Since last winter, there were outbreaks of measles in the United States, a disease that was declared eliminated in 00. Recent implications were frightening because they are manageable in a world where almost everyone is vaccinated, but some people use personal reasons to avoid them. What needs to change in the conversation to prevent disease and future superbugs to become a full-fledged epidemic?

There must be a big overhaul of how we talk about vaccination to eliminate the shame and pointing to the conversation. I found that some of the people who promote vaccinations cite biological research, but do not refer also to the social science research. However, there is a lot of research on what convinces people to get vaccinated. What does not work is the shame of the people and pointing the finger ... and that is what happens in conversations today. It also requires a change in how doctors talk to patients about vaccinations. Patients have real concerns, and rampant misinformation given online and in the media, their concerns are not unreasonable. People can not get all the information they need about vaccinations on Google. But some doctors ask: "Why you do not trust me" When patients ask questions That's the wrong attitude Skepticism is healthy, and many doctors are not well equipped to handle any concerns about?.. vaccination as the vaccination can have parents hesitate during a 15 minute test. the problem is the insurance companies do not reimburse physicians for the extra time, so most can not afford to spend more time with patients who go on these concerns. I would love to see a complete overhaul of the health care system in which insurance companies could empower doctors to spend time with their patients to build confidence and show them proven to improve vaccination rates. physicians must demonstrate empathy and compassion, and not dismissive. I understand the point of view of a doctor who spends years in training and residence and is expert matter. I can understand how doctors feel insulted when patients say they do not trust them. But not on the doctors, it is about the big picture. He is patient over large amounts of misinformation, and not in relation to doctors patients. There will be people you can not reach, but many more people are reluctant to vaccination can be achieved with empathy and compassion.

What are your thoughts on the laws as S. B. 277, a law passed this summer in California, which eliminate the personal and religious exemption vaccines for school children? Why are not other states passing similar laws?

Other states are adopting similar laws because they do not have the same unique situation has precipitated California law. California experienced huge pockets of non-immunising parents, which has already been reflected in low levels of herd immunity, a whooping cough epidemic in 2010, and most recent outbreak of measles in 2014 in Disneyland, the " happiest place on earth. "These conditions built over time and brought to the demand for vaccination mandate to a head. California also pediatrician and Senator Richard Pan, who sponsored the bill and was dedicated to . its success in most states, there is a small but vocal anti-vaccine community, but the pro-vaccine parents are ardently pro-vaccination; they just make that typical parents do things that stimulate. in action similar to that of California would be a direct threat to their children and the onset of a disease. I see tightening conditions of their vaccination laws. an example would be, instead of removing the exemption of personal belief vaccinations, requiring all parents to go to a health service presentation 10 hours to be exempt. This idea seems important and intense on purpose. Research has shown that when making exemptions difficult to get, more people will be vaccinated. Dr. Saad Omer at Emory University discusses tip the balance of convenience to improve vaccination rates. If you tilt the balance of convenience, or if the parents are hesitant vaccination find it more difficult to obtain exemptions, they will usually take the path of least resistance and get vaccinated children instead of taking the course of time.

How did you enter the world of health reports and science, and what has it taught you about how Americans are receiving and understanding the health information in the media? How do the media report our conversations about vaccinations?

I came to the declaration of health in many different ways. I took different writing opportunities in graduate school, is a scholarship and went to a conference of the National Association of Science Writers. The birth of my first son was the greatest part of the trip because I'm curious about parenting issues, and wanted to know what the evidence says about the best health practices. The news did not provide that information because the stories did not contain enough detail about the strength of medical studies and the number of studies were conducted on different topics. I decided to start communicating on health and parenting because if I had these questions, I knew that other parents must also. I think technology has grown faster than our ability to understand the technology and media literacy is low in this country and around the world. People are not sufficiently trained to assess information, its reliability, the reliability of its sources and its validity. I believe it is the work of health journalists to fulfill this role for their readers because they are trained in these areas. Instead, there are many "churnalism," in which news sites print press releases and titles of medical school without meaningful context or explanation of the significance of the results. Information without context is dangerous, and it is important for me to provide that context to my readers so they can make health decisions formed.

Your blog is focused on "parenting based on evidence." Can you define it?

parental based on evidence by looking at the evidence exists, how it is strong, warnings and risks exist, and assessment of how it relates to my children and me. that does not mean that there is only one way to parent. the position of parenthood on the evidence base on vaccinations are not "going your child vaccinated." this means "here's proof of vaccination, and if you look at this, the benefits far outweigh the risks." based on the available data on immunization, reasonable parents who are able to consider the objective evidence would have their children vaccinated Here's an example. There is a lot of evidence that supports the claim that there are many benefits to breastfeeding, but that does not mean women should be ashamed not to breastfeed. Women may feel like they deny their benefits to the health of children, but the reality is that systemic support to encourage breastfeeding in this country does not exist. The evidence shows that there are benefits to breastfeeding, but they may be minimal in the light of other circumstances, such as a mother who works two jobs, has no free time, and becomes stressed or depressed about not to provide breast milk for her children. The evidence must be considered in the circumstances of the individual to make the best choices for themselves. Evidence-based parenting encourages personal decisions based on scientific evidence about the risks and benefits that exist in the context of the circumstances and values ​​of each family.

Who will get vaccinated and why?

There are two groups of people do not get vaccinated: children of parents who have safety concerns about the vaccine, and people who do not have access to health services. Parents with security problems are often dismissed or ridiculed by their doctors to ask questions, and many can take advantage of immunization exemptions in their state. People who do not have access to health services may be limited by the lower income or education, difficulty leaving work to health care physical access, or a variety of other factors socio economic.

What are you, professionally and personally, to encourage vaccination for people of all ages?

I am very involved in a large number of Facebook groups and forums, and do a lot of one-on-one talk with people on issues they have about vaccination. I think that the fears and people's concerns are and treat them in a way to make them feel heard and not dismissed. I am the co-founder of a Facebook page called page vaccine and serve as one of the 11 directors in the health area to answer questions from the community about immunization.

Tara Haelle is a Forbes contributor whose work also appears on NPR, Scientific American, Slate, Politico, HealthDay, and elsewhere. She co-wrote The Parent Informed: A scientific guide in the first four years, due in April 2016, with science journalist Emily Willingham. She also blogs about parenting based on evidence at the Red Wine & Applesauce and creates resources for journalists to report on medical research from the Association of Health Care Journalists. Follow her on Facebook and Twitter.