11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The French public's attitudes to a future COVID-19 vaccine: The politicization of a public health issue

      brief-report

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          As Covid-19 spreads across the world, governments turn a hopeful eye towards research and development of a vaccine against this new disease. But it is one thing to make a vaccine available, and it is quite another to convince the public to take the shot, as the precedent of the 2009 H1N1 influenza illustrated. In this paper, we present the results of four online surveys conducted in April 2020 in representative samples of the French population 18 years of age and over (N = 5018). These surveys were conducted during a period when the French population was on lockdown and the daily number of deaths attributed to the virus reached its peak. We found that if a vaccine against the new coronavirus became available, almost a quarter of respondents would not use it. We also found that attitudes to this vaccine were correlated significantly with political partisanship and engagement with the political system. Attitudes towards this future vaccine did not follow the traditional mapping of political attitudes along a Left-Right axis. The rift seems to be between people who feel close to governing parties (Centre, Left and Right) on the one hand, and, on the other, people who feel close to Far-Left and Far-Right parties as well as people who do not feel close to any party. We draw on the French sociological literature on ordinary attitudes to politics to discuss our results as well as the cultural pathways via which political beliefs can affect perceptions of vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic.

          Highlights

          • Almost a quarter of the French population would not get vaccinated against COVID-19.

          • Attitudes are correlated with political partisanship and engagement with politics.

          • Attitudes do not follow the traditional separation between Left-wing and Right-wing.

          • Refusal is associated with proximity radical parties and to abstention.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A future vaccination campaign against COVID-19 at risk of vaccine hesitancy and politicisation

          Just a few weeks ago, more than half of the world's population was on lockdown to limit the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Scientists are racing against time to provide a proven treatment. Beyond the current outbreak, in the longer term, the development of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and their global access are a priority to end the pandemic. 1 However, the success of this strategy relies on people's acceptability of immunisation: what if people do not want the shot? This question is not rhetorical; many experts have warned against a worldwide decline in public trust in immunisation and the rise of vaccine hesitancy during the past decade, especially in whole Europe and in France.2, 3 Early results from a survey done in late March in France suggests that this distrust is likely to become an issue when the vaccine will be made available. We did an online survey in a representative sample of the French population aged 18 years and older 10 days after the nationwide lockdown was introduced (March 27–29). We found that 26% of respondents stated that, if a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 becomes available, they would not use it. It might come as a surprise given the situation a few weeks ago: the whole population was confined as the outbreak had not yet reached its peak, and media were flooded with daily death tolls and the saturation of intensive care wards. The social profile of reluctant responders is even more worrying: this attitude was more prevalent among low-income people (37%), who are generally more exposed to infectious diseases, 4 among young women (aged 18–35 years; 36%), who play a crucial role regarding childhood vaccination, 5 and among people aged older than 75 years (22%), who are probably at an increased risk for severe illness from COVID-19. Our data also suggest that the political views of respondents play an important part in their attitude. Participants' acceptation of a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 strongly depended on their vote at the first round of the 2017 presidential election (figure ): those who had voted for a far left or far right candidate were much more likely to state that they would refuse the vaccine, as well as those who abtained from voting. Figure The French public's intention to refuse vaccination against COVID-19 according to their vote at the first round of the 2017 presidential election, March 27–29, COCONEL Survey (n=1012) These early results are not entirely surprising. When this dimension has been studied, researchers have often found a connection between political beliefs and attitudes to vaccines. 6 They highlight a crucial issue for public health interventions: how can we assure the public that recommendations reflect the state of scientific knowledge rather than political interests? This problem is exacerbated in times of crisis, during which there is considerable scientific uncertainty, available measures have a limited effect, and politicians—rather than experts—are the public face of crisis management. This is one of the lessons that can be drawn from the H1N1 influenza pandemic of 2009 in France. As the pandemic unfolded, the apparent national unity of the early phase broke apart. Criticism of the government's strategy was voiced by prominent members of nearly all of the opposition parties. 7 A public debate around the safety of the vaccine arose, with prominent politicians and activists claiming that it had been produced too hastily and not been tested enough. This was crucial in the failure of the vaccination campaign (only 8% of the population was vaccinated). 8 It also ushered in an era of perpetual debate over vaccination in France. 9 One of the crucial mistakes made at the time by French authorities was to refuse to communicate early on the measures taken to ensure the safety of the vaccine for fear that the mere evocation of risk might provoke irrational reactions. 10 This approach let critics set the agenda on this issue, condemning public authorities to a defensive position. Public authorities are setting up fast-track approval processes for a putative vaccine against SARS-CoV-2. 9 It is crucial to communicate early and transparently on these processes to avoid vaccines becoming part of political debates.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Ensuring global access to COVID-19 vaccines

            The current response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic involves aggressive implementation of suppression strategies, such as case identification, quarantine and isolation, contact tracing, and social distancing. However, models developed by the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team suggest that “transmission will quickly rebound if interventions are relaxed”. 1 WHO warns of multiple simultaneous outbreaks of COVID-19 worldwide. 2 The development of COVID-19 vaccines that can be used globally is therefore a priority for ending the pandemic. This vaccine effort should be guided by three imperatives: speed, manufacture and deployment at scale, and global access. In February, 2020, the World Bank and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), which funds development of epidemic vaccines, co-hosted a global consultation on these goals. 3 This consultation led to the launch of a COVID-19 Vaccine Development Taskforce that is now working on how to finance and manufacture vaccines for global access. CEPI estimates that developing up to three vaccines in the next 12–18 months will require an investment of at least US$2 billion. 4 This estimate includes phase 1 clinical trials of eight vaccine candidates, progression of up to six candidates through phase 2 and 3 trials, completion of regulatory and quality requirements for at least three vaccines, and enhancing global manufacturing capacity for three vaccines. This estimate does not include the costs of manufacture or delivery. Progress has been rapid. A phase 1 trial of a vaccine candidate, supported by the US National Institutes of Health and CEPI, began on March 16, 2020, 5 and 2 days later a clinical trial began in China. 6 Clinical trials for other candidates will start soon. Use of existing financing systems to support this work offers the benefits of speed and lower transaction costs than for new financing approaches. CEPI is supported by a World Bank financial intermediary fund that brings together public, philanthropic, and private funding to respond to global priorities. 7 Through this fund, CEPI can act as a global mechanism for funding vaccine development until vaccines can be licensed or used under emergency use provisions. Mobilising $2 billion in funding will require funding from all sources. Given the enormous health, social, and economic consequences of COVID-19, there is a strong case for all governments to invest in vaccines. In addition to direct government contributions, innovative finance mechanisms have been successful in raising funds for vaccines in the past and should be used to fund the development of COVID-19 vaccines.8, 9 The International Finance Facility for Immunisation (IFFIm) raises funds with vaccine bonds, which turn long-term contributions by donors into available cash. 8 IFFIm was created to support Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, but could be used to finance CEPI's COVID-19 vaccine efforts. With advanced market commitments, donors make funding commitments to vaccine manufacturers and, in exchange, companies sign a legally binding commitment to provide the vaccines at a price affordable to low-income and middle-income countries. Gavi's board expressed support for the use of Gavi's IFFIm and advanced market commitments to improve COVID-19 vaccine development and access. 10 The need for COVID-19 vaccines is global, although the need is differentially distributed within populations. Vaccines would likely be prioritised for health-care workers and people at greatest risk of severe illness and death. High-income countries must not monopolise the global supply of COVID-19 vaccines. This risk is real: during the 2009 influenza A/H1N1 pandemic, rich countries negotiated large advance orders for the vaccine, crowding out poor countries. 11 Such an outcome would result in a suboptimal allocation of an initially scarce resource. © 2020 Joseph Campbell/Reuters 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. A far better solution would be for governments to ensure there is a globally fair allocation system. With sufficient political will and public sector financing, such a system could be established using existing instruments and institutions. The rudiments of the system would require a global purchasing agent or agents, a substantial but limited-term advanced purchase commitment, and access through the system to financial instruments such as concessional loans or grants and indemnification from liability to offset the risks taken by participating private sector partners. Vaccines purchased through the system should be free at the point of care worldwide for prioritised populations, with national allocations determined through a fair and objective process. On March 16, 2020, the G7 committed to supporting the launch of joint research projects for COVID-19 treatments and vaccines. 12 High-level dialogue is needed on ways to ensure complementarity of efforts and global access to COVID-19 vaccines. Investments should proceed in tandem to build national systems for delivery of potential vaccines—eg, using domestic financing and external financing from the World Bank Group's $14 billion COVID-19 Fast Track Facility 13 and reallocations from the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, Gavi, and Global Financing Facility grants for service delivery.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The influence of political ideology and trust on willingness to vaccinate

              In light of the increasing refusal of some parents to vaccinate children, public health strategies have focused on increasing knowledge and awareness based on a “knowledge-deficit” approach. However, decisions about vaccination are based on more than mere knowledge of risks, costs, and benefits. Individual decision making about vaccinating involves many other factors including those related to emotion, culture, religion, and socio-political context. In this paper, we use a nationally representative internet survey in the U.S. to investigate socio-political characteristics to assess attitudes about vaccination. In particular, we consider how political ideology and trust affect opinions about vaccinations for flu, pertussis, and measles. Our findings demonstrate that ideology has a direct effect on vaccine attitudes. In particular, conservative respondents are less likely to express pro-vaccination beliefs than other individuals. Furthermore, ideology also has an indirect effect on immunization propensity. The ideology variable predicts an indicator capturing trust in government medical experts, which in turn helps to explain individual-level variation with regards to attitudes about vaccine choice.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Soc Sci Med
                Soc Sci Med
                Social Science & Medicine (1982)
                Elsevier Ltd.
                0277-9536
                1873-5347
                6 October 2020
                November 2020
                6 October 2020
                : 265
                : 113414
                Affiliations
                [a ]GEMASS, CNRS, Université Paris Sorbonne, Paris, France
                [b ]Aix Marseille Université, IRD, AP-HM, SSA, VITROME, Marseille, France
                [c ]Southeastern Health Regional Observatory (ORS Paca), Marseille, France
                [d ]Inserm CIC 1417; Univ Paris, Faculté de médecine Paris Descartes; AP-HP, Hôpital Cochin; Paris, France
                [e ]EHESP School of Public Health, Rennes, France
                [f ]CESP, Univ Paris Sud, Faculté de médecine UVSQ, Inserm, Univ Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
                [g ]Univ Rennes, CNRS, CREM UMR, 6211, Rennes, France
                [a ]GEMASS, CNRS, Université Paris Sorbonne, Paris, France
                [b ]Aix Marseille Université, IRD, AP-HM, SSA, VITROME, Marseille, France
                [c ]Southeastern Health Regional Observatory (ORS Paca), Marseille, France
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. GEMASS, CNRS, 59 rue Pouchet, 75017, Paris, France.
                Article
                S0277-9536(20)30633-X 113414
                10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113414
                7537647
                33038683
                18ffb70c-a3c1-4adb-b013-ced8c275b5ed
                © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 22 September 2020
                : 30 September 2020
                Categories
                Short Communication

                Health & Social care
                vaccination,coronavirus,covid-19,ideology,partisanship,france,hesitancy,politics
                Health & Social care
                vaccination, coronavirus, covid-19, ideology, partisanship, france, hesitancy, politics

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content223

                Cited by164

                Most referenced authors117