by Amy Spangler
January 06, 2009

Just when you thought your mind was made up, the controversy surrounding childhood immunization is back in the news. Considered one of the most significant public health success stories, childhood immunization has been the subject of numerous posts here and here on baby gooroo. The source of the current debate is a book titled, The Vaccine Book: Making the Right Decision for Your Child.

In an effort to address the concern that children are given too many vaccines at a young age, author and pediatrician, Robert Sears, suggests delaying vaccines and limiting the number of vaccines given at one time—the proposed schedule is termed, “Dr. Bob’s Alternative Vaccine Schedule.”

As an indication of the book’s popularity, a growing number of parents are insisting that their children receive immunizations according to Sears’ schedule rather than the schedule recently revised and recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the American Academy of Family Physicians.

In an article published in Pediatrics, authors, Paul Offit and Charlotte Moser argue that Sears’ alternative schedule would require 12 office visits in the first two years and seven in the next four years. The influenza vaccine would not be given until age 5, the hepatitis B vaccine would be delayed until age 2 1/2, and the measles vaccine would be delayed until age 3.

Sears, in a response to the article by Offit and Moser, states that he encourages parents to vaccinate their children according to the CDC schedule “as long as they feel confident in our nation’s vaccine system.” He maintains that his alternative schedule is for those parents who are still unsure but want to fully vaccinate albeit at a slower pace.

Offit and Moser argue that increasing the number of vaccines and delaying the administration of vaccines will likely decrease immunization rates and increase the incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases, citing as evidence recent measles outbreaks.

Sears maintains that “many families go unvaccinated simply because they aren’t offered a more gradual option. If they were, many would vaccinate.[Sears] believes this approach would actually increase vaccination rates.”

For a detailed analysis of the issue, read the full text of Offit’s and Moser’s article along with Sears’ response.

In the meantime, parents, talk with your child’s health care provider; share your concerns; consider the facts; and take the necessary steps to keep your child safe.

Lost in the controversy is what’s at the heart of the debate—children needing protection and parents wanting to do the right thing. Perhaps it is time for all of the stakeholders to come together and consider what is truly in everyone’s best interest.