Get unlimited digital access to $0.99 for 4 weeks.
News Opinion Readers Respond

Letter mischaracterizes vaccine op-ed

While Steven Salzberg's readers-response letter may accurately reflect his point of view ("Sun gives voice to dangerous anti-vaccination fear-mongering," July 13), he significantly mischaracterizes important aspects of my July 11th op-ed, "We don't know enough about childhood vaccines."

The main point of my op-ed is a simple fact, a number. The federal government recommends 36 doses of vaccines for every child during the first two years of life. And then I ask: Is this too many, too few or just right? What is "dangerous" is to ignore this fact, and to lack the curiosity or backbone to fully explore the science to understand — and, if necessary ameliorate — any negative consequences of this number for our youngest citizens.

Providing facts — drawn from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports and meticulously checked with the lead author of the federal "General Recommendations on Immunization" — is not, as Mr. Salzberg asserts, "fear-mongering" and "misinformation."

Rather, knowing this number is vital to ensuring that there is ongoing, rigorous biomedical research about childhood vaccines and the vaccine schedule. After all, more than 4 million U.S. children are born each year, and these federal recommendations apply to each and every one of them. These infants deserve more than reliance on a decade-old analysis of the ever-changing vaccine schedule, and name calling. Facts and data are, or should be, the way we have an informed populace, good science, sensible policies, and a strong democracy.

Mr. Salzberg asserts that the content of my op-ed "will lead parents to withhold vaccines from their children." My article does not say this. That is his conclusion, not mine.

Mr. Salzberg sets up a straw man, saying my "main claim is that the current vaccine schedule gives children too many vaccines too early in life, and that is somehow harmful to children." My article does not say that, either. Rather, it presents facts and asks questions, leaving readers to draw their own conclusions.

I do not know what Mr. Salzberg means when he says "science has debunked Ms. Dunkle's claims." What "claims" in my article is he talking about? Or perhaps he is speaking about issues on his agenda but not addressed by my article.

My op-ed cited the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health study in the context that it is sure to rekindle the debate about vaccine safety. Mr. Salzberg's focus on this journal article confirms that indeed it has. I did not, however, as Mr. Salzberg contends, cite this article to support any "claims."

Mr. Salzberg is totally without accuracy when calls me an "anti-vaccine activist." Not true. Presenting solid facts about vaccines — 36 recommended doses before age 2 — provides information that can help improve our country's immunization efforts to ensure that children are both free from disease and free from adverse reactions to vaccination.

It is fine for Mr. Salzberg to have his own words and views. It is not fine for him to mischaracterize my words and views. I urge readers to read my actual article and draw their own conclusions.

Margaret Dunkle, Washington

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Vaccine safety: Misinformation about vaccine risks is making us less safe
    Vaccine safety: Misinformation about vaccine risks is making us less safe

    Last month, the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene reported the first case of measles in the state since 2009.

  • Parents have good reason to distrust childhood vaccines

    Steven L. Salzberg's response to Margaret Dunkle's vaccination op-ed is itself a study in fear-mongering and ignorance ("Sun prints dangerous anti-vaccination op-ed," July 14). It is precisely because of the condescending and uninformed views of Dr. Salzberg that parents are losing confidence...

  • Obama administration steps up on vaccines

    The Obama administration's recent commitment to the GAVI Alliance should be applauded ("Donors pledge $4.3 billion for vaccines for poor," June 13). The United States' pledge will help vaccinate 250 million children and save more than 4 million lives.

  • Overdoses not just about substance abuse
    Overdoses not just about substance abuse

    I do believe that reversing the overdose epidemic does take a comprehensive approach as noted in the many examples put forth in the recent commentary "Reversing overdose epidemic" (Feb. 27). Unfortunately, it can't be comprehensive if the focus is only on substance use.

  • MTA bus app a win-win
    MTA bus app a win-win

    "Alice In Wonderland" was an Oscar-winning documentary compared to your article, "MTA real time bus data 'hacked' and offered on private mobile app" (Feb. 25). Your story reported how the Maryland Transit Administration's success in making actual bus schedules available to riders online was...

  • Hampden parking: Where's my space?
    Hampden parking: Where's my space?

    The Baltimore City Council took a final vote and passed a controversial parking plan for Hampden, a place where parking is already a challenge ("Hampden parking plan a disaster," Feb. 14). But the measure left out two addresses on Elm Street including the Hampden Hill Apartments in the 3700...