Immunology beliefs as a factor in vaccine opposition among complementary and alternative medical providers

OBJECTIVES: Parental pediatric vaccine decisions are influenced by parents’ health provider networks. Complementary and alternative medical providers may be key influences in the networks of those parents who do not vaccinate their children. METHODS: From March to July 2013, we conducted semi-structured interviews of Oregon complementary and alternative medical providers (N = 36) in five disciplines likely to treat parents or children, or both, and whose practitioners are known to express opinions about vaccines and vaccination. We interviewed them concerning their immunology beliefs, vaccine positions, and what these providers recommend to their patients concerning vaccines. We conducted face-to-face interviews and analyzed the interview data using thematic analysis methodology. RESULTS: This article identifies the range and type of immunological beliefs of complementary and alternative medical providers concerning pediatric vaccine recommendations. From repeated readings of the data, we identified three areas of alternative immunological beliefs among complementary and alternative medical providers (i.e. “natural is best,” “innate intelligence,” and “the fragile immune system”). In addition, complementary and alternative medical providers who embraced mainstream medicine were likely to be vaccine accepters and to mention vaccines as a positive health measure to their patients—these themes were “vaccines prevent illness” and “herd immunity.” CONCLUSION: Complementary and alternative medical providers influence their patients’ vaccination decisions, particularly urging caution or complete vaccine avoidance, and may be a major influence in states like Oregon with high non-medical exemption rates. Complementary and alternative medical providers come to their anti-vaccine positions largely through post-graduation continuing education courses and seminars. In Oregon, such courses are unregulated and not vetted.