaccines, that they are administered too many too soon that overwhelms their immune systems (Smith, 2017). A lot other arguments are out here, and in one way or another, they have succeeded in creating a diametrically opposed sides about vaccination. References Smith, T. C. (2017, July). Vaccine rejection and hesitancy: a review and call to action. In Open forum infectious diseases (Vol. 4, No. 3). Oxford University Press.