Ebola hasn’t gone away just because the election’s over, but as we’ve noted before, Ebola was never a very real threat anyway. There were other, ongoing diseases and viruses that demanded more of the media — and the public’s — attention than Ebola, among them the flu. The flu kills more people every year than Ebola does by a wide margin, but the flu is preventable with a vaccination.
And it’s that last bit, that’s the rub. See, “vaccination” is a scare word for a certain population of rather gullible individual.
Or, rather, certain types of vaccinations, because apparently, anti-vaxxers can distinguish as well. And while anti-vaxxers have no problem exposing your child to their unvaccinated child in regards to measles, mumps, or the flu, Ebola may be a line they’re not willing cross. Because. . . who knows why. Reasons.
The New York Times has a piece written by Andrew Revkin detailing an actual conversation that a colleague of Dr. Dave Stukus, a real pediatrician, had with a patient:
While it’s an anecdote, it’s from a reliable source — Stukus confirmed the story via phone with the Revkin — and is a reminder of the enormous gap between the fears people have about health risks and the actual facts. It also highlights how that gap help contributes to illness, and answers one of my long-time questions: yes, anti-vaxxers will stop for the Ebola vaccination, because apparently Ebola outweighs their idiotic fears.
Also, it confirms that the flu needs better PR.