Bernice L. Hausman

Anti/VAX: Reframing the Vaccination Controversy from Bernice L Hausman is an attempt to get beyond the animosity and name-calling that largely defines the current vaccination controversy. Hausman largely succeeds and even where there might be something questionable it is not a negative but rather, for lack of a better term, the nature of the debate.

First, to be honest and upfront, I am a supporter of vaccinating and, unfortunately, have sometimes made the types of comments that shut down discussion rather than open it up. So that is where I am coming to this book from.

I don't think it serves any purpose to either restate the arguments usually put forth for or against vaccinations, we are all familiar with the limited range of the popular public debate. I am also not going to try to mention every nuance of Hausman's findings or ideas. The debate is too heated and I think a wrong comment from a reviewer can make someone decide not to read this book, and I think this book offers a lot to consider for everyone with an opinion about vaccinations.

What I will say is that, while some medical/scientific information is shared, it is not for the purpose of "proving" any particular position but rather to illustrate what can be, I think, agreed upon by most people. So there is mention of positives and negatives, concerns and established fact, with the goal of establishing the ground upon which most concerns are centered.

Hausman looks at the long history of antiVAX sentiment and explains what has been behind a great deal of it. With more diseases having effective vaccines that also means more vaccines are recommended for everyone. In principle, I think the vast majority of people, regardless of their concerns, would like to have effective means to eliminate dangerous diseases. The concerns largely boil down to a couple overarching issues, even if they tend to be presented as purely safety. One is, clearly, how safe are these vaccines? The other is basically a distrust of Big Pharma/Big Government/Giant Medical bureaucracies. The extreme of the second position are the conspiracy theorists who see conspiracies everywhere, but that is not the largest portion of the antivaxxers, even those who are coming from a position of distrust.

Understanding that most antivaxxers might change their opinion if their concerns are answered with respect and transparency makes it imperative for those of us who believe the vaccines to be safe to stop being so antagonistic. Just as the conspiracy theorists represent an extreme on the antivaxxer side there is an extreme on the proVAX side that will blindly accept whatever they are told is safe. Neither the conspiracy theorists nor the blindly submissive will be moved by this book, they are not looking to actually resolve the debate but to prove a larger worldview. Most people, like myself, who are proVAX have a certain amount of concern for anything that is put into our bodies. I have read studies and research, on both sides, and have been convinced that the safety is well within the safety limits of medicine we all take all the time. The anti research I've seen has cherry-picked facts and glossed over the details to raise alarm. Likewise, pro research sometimes does the same, but, from what I've seen, to a lesser extent. As for the distrust issue, that is probably bigger than the actual concern over the safety of a particular component of a vaccine that is well within the safe range. Because it is the distrust of the big companies and government that causes people to disregard the research that comes out of them. So that is a ready-made excuse to dismiss whatever doesn't support one's position. That feeling of distrust is only strengthened when confronted with animosity and name-calling. Thus the need for everyone to step back, try to understand where the other side is truly coming from (as well as look closely at ourselves and understand what we really want: to find a safe way to eradicate diseases or simply promote distrust/blind acceptance), and then figure out ways to have our questions and concerns addressed.

I would recommend this to anyone with an interest in the topic, which should be everyone who lives near other human beings. I will add that those on the extreme of either side will not be swayed here, you'll feel Hausman has either been too easy on the antivaxxers or too gullible like the provaxxers. But the vast majority of people who are looking for a solution and not just a fight can learn something about both your own position and the position of those who disagree.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.… (altro)

Hausman sets out to explore the development of the idea of gender identity out of the treatment protocols for the intersexed in the middle of the 20th century and how those ideas were appropriated by transsexuals for their own use. The facts are fascinating, but the analysis, which relies very heavily on post-structuralism, especially Judith Butler, ends up not saying anything except that bodies don't fall neatly into categories and gender is a problematic category. This is stuff that anyone paying even remote attention to these issues already knows.

I've given up thinking that post-structural texts are going to be able to advance the politics of gender, so I wasn't as disappointed in this book as I might have been. It does present some very interesting historical facts about sexualized bodies and the idea of gender. What we do with those facts in the long run is going to require another book.… (altro)