Fwd:Informed consent policy for vaccinations has reverse effect

[Guest guest]

Less info means less questions and greater compliance, it would

appear...

 

CONCLUSION: While the informed consent policy for anthrax vaccinations

was intended to decrease concern, it may inadvertently have had the

opposite effect.

 

 

 

 

--- Meryl Nass <mnass wrote:

 

 

 

UK armed forces responses to an informed consent policy for anthrax

vaccination: A paradoxical effect?

 

Murphy D, Dandeker C, Horn O, Hotopf M, Hull L, Jones M, Marteau T,

Rona R, Wessely S.

 

King's Centre for Military Health Research, Institute of Psychiatry,

United Kingdom.

 

BACKGROUND:

In recognition of concerns that anthrax vaccination might

be a trigger for " Gulf war syndrome " , anthrax vaccinations were offered

to UK armed forces in the 2003 Iraq conflict using explicit as opposed

to implicit consent, as is the policy for all other vaccinations. This

paper examines responses of personnel to this policy.

 

METHODS:

Qualitative analysis of free text responses to a question inviting

comments on any concerns about the anthrax vaccination, asked in the

context of a questionnaire assessing military health amongst 1000

members of the UK armed forces following the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

 

 

RESULTS:

Two hundred and two (20.2%) respondents made comments

reflecting concerns about the vaccine's effectiveness and its safety.

These appeared to be magnified by suspicions about the motives behind

the informed consent policy for anthrax but not other vaccinations.

 

CONCLUSION: While the informed consent policy for anthrax vaccinations

was intended to decrease concern, it may inadvertently have had the

opposite effect.

 

PMID: 16504348

 

Meryl Nass, MD

Mount Desert Island Hospital

Bar Harbor, Maine 04609

207 288-5081 ext. 220