Vaccination resistance is as old as vaccination itself. Even though vaccines save five lives every minute, and even though 85 percent of children worldwide are vaccinated against diphtheria, tetanus, and whooping cough, some people are still resisting life-saving vaccines. A range of factors contribute to vaccine resistance, from fear of needles or side effects to conspiracy theories involving governments or the pharmaceutical industry.
Although anti-vaccination activists have never prevailed, when they find temporary footing in a society, they proclaim theories that cause vaccination rates to decrease and preventable diseases to increase.
The COVID-19 pandemic illustrates everything we know about vaccines and vaccine resistance. The development of safe COVID-19 vaccines has provided us with the tools to fight the pandemic, and with 6.5 billion doses administered, and a rate of 22 million doses administered per day, it has brought light to the end of a dark tunnel.
On the other hand, the pandemic not only caused the deaths of millions of people, but also created a toxic legacy of misinformation and conspiracy theories that has mobilized opposition to vaccinations. This is not surprising given what we know about human behavior. When people suffer a loss of control over their lives or feel threatened, they become more vulnerable to conspiracy beliefs.
While this opposition has not prevented many countries from achieving high vaccination rates – in Spain, for example, almost 80 percent of the population is fully vaccinated, with Italy and France not far behind – it cannot be ignored because anti-vaccination activists are increasingly resorting to intimidation and threats of violence against health workers. In the United Kingdom, police are now protecting some mobile vaccination stations, and in Germany, after a man attacked health workers because they refused to issue him a vaccination certificate without having been vaccinated at all.
In the United States, attitudes towards vaccination have become so politicized, with some Republican leaders expressing opposition to vaccines, that there is now a significant gap in uptake between states depending on how they vote. Democratic-leaning states have high vaccination rates, with Massachusetts and Vermont reaching 78 percent, while Republican-leaning states lag behind, with West Virginia still lagging behind at just 48 percent. This phenomenon is believed to be due to allegations that American anti-vaccination activists have joined forces with the far right and other conspiracy theorists.
But what can communicators and politicians do to respond to this phenomenon given the obvious risk to public health that comes as a result of anti-vaccination movements?
First, leadership matters. When deciding on a complex issue like vaccination, people generally rely on the advice of trusted opinion leaders, who may be experts, media personalities, or politicians. However, when issues become politically polarized, the question of whom to trust can become a matter of partisanship rather than expertise. In fact, evidence shows that willingness to get vaccinated against COVID-19 among Republicans varies depending on who is recommending vaccination—Donald Trump or Joe Biden. Thus, it is essential that opinion leaders understand their impact on individual health decision-making and put public health ahead of partisan divides. That is why it is important that some Republicans speak out in favor of vaccination.
However, even when leaders issue clear messages, some individuals will continue to publicly question the effectiveness and safety of vaccinations, almost inevitably spreading information that is completely false or highly misleading. The messages of these science deniers do the most damage when they are not corrected.
Fortunately, research shows that the impact of science deniers’ messages can be mitigated by offering fact-based corrections or exposing logical flaws. The latest manual on combating fake news offers practical advice for practitioners on how to be able to do this and write promising corrections.
(Opinion of Stephan Lewandowsky and Philipp Schmid for Aljazeera)