The Language of COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Public Health Misinformation: Distrust, Unwillingness, and Uncertainty

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (0) ◽  
pp. 117
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy

scholarly journals COVID-19 Pandemic Optimism and Vaccine Willingness among an Online Sample of US Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 745
Author(s):  
Rob Stephenson ◽  
Stephen P. Sullivan ◽  
Renee A. Pitter ◽  
Alexis S. Hunter ◽  
Tanaka MD Chavanduka
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Three Dimensions ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Binary Outcomes ◽  
Sex Partners ◽  
Black African ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Public Health Messages ◽  
Sex With Men ◽  
Living With Hiv

This paper presents data from an online sample of U.S gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM), to explore the factors associated with three dimensions of vaccine beliefs: perception of the likelihood of a COVID-19 vaccine becoming available, perception of when a COVID-19 vaccine would become available, and the likelihood of taking a COVID-19 vaccine. Data are taken from the Love and Sex in the Time of COVID-19 study, collected from November 2020 to January 2021. A sample of 290 GBMSM is analyzed, modeling three binary outcomes: belief that there will be a COVID-19 vaccine, belief that the COVID-19 vaccine will be available in 6 months, and being very likely to take the COVID-19 vaccine. In contrast to other studies, Black/African Americans and GBMSM living with HIV had higher levels of pandemic optimism and were more likely to be willing to accept a vaccine. Men who perceived a higher prevalence of COVID-19 among their friends and sex partners, and those who had reduced their sex partners, were more likely to be willing to take a COVID-19 vaccine. There remained a small percentage of participants (14%) who did not think the pandemic would end, that there would not be a vaccine and were unlikely to take a vaccine. To reach the levels of vaccination necessary to control the pandemic, it is imperative to understand the characteristics of those experiencing vaccine hesitancy and then tailor public health messages to their unique set of barriers and motivations.

Understanding vaccine hesitancy: the evidence

2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (7) ◽  
pp. 282-287
Author(s):  
Alison While
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Herd Immunity ◽  
Public Health Intervention ◽  
Health Intervention ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Important Public Health ◽  
Positive Attitudes ◽  
The Uk

Vaccine hesitancy is a concern both globally and within the UK. Alison While reviews the evidence relating to vaccine hesitancy, its underlying factors and the sociodemographic variations Vaccination is an important public health intervention, but its effectiveness depends upon the uptake of vaccination reaching sufficient levels to yield ‘herd’ immunity. While the majority of the UK hold positive attitudes about vaccination, some people, including health professionals, decline vaccinations. This article reviews the evidence relating to vaccine hesitancy, its underlying factors and the sociodemographic variations.

Balancing benefits and potential risks of vaccination: the precautionary principle and the law of unintended consequences

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjebm-2021-111773
Author(s):  
David Robert Grimes
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Precautionary Principle ◽  
Unintended Consequences ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
The Precautionary Principle ◽  
Life Saving ◽  
Potential Risks ◽  
Risk And Benefit

Vaccination is a life-saving endeavour, yet risk and uncertainty are unavoidable in science and medicine. Vaccination remains contentious in the public mind, and vaccine hesitancy is a serious public health issue. This has recently been reignited in the discussion over potential side effects of COVID-19 vaccines, and the decision by several countries to suspend measures such as the AstraZeneca vaccine. In these instances, the precautionary principle has often been invoked as a rationale, yet such heuristics do not adequately weigh potential harms against real benefits. How we analyse, communicate and react to potential harms is absolutely paramount to ensure the best decisions and outcomes for societal health, and maintaining public confidence. While balancing benefits and risks is an essential undertaking, it cannot be achieved without due consideration of several other pertinent factors, especially in the context of vaccination, where misguided or exaggerated fears have in the past imperilled public health. While well meaning, over reactions to potential hazards of vaccination and other health interventions can have unintended consequences, and cause lingering damage to public trust. In this analysis, we explore the challenges of assessing risk and benefit, and the limitations of the precautionary principle in these endeavours. When risk is unclear, cautious vigilance might be a more pragmatic and useful policy than reactionary suspensions.

scholarly journals Antecedents of Vaccine Hesitancy in WEIRD and East Asian Contexts

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel S. Courtney ◽  
Ana-Maria Bliuc
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
East Asian ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Mmr Vaccine ◽  
Specific Context ◽  
Vaccination Rates ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Effective Science

Following decreasing vaccination rates over the last two decades, understanding the roots of vaccine hesitancy has become a public health priority. Vaccine hesitancy is linked to scientifically unfounded fears around the MMR vaccine and autism which are often fuelled by misinformation spread on social media. To counteract the effects of misinformation about vaccines and in particular the falling vaccination rates, much research has focused on identifying the antecedents of vaccine hesitancy. As antecedents of vaccine hesitancy are contextually dependent, a one-size-fits-all approach is unlikely to be successful in non-WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich, and Democratic) populations, and even in certain (non-typical) WEIRD sub-populations. Successful interventions to reduce vaccine hesitancy must be based on understanding of the specific context. To identify potential contextual differences in the antecedents of vaccine hesitancy, we review research from three non-WEIRD populations in East Asia, and three WEIRD sub-populations. We find that regardless of the context, mistrust seems to be the key factor leading to vaccine hesitancy. However, the object of mistrust varies across WEIRD and non-WEIRD populations, and across WEIRD subgroups suggesting that effective science communication must be mindful of these differences.

Public Engagement and Policy Entrepreneurship on Social Media in the Time of Anti-Vaccination Movements

2020 ◽  
pp. 60-80
Author(s):  
Melodie Yunju Song
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Competing Values ◽  
Mmr Vaccine ◽  
The Public ◽  
Coverage Rates

North America has experienced a resurgence of measles outbreak due to unprecedentedly low Mumps-Measles and Rubella vaccination coverage rates facilitated by the anti-vaccination movement. The objective of this chapter is to explore the new online public space and public discourse using Web 2.0 in the public health arena to answer the question, ‘What is driving public acceptance of or hesitancy towards the MMR vaccine?' More specifically, typologies of online public engagement will be examined using MMR vaccine hesitancy as a case study to illustrate the different approaches used by pro- and anti-vaccine groups to inform, consult with, and engage the public on a public health issue that has been the subject of long-standing public debate and confusion. This chapter provides an overview of the cyclical discourse of anti-vaccination movements. The authors hypothesize that anti-vaccination, vaccine hesitant, and pro-vaccination representations on the online public sphere are reflective of competing values (e.g., modernism, post-modernism) in contemporary society.

Legitimising a ‘Zombie idea’: childhood vaccines and autism

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Rizzi ◽  
K Attwell ◽  
V Casigliani ◽  
J Taylor ◽  
F Quattrone ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Economic Benefits ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Strategic Decision ◽  
Childhood Vaccination ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Scientific Authority ◽  
Immunization Rates

Abstract Background In June 2017 the Italian government made childhood vaccination mandatory following a drop in immunization rates. In the years preceding, two court judgments affirmed a causal link between vaccines and autism. Studies have linked these decisions to internet searches about vaccine-autism, the popularity of 'no-vax' theories, and drops in immunization rates. This paper provides an in-depth case study of both decisions and their impact. Methods We use a synthetic research design reliant on: (i) a systematic collection of primary sources (publicly available and obtained via official access to information requests); (ii) interviews with key actors prominently involved in the two cases or privy to the Italian vaccine-injury compensation regime (iii) a systematic analysis of media coverage. Results Circumstantial and systemic flaws enabled these decisions. Poor trial strategies, insufficient resources and laborious communication practices between arms of government were facilitators. Lack of awareness of the social sensitivity of vaccine issues, underestimation of the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy, and a tendency to 'think in silos' informed the lack of attention dedicated to the cases. The decisions created false expectations of economic benefits and vindication for families with autistic children, resulting in increased litigation. Systemic flaws exist in the process of appointment of expert consultants acting for the court leading to judicial reliance on false data. Conclusions Lessons learned include greater levels of attention to vaccine cases by the administration and a matured attitude of adjudicating bodies. Two issues remain: (i) the inability of government lawyers to disseminate positive results to counteract unfounded narratives; (ii) flaws in the process of appointing expert consultants advising courts, which remains focused on the fiduciary nature of the relationship, rather than scientific authority. Key messages The Milan and Rimini decisions that directly affected vaccine governance stemmed from a combination of circumstantial decision-making and systemic flaws that still lurk in public health governance. Strategic decision-making that overlooks lower levels of the adjudicative system can lead to significant public health consequences as courts of law and courts of public opinion obey different logics.

scholarly journals Beneficial or an unknown risk: Immunization hesitancy in Indian population

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 70-71
Author(s):  
Digjeet Kaur ◽  
Mahak Gera
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Virus Infection ◽  
Indian Population ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Effective Vaccine ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Unknown Risk ◽  
Rapid Spread ◽  
People’S Perception

The most victorious intervention in field of Public Health is immunization. It prevents 2-3 million deaths every year from diseases like diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, influenza, measles and currently to overcome the novel corona virus infection an effective vaccine is the most anticipated resolution. Despite the advancements and innovations in clinical research and healthcare, vaccine hesitancy is a threat globally. Social media has provided unmatched capacity for people to communicate but has also been a major tool for rapid spread of misconceptions and disingenuous information damaging to public health. This article aims to give an overview of vaccine hesitancy of various infectious diseases, people’s perception towards it, how social media has facilitated this movement and how to eliminate the misconception.

scholarly journals Acceptance and Attitudes Toward COVID-19 Vaccines: A Cross-Sectional Study from Jordan

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamam El-Elimat ◽  
Mahmoud M. AbuAlSamen ◽  
Basima A. Almomani ◽  
Nour A. Al-Sawalha ◽  
Feras Q. Alali
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
The Public ◽  
Awareness Campaigns ◽  
Health Authorities ◽  
Public Acceptability ◽  
Public Health Authorities

AbstractBackgroundVaccines are effective interventions that can reduce the high burden of diseases globally. However, public vaccine hesitancy is a pressing problem for public health authorities. With the availability of COVID-19 vaccines, little information is available on the public acceptability and attitudes towards the COVID-19 vaccines in Jordan. This study aimed to investigate the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines and its predictors in addition to the attitudes towards these vaccines among public in Jordan.MethodsAn online, cross-sectional, and self-administered questionnaire was instrumentalized to survey adult participants from Jordan on the acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines. Logistic regression analysis was used to find the predictors of COVID-19 vaccines’ acceptability.ResultsA total of 3,100 participants completed the survey. The public acceptability of COVID-19 vaccines was fairly low (37.4%) in Jordan. Males (OR=2.488, 95CI%=1.834–3.375, p<.001) and those who took the seasonal influenza vaccine (OR=2.036, 95CI%=1.306–3.174, p=.002) were more likely to accept Covid-19 vaccines. Similarly, participants who believed that vaccines are generally safe (OR=9.258, 95CI%=6.020–14.237, p<.001) and those who were willing to pay for vaccines (OR=19.223, 95CI%=13.665–27.042, p<.001), once available, were more likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccines. However, those above 35 years old (OR=0.376, 95CI%=0.233-0.607, p<.001) and employed participants (OR=0.542, 95CI%=0.405-0.725, p<.001) were less likely to accept the COVID-19 vaccines. Moreover, participants who believed that there was a conspiracy behind COVID-19 (OR=0.502, 95CI%=0.356- 0.709, p<.001) and those who do not trust any source of information on COVID-19 vaccines (OR=0.271, 95CI%=0.183 – 0.400, p<.001), were less likely to have acceptance towards them. The most trusted sources of information on COVID-19 vaccines were healthcare providers.ConclusionSystematic interventions are required by public health authorities to reduce the levels of vaccines’ hesitancy and improve their acceptance. We believe these results and specifically the low rate of acceptability is alarming to Jordanian health authorities and should stir further studies on the root causes and the need of awareness campaigns. These interventions should take the form of reviving the trust in national health authorities and structured awareness campaigns that offer transparent information about the safety and efficacy of the vaccines and the technology that was utilized in their production.

scholarly journals College Students' COVID-19 Vaccine Beliefs and Intentions: Implications for interventions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meg L Small ◽  
Robert Lennon ◽  
John Dziak ◽  
Rachel A Smith ◽  
Gillian Sommerville ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
College Students ◽  
Public University ◽  
College Campuses ◽  
Vaccine Hesitancy ◽  
Effective Management ◽  
Effective Interventions ◽  
Critical Public Health ◽  
Beliefs And Attitudes ◽  
Health Messaging

On college campuses, effective management of vaccine-preventable transmissible pathogens requires understanding student vaccination intentions. This is necessary for developing and tailoring health messaging to maximize uptake of health information and vaccines. The current study explored students' beliefs and attitudes about vaccines in general, and the new COVID-19 vaccines specifically. This study provides insights into effective health messaging needed to rapidly increase COVID-19 vaccination on college campuses--information that will continue to be informative in future academic years across a broad scope of pathogens. Data were collected via an online cohort survey of college students aged 18 years and older residing on or near the campus of a large public university during fall 2020. Overall, we found COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in college students correlated strongly with some concerns about vaccines in general as well as with concerns specific to COVID-19 vaccines. Taken together, these results provide further insight for message development and delivery, and can inform more effective interventions to advance critical public health outcomes on college campuses beyond the current pandemic.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document