Newspapers React to Bush’s Smallpox Vaccination Plan

Newspapers nationwide have published editorials addressing President Bush's smallpox vaccination plan, announced Dec. 13. Summaries of some of those editorials appear below:

• Boston Globe: Although President Bush is "right" to require smallpox vaccinations for members of the military, a mass vaccination plan would be "unwise," according to a Globe editorial. The Globe notes that "[t]here is already enough distrust of vaccines much safer than smallpox." The editorial concludes, "The last thing this country needs is to botch a mass smallpox vaccination so badly that the country is left more vulnerable to disease like whooping cough or polio" because parents are choosing not to give any vaccines to their children (Boston Globe, 12/13).
  
• Des Moines Register: President Bush's vaccination plan "sounds like a logical progression" until one considers the CDC's recommendation that "millions of people" should not be vaccinated, the Register states. Included in the CDC's list of who should not receive the vaccine are people with eczema, people with a weakened immune system, women pregnant or planning to get pregnant within a month and anyone living with such people. According to the Register, "[t]hat does not leave a huge number of good candidates for vaccination." The Register concludes, "Having enough vaccine on hand to inoculate every American, should it be necessary, ought to be enough of a deterrent to terrorists -- if they even have such a weapon at their disposal" (Des Moines Register, 12/12).
  
• Memphis Commercial Appeal: President Bush's smallpox vaccination plan is a "sensible, phased program of vaccinations," the Commercial Appeal states. The editorial concludes, "The administration's vaccination program shows we can defend ourselves. But it would be heartbreaking for the many poor nations that can't fight off smallpox so comprehensively if this menace were to reappear" (Memphis Commercial Appeal, 12/16).
  
• New York Times: President Bush's plan for smallpox vaccinations is a "sensible approach," the editorial states. The Times writes, "With mounting concerns over the safety of the vaccine, and with enormous uncertainty over whether rogue nations like Iraq or terrorist groups like Al Qaeda can launch a smallpox attack, this step-by-step approach has much to recommend it." The Times concludes that because of "doubt as to how quickly the vaccine could be distributed after an attack," Bush is "right to give well-informed citizens access to the vaccine in advance if they want it" (New York Times, 12/14).
  
• Philadelphia Inquirer: Many health care workers will "put their arms on the line" to protect the public by receiving the smallpox vaccine, the Inquirer writes, adding, "The federal government, working with states, owes them the protection that comes with a well-planned vaccination program." The editorial notes that New Jersey health officials are urging the state government to establish a victims' compensation fund, and the Inquirer concludes that Pennsylvania Gov.-elect Ed Rendell (D) "should pursue the idea as well" (Philadelphia Inquirer, 12/10).
  
• San Francisco Chronicle: The "go-slow approach" the Bush administration outlined on Friday "reflects two realities": that the government cannot fully measure the extent of the threat of a smallpox attack and that with the vaccination comes with "relatively high risk," the Chronicle states. According to the Chronicle, the administration knows that "unauthorized stocks" of smallpox exist and that such stocks might be "in the arsenal of terrorists." The administration is also aware that for every one million people who receive the vaccine, between 14 and 52 will experience "life-threatening reactions," and one or two may die, the Chronicle states. For those reasons, the editorial contends that the administration "was wise to proceed with caution." The Chronicle concludes, "A plunge into nationwide vaccinations could have created undue panic for an amorphous military threat, while leaving people exposed to the serious side effects" (San Francisco Chronicle, 12/17).
  
• Washington Times: While President Bush's vaccination program is a "step in the right direction," it "falls short" of ensuring Americans' "most basic rights." According to the Times, whether the public receives the vaccine "comes down to a question of liberty." Americans "enjo[y] the liberty to make reasonable decisions" on how best to protect themselves and their families. Although the public might be allowed to volunteer for clinical trials in order the receive the vaccine before public inoculations are set to begin in 2004, trial enrollment is "hardly an ideal situation" because such trials will be "at best inconvenient." The editorial concludes, "Mr. Bush is headed in the right direction on smallpox vaccinations. But he is not there yet" (Washington Times, 12/13).
  
• Washington Times: "Another alternative" to the smallpox vaccine is "clearly needed" because of the large numbers of people with weakened immune systems who will be ineligible to be inoculated, and antivirals "seem to offer some promise," a Washington Times editorial states. The editorial concludes, "In its quest to provide smallpox protections to Americans, the administration must not fail to provide the support necessary to develop a smallpox antiviral" (Washington Times, 12/12).
  
• Wichita Eagle: In light of President Bush's vaccination plan, it is "time to make some hard personal choices," the Eagle states. According to the Eagle, about 33% of those vaccinated will feel sick enough to miss work, while "very few" will experience "life-threatening complications." However, the Eagle notes that smallpox cannot be treated and kills one-third of those who contract the virus. The editorial concludes, "Very soon, we all will have to make personal choices about preparing for a smallpox outbreak. It's a decision best made with information, not fear" (Wichita Eagle, 12/13).
  

NPR Coverage
NPR's "Talk of the Nation" on Dec. 17 will include a discussion of the smallpox vaccination plan with Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, in the first hour of the program (Conan, "Talk of the Nation," NPR, 12/17). The full segment will be available in RealPlayer Audio after 6 p.m. ET online.