Resister’s logic: the anti-vaccination arguments of Alfred Russel Wallace and their role in the debates over compulsory vaccination in England, 1870–1907

Alfred Russel Wallace and the Antivaccination Movement in Victorian England

“…The statistical approach to the vaccination debate used by Wallace and his opponents could simply not resolve the issue of vaccine efficiency; thus, each side was free to choose the interpretation that suited its needs best. However, despite its indecisive outcome, the debate was a major step in defining what kind of evidence was needed ( 17 ). It is also unjustified to portray the debate as a controversy of science versus antiscience because the boundaries between orthodox and heterodox science we are certain of today were far less apparent in the Victorian era ( 18 ).…”

“…Such a clinical perspective of parents can, however, cut both ways. The individually witnessed causal relationship between therapy and recovery in the case of tetanus and diphtheria was instrumental in the widespread public acceptance of immunization ( 17 ). A similar mechanism is at play in the contemporary controversies: perceived causal relationships between vaccination and the appearance of complications undermine the claims that vaccines are generally safe.…”

“…Their conclusions from these data differed according to the way these data were subdivided into periods ( 17 ). For example, if it were assumed that vaccination rates increased in 1867, when cumulative penalties were introduced and fewer dared to challenge the vaccination law, and not in 1871, when the smallpox pandemic accelerated, then the rate of decline of smallpox mortality rates was lower when vaccination was more prevalent.…”

Leçons à tirer du refus de l’inoculation variolique : premiers débats entre scientifiques et évolution de la tendance au refus de la vaccination

“…19. Pour une description la position de Wallace face à la vaccination, se reporter à Weber (2010) et Fichman et Keelan (2007).…”

“…Selon lui, les personnes chargées de la vaccination étaient incapables d'évaluer cette procédure avec objectivité, car leur intérêt financier les incitait à la soutenir. Il ajoutait que la spécialisation et la connaissance de la vaccination engendraient des biais systématiques qui se fondaient dans les statistiques, créant des preuves soutenant la vaccination (Fichman et Keelan, 2007). Opposé à la vaccination obligatoire, Wallace s'en remettait à la science pour proposer une approche médicale différente, mettant en vedette l'acquisition d'un comportement plus sain.…”