Do you think this pandemic will change minds about vaccines?

[Shellydon]

Will anti-vaxxers now understand why vaccines are important and work?

[mommyoffive]

Yes I do.  I think once anti-vaxxers start losing their friends and family they will change their minds once a vaccine for this roles out.  

 

[gardenmom5]

some will, some won't.

[Shellydon]

2 minutes ago, mommyoffive said:

Yes I do.  I think once anti-vaxxers start losing their friends and family they will change their minds once a vaccine for this roles out.  

 

I hope so.  The death rate for paralytic polio was 2-5% (death to cases ratio). 

[Soror]

I doubt it moves anyone that is hard-core. I have one friend that is so anti-vax I don't think she'd change her mind even if she lost a child to a VPD because she would still see the vax as a greater risk. I think it will change for those that are more on the line.

[Murphy101]

Depends why they were against some vaccines. 

People who thought vaccines were just bunk? Meh. Who knows. 

People who thought some illnesses didn’t need a vaccine to begin with? Idk. I’ve always thought that it was .. not all good.. to combo so many vaccines bc people who wanted some but not others were put in an all or nothing situation, and yeah some will choose nothing.

Some people have a problem with vaccines that came to be an an unethical manner, believing that encourages/supports those unethical acts to justify the means.  

I think most people will want a vaccine for Covid, if it is ethically sourced and distributed.

Theres always going to be people that say no to something though.

And truth be known, the vast majority of people do get all the vaccines. I don’t see that changing. 

Edited April 4, 2020 by Murphy101

[Liz CA]

7 minutes ago, gardenmom5 said:

some will, some won't.

 

This because from what I have heard there are different reasons many choose not to do it and some are selective about which ones they are having injected. Not sure if there will be an "across the board response."

[Corraleno]

I think the super hard core anti-vaxxers who have a lot of their identity wrapped up in it will stay that way, but others may become more selective vaxxers (e.g., get the CV vax, but not chicken pox). I would hope that all schools and colleges will require proof of CV vaccine to enroll once it's available, so that may persuade a lot of 18 yr olds to get it, even if their parents were strict anti-vaxxers.

[gardenmom5]

4 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

I think the super hard core anti-vaxxers who have a lot of their identity wrapped up in it will stay that way, but others may become more selective vaxxers (e.g., get the CV vax, but not chicken pox). I would hope that all schools and colleges will require proof of CV vaccine to enroll once it's available, so that may persuade a lot of 18 yr olds to get it, even if their parents were strict anti-vaxxers.

there have already been news reports (previous to this) about 18 year olds publicly going through all the vaccine process because their parents were such staunch antivaxxers - the parent would rather disown their child than see them vaccinated.

[DesertBlossom]

I recently watched a video with Peter Hotek where he explained that previous attempts to create a coronavirus vaccine caused immune enhancement problems, where the vaccinated individual became even sicker when exposed to the virus they had been vaccinated against. It's a known problem with the dengue fever vaccine, as well as RSV. I will be curious to see if they can resolve that issue. I would be especially wary of a vaccine that was fast-tracked for approval because of it. Honestly, I think our best bet is to all slowly be exposed to the virus so we can develop natural immunity and hopefully doctors will be able to find effective treatments to treat those who are severely affected by virus.

[May]

I have never gotten the flu vaccine and a couple of other optional vaccines recommend for a person of my age. I’ll make an informed decision when a C19 vaccine becomes available. 

[DesertBlossom]

To answer the original question, it depends on why they are anti-vaccine. Parents whose children have been injured or killed by vaccines will not change their minds. And those who have issues with vaccines cultured on aborted fetal cells will not change their minds if that is how the COVID vaccine is manufactured. 

The fact that there is a deadly virus circulating the globe is not proof that "vaccines work." Some vaccines are more effective than others. Some don't work very well at all. So whether or not people will be inclined to get the COVID vaccine comes out will depend on a lot of factors specific to the vaccine itself. Look at how many pro-vaxxers opt out of the flu vaccine. This is not a black and white issue. And anyone who thinks it is, does not understand the controversy surrounding vaccines.

Edited April 4, 2020 by DesertBlossom

[Carrie12345]

I’ve actually seen someone argue that this is a reason to UNDERSTAND anti-vaxxers instead of stigmatize them. Because we’ll go to such extremes to save a small percentage of the population from complications.  Yeah.

I wasn’t ever anti-vax, but I was definitely meh about the whole thing for a few years. Now I’m willing to let anyone stick my family with all the needles they can find.  Okay, maybe not THAT extreme, but close!

[BusyMom5]

I doubt it changes any minds.  My DH and I have been discussing the Covid vax, when its available.  It will be hard for me to make a decision.   I prefer a vax to be about 10 years in circulation before I feel it's really safe.  

[Guest]

1 hour ago, soror said:

I doubt it moves anyone that is hard-core. I have one friend that is so anti-vax I don't think she'd change her mind even if she lost a child to a VPD because she would still see the vax as a greater risk. I think it will change for those that are more on the line.

I agree. For one thing, people have Consistency Bias and it is really difficult for most people to change their minds about something they have forcefully argued against before. The more their self-image is involved with a position the less likely they will change positions completely. 

 

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, Carrie12345 said:

I’ve actually seen someone argue that this is a reason to UNDERSTAND anti-vaxxers instead of stigmatize them. Because we’ll go to such extremes to save a small percentage of the population from complications.  Yeah.

I wasn’t ever anti-vax, but I was definitely meh about the whole thing for a few years. Now I’m willing to let anyone stick my family with all the needles they can find.  Okay, maybe not THAT extreme, but close!

Pretty much true for me, too. My youngest didn’t get the MMR until he was ten. But it was Measles outbreaks that made me start to think...hmmm. If my kid gets Measles when I could have made that extremely unlikely, I’m really gonna kick myself. I also figured if there was any place a Measles outbreak was likely to happen in my state, it would be in a homeschool community. Other than certain religious sects with whom we don’t socialize, the hsers were the most likely to not vax. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, DesertBlossom said:

To answer the original question, it depends on why they are anti-vaccine. Parents whose children have been injured or killed by vaccines will not change their minds. And those who have issues with vaccines cultured on aborted fetal cells will not change their minds if that is how the COVID vaccine is manufactured. 

The fact that there is a deadly virus circulating the globe is not proof that "vaccines work." Some vaccines are more effective than others. Some don't work very well at all. So whether or not people will be inclined to get the COVID vaccine comes out will depend on a lot of factors specific to the vaccine itself. Look at how many pro-vaxxers opt out of the flu vaccine. This is not a black and white issue. And anyone who thinks it is, does not understand the controversy surrounding vaccines.

It will be once the vax is in widespread use and then the number of new cases drops precipitously. That will be the proof that vaccines work. That will be the part that it should be hard for any current anti-vaxxer to argue against. 

[maize]

39 minutes ago, Quill said:

It will be once the vax is in widespread use and then the number of new cases drops precipitously. That will be the proof that vaccines work. That will be the part that it should be hard for any current anti-vaxxer to argue against. 

I suspect they will just argue that the pandemic ran its course.

[klmama]

11 minutes ago, Quill said:

It will be once the vax is in widespread use and then the number of new cases drops precipitously. That will be the proof that vaccines work. That will be the part that it should be hard for any current anti-vaxxer to argue against. 

Again, it depends on why they are against vaccinating.  Most people I know who don't vaccinate or who vaccinate selectively are afraid of the diseases and believe vaccines work.  It's just that they are more afraid of their dc developing neurological injuries from the vaccines.    

14 minutes ago, maize said:

I suspect they will just argue that the pandemic ran its course.

Yep.  Besides the known cases, COVID-19 has a lot of asymptomatic carriers and a lot of potentially infected people who aren't tested because they aren't seriously ill.  There may be fewer cases in the future simply because there will be fewer available hosts for the virus.  If a vaccine is developed and people are vaccinated without being titered first, it won't be clear how effective the vaccine truly is.  The CDC may claim it's all the vaccine's doing, but no one will know for sure unless they titer people first.  The argument against COVID-19 vaccination is likely to be the same as with measles - that the numbers were already dropping when the vaccine was developed.  

 

[Frances]

3 hours ago, soror said:

I doubt it moves anyone that is hard-core. I have one friend that is so anti-vax I don't think she'd change her mind even if she lost a child to a VPD because she would still see the vax as a greater risk. I think it will change for those that are more on the line.

Exactly. We had a case of tetanus in a child in my state where the boy was in intensive care on a vent for many weeks and the parents still refused to vaccinate afterwards. 

[itsheresomewhere]

No.  Especially the ones who think this pandemic is to distract from the 5G they are installing now.  Apparently, 5G will be worse than the covid 19.  It also does mind control or something close to it but I just can’t finish reading the posts about it.  They make my eyes roll from the wacky ness of the posts.

Edited April 4, 2020 by itsheresomewhere

[SKL]

Maybe to a degree, but I am sure many people won't change their minds.  Actually I've seen some people who think this whole thing is a conspiracy by vaccine makers.

[gardenmom5]

14 minutes ago, SKL said:

Maybe to a degree, but I am sure many people won't change their minds.  Actually I've seen some people who think this whole thing is a conspiracy by vaccine makers.

that's a new version of the conspiracies around this.

[Ausmumof3]

Some people who are against vaccines in a serious way claim that vaccines usually come too late after herd immunity is already established.  I don’t think anything about this will probably change their mind. People who joined the anti vax club without as much thought probably will.  It will also depend whether we get a vaccine and what the side effects are.  If we get one that causes problems in the early stages it may turn people against them.

[rebcoola]

My one friend who is anti-vax already said if the way out of the restrictions was a vax we should just expose her or kill her now because she would never do it.

[Terabith]

47 minutes ago, Dreamergal said:

I hope so. It is appalling America still has small pox because of negligence and unproven scientific views by people. I generally try to be understanding of people's views. But on vaccines I am a  pro-vaccinator that draws a hard line. I think refusing to vaccinate is a luxury and something that people in developed countries consider they have a choice because they have not seen people with polio or small pox scars. I come from a country where there was a sustained campaign by the government who sent volunteers to educate uneducated villagers and dedicated western doctor volunteers that eradicated polio and small pox. Even now there are village volunteers who go door to door to vaccinate uneducated people. Vaccination is not a luxury or a choice. 

We don't have smallpox.  ETA:  We do have measles outbreaks, and chicken pox is still around.  But no smallpox.

Edited April 4, 2020 by Terabith

[Katy]

I think the anti-vaccine people who are moderate will be more likely to be vaccinated.

I think the hard core people are just blaming this on conspiracy theories and will dig deeper.

[sassenach]

7 hours ago, gardenmom5 said:

there have already been news reports (previous to this) about 18 year olds publicly going through all the vaccine process because their parents were such staunch antivaxxers - the parent would rather disown their child than see them vaccinated.

That’s so bizarre to me. 
 

The anti-vaxxers in my life seem more concerned about a government mandated vaccine than about getting Covid. So I’m gonna say no, it’s probably not going to change much. 

[J-rap]

I think it'll move a few more to the "other side."  

[Lady Florida.]

7 hours ago, Quill said:

It will be once the vax is in widespread use and then the number of new cases drops precipitously. That will be the proof that vaccines work. That will be the part that it should be hard for any current anti-vaxxer to argue against. 

If that idea worked there wouldn't be anti-vaxxers. Not even counting the supposedly harmless childhood vaccines, the smallpox and polio vaccines should have been proof enough. Maybe it's because many in the anti-vax crowd never experienced a world with those diseases they didn't see the good the vaccines have done. It's possible that living through a deadly pandemic will change some minds but I don't hold out a lot of hope.

[SereneHome]

There are quite a few families in our HS community that don't vaccinate or do it in on a delayed schedule. Only one mom is VERY anti-vax. I she believes that her son got injured by it.

So.....she is also the only one right now who is proclaiming that Covid 19 is not a big deal and that they are living their life "normally" and not doing anything differently.  And that viruses are nothing to worry about.

While she is the only one like that on my FB feed, I am willing to bet she is not the only one who feels this way. That's why I am terrified of how long this epidemic will be going on!

[Lecka]

I doubt it.  People have already decided some really personal things, and already put up with a lot of criticism and doubt.  
 

Maybe for some people who were just being on the safe side or going along with their peer group or taking advice from others.  But I think many of those people have already made the switch.  
 

I do think there was a period of time when Andrew Wakefield appeared to be a legitimate scientist!  He was published in The Lancet!!!!!  

Edited April 5, 2020 by Lecka

[Ellie]

Government-mandated vaccines? No. For many people it isn't that they don't want their dc to be vaccinated; it's that they don't believe the government should be telling them to do so.

A boatload of vaccines given to newborn babies? No. Just...no. Why anyone thinks that's a good idea is beyond me. Vaccines spaced out over time, sure. But not government-mandated.

 Supposed government ignorance of people--adults as well as children-- being damaged by vaccines? The government needs to up its game on that. There's way too much evidence that it is so.

Mandated vaccines which were made with aborted baby tissue? That objection will never go away.

[Farrar]

I've already seen my anti-vax friends doubling down against this one, so it seems doubtful.

I also think there's a good chance that - with the vaccine being rushed for obvious reasons - there may be problems with it that make them feel super validated. Sigh.

[DesertBlossom]

This article is worth a read. 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-vaccines-insight/as-pressure-for-coronavirus-vaccine-mounts-scientists-debate-risks-of-accelerated-testing-idUSKBN20Y1GZ

[kiwik]

10 hours ago, BusyMom5 said:

I doubt it changes any minds.  My DH and I have been discussing the Covid vax, when its available.  It will be hard for me to make a decision.   I prefer a vax to be about 10 years in circulation before I feel it's really safe.  

Do do I but who are we prepared to sacrifice for those 10 years.  I am avoiding the HPV vaccination for now but I could not in good conscience avoid this one.

[lulalu]

12 hours ago, Quill said:

It will be once the vax is in widespread use and then the number of new cases drops precipitously. That will be the proof that vaccines work. That will be the part that it should be hard for any current anti-vaxxer to argue against. 

Or if rates drop it could show natural herd immunity. Or could show like many are thinking right now that people can have mild symptoms. 

If a vaccine comes out and rates drop will not show vaccines work. There are so many factors involved. 

[lulalu]

I wonder where a mandated vaccine would leave people who have survived COVID19 already. Or even if not a mandate by government, but if one becomes routine in the schedule. Where does that leave natural immunity? 

I think a rush vaccine won't change many people's thoughts on the dangers. 

Edited April 5, 2020 by lulalu

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Lady Florida. said:

If that idea worked there wouldn't be anti-vaxxers. Not even counting the supposedly harmless childhood vaccines, the smallpox and polio vaccines should have been proof enough. Maybe it's because many in the anti-vax crowd never experienced a world with those diseases they didn't see the good the vaccines have done. It's possible that living through a deadly pandemic will change some minds but I don't hold out a lot of hope.

That was my thinking. 

One of the arguments anti-vaxxers make is “those diseases were going away due to improved sanitation and better hospital care.” It should be apparent to an anti-vaxxer that hand-washing (for example), while helpful, does not firewall COVID-19. Better hygiene is not going to drop the cases from millions to a few thousand. Only vaccines have done that historically. 

FWIW, I don’t hold out a lot of hope, either. As I said, people have consistency bias and the number of people who willingly do a complete about-face like that after they have argued their point forcefully the other way are few. 

However, when I was more on the anti-vax side, part of what changed my mind, at least as far as the “vaccines don’t work” argument, was because I saw what happened to Chicken Pox. When I was a kid, everyone got CP. Every year we knew families where CP was running through the household. The vaccine was released when my first child was born. After the vax was established, I virtually never heard of a kid with CP again. The small handful I did hear of had a few pox sprinkled on their bodies and that was it. So it was apparent to me that vaccines do work. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, lulalu said:

Or if rates drop it could show natural herd immunity. Or could show like many are thinking right now that people can have mild symptoms. 

If a vaccine comes out and rates drop will not show vaccines work. There are so many factors involved. 

Natural herd immunity? You know how many people have to get sick and die in order to establish natural herd immunity? And avoiding mild symptoms has never been the point of trying to halt the spread of CV19. It’s to avoid community transmission to thousands, and then millions, of people, many of whom will not have mild symptoms. It’s to avoid hospitals so packed with very sick and dying people that the hospital rolls out refrigerator cars to the parking lot for temporary body storage. 

Your last sentence is highly unscientific. Vaccines would not even be a thing if the data did not clearly demonstrate that vaccines work. I bet you don’t know any kids surviving in an iron lung; that’s because vaccines work. The reason we can confidently keep pet dogs without fear they will get rabies, even though rabies exist all around in the raccoons, groundhogs and bats in our woods, is because we know vaccines work. 

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, lulalu said:

I wonder where a mandated vaccine would leave people who have survived COVID19 already. Or even a not mandate by government, but if one becomes routine in the schedule. Where does that leave natural immunity? 

I think a rush vaccine won't change many people's thought on the dangers. 

Presumably, if you have had a COVID19 test and were given confirmation you do indeed have the disease, you would not be required to get a vaccine. 

If the vaccine is mandated by the government (US or any country), it is obvious to me why it would be mandatory and not elective. We have seen exactly what people do when they have the freedom to make the choice themselves: they flout the suggestions, they have parties, they pack out the parks and beaches, they arrange play-dates with the kids they are meant to be avoiding contact with, they go get their hair done and their fingernails touched up. If it is mandated, this will be why. 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Farrar said:

I've already seen my anti-vax friends doubling down against this one, so it seems doubtful.

I also think there's a good chance that - with the vaccine being rushed for obvious reasons - there may be problems with it that make them feel super validated. Sigh.

I worry about that, too. I personally do not want steps skipped in haste to get a vaccine on the market. And I say that though I really want a CV19 vax as soon as possible. 

[HS Mom in NC]

It depends which subset of people you're talking about that tend be lumped into the "anti-vaxx" label by others. 

If you mean people who are actually anti-vaxx and label themselves as such because they believe all vaccinations are categorically higher risk than the diseases, then no. They will continue to do what they've been doing.  This is the group that gets the most press because controversy sells in the media and they tend to have a Crusader mindset that wants publicity.

If you mean people who are often labeled "anti-vaxx" by others but have always left the possibility for vaccinating open because they weigh the likelihood of exposure, then  yes because this is clearly eventually going to expose everyone and requires intensive hospitalizing for significant percentage of those sickened.  This is the same group of people who, for example,  were not vaccinating for measles and Whooping Cough in the mid-1990s when there were few cases of each, but regularly kept an eye on the stats. I'm not talking about big the outbreaks in the last 5 years, I'm talking about before then when a series of international travel cases were causing small outbreaks and when steady increases in illegal border crossing by populations who had never had access to vaccines were fleeing terrible situations in Central and South America.  When  those numbers increased, they vaccinated their children (none of whom had ever had measles or Whooping cough) just like they intended to do all along.  This crowd doesn't get much press because it doesn't sell in the media.

They don't really want publicity because they're far more inclined to leaving it up to parents and institutions that are responsible for children  all day.  It's not unusual for this person to say about an illness for which there is already a vaccine, "If parents don't want to vaccinate, it's up to them, but when they enroll in an institution, find a pediatrician, etc.  they have to follow the school or doctor's guidelines for vaccination if they want their services.  When they take on the responsibility for children in their care, they call the shots-literally."  

[Shellydon]

1 hour ago, Homeschool Mom in AZ said:

It depends which subset of people you're talking about that tend be lumped into the "anti-vaxx" label by others. 

If you mean people who are actually anti-vaxx and label themselves as such because they believe all vaccinations are categorically higher risk than the diseases, then no. They will continue to do what they've been doing.  This is the group that gets the most press because controversy sells in the media and they tend to have a Crusader mindset that wants publicity.

If you mean people who are often labeled "anti-vaxx" by others but have always left the possibility for vaccinating open because they weigh the likelihood of exposure, then  yes because this is clearly eventually going to expose everyone and requires intensive hospitalizing for significant percentage of those sickened.  This is the same group of people who, for example,  were not vaccinating for measles and Whooping Cough in the mid-1990s when there were few cases of each, but regularly kept an eye on the stats. I'm not talking about big the outbreaks in the last 5 years, I'm talking about before then when a series of international travel cases were causing small outbreaks and when steady increases in illegal border crossing by populations who had never had access to vaccines were fleeing terrible situations in Central and South America.  When  those numbers increased, they vaccinated their children (none of whom had ever had measles or Whooping cough) just like they intended to do all along.  This crowd doesn't get much press because it doesn't sell in the media.

They don't really want publicity because they're far more inclined to leaving it up to parents and institutions that are responsible for children  all day.  It's not unusual for this person to say about an illness for which there is already a vaccine, "If parents don't want to vaccinate, it's up to them, but when they enroll in an institution, find a pediatrician, etc.  they have to follow the school or doctor's guidelines for vaccination if they want their services.  When they take on the responsibility for children in their care, they call the shots-literally."  

All of my anti-vax friends fall in the first category

[Wheres Toto]

Nope.   For the first time I'm seeing them object to the term anti-vaxxers and say instead they are pro-science, and that "we can't copy Mother Nature" and "anything natural is safe".  

And honestly, every single time one of my kids has gotten any vaccine I've been given the insert to read, the doctor has asked if I had any questions, explained about possible side effects, etc.   I've never seen any denial that some people may react badly to vaccines.   NO medicine works the same way 100% of the time and ALL medicines have some risk, even serious risks for some people.

Anyone, this was the latest quote I saw.  Can you be pro-science and not accept germ theory?

Not everybody believes in the germ theory, or that you can "catch" & "spread" germs floating around in the air. Similar to the terrain theory I talked about last week, this theory is based on a model called "New Medicine" or "German New Medicine" or GNM for short.  Learning this model of medicine has changed my life because I no longer fear disease or germs the way I was taught to growing up. 

[Farrar]

3 hours ago, Quill said:

I worry about that, too. I personally do not want steps skipped in haste to get a vaccine on the market. And I say that though I really want a CV19 vax as soon as possible. 

We already know they're skipping steps. But it's not like there's one "they." There are six (I think) different efforts going on mostly using really different methods. I think if they're able to use the measles vaccines, for example, I wouldn't worry too much from what I've read. But if they use that totally new method with the RNA... yeah, that seems untried. It's all just hope at this point. One of the steps they're skipping which can't hurt anyone per se though, is that once these trials show any promise, they're going to just start producing the vaccine in huge quantities without finishing the testing. They know that it will likely lead to scrapped vaccines, but it's the only way to get it out faster. As long as it doesn't get distributed, then starting multiple lines of production before getting the the go on which one is working seems like a good skipped step.

[sassenach]

20 hours ago, DesertBlossom said:

I recently watched a video with Peter Hotek where he explained that previous attempts to create a coronavirus vaccine caused immune enhancement problems, where the vaccinated individual became even sicker when exposed to the virus they had been vaccinated against. It's a known problem with the dengue fever vaccine, as well as RSV. I will be curious to see if they can resolve that issue. I would be especially wary of a vaccine that was fast-tracked for approval because of it. Honestly, I think our best bet is to all slowly be exposed to the virus so we can develop natural immunity and hopefully doctors will be able to find effective treatments to treat those who are severely affected by virus.

I saw a study that showed that due to immune enhancement, those who got the flu shot were more likely to catch corona-viruses (of the generic flavor) and human metapneumovirus. That caught my eye because human metapneumovirus landed my ds in the hospital last year (and we always get the flu shot). Sometimes it feels like you’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t with vaccines. 

[wintermom]

I think society's tolerance of anti-vaccination and non-compliance will change, and our political leaders will have more power to enforce immunization and penalize those who do not comply. Whether individuals change their personal beliefs or not will be less relevant, as long as their behaviours do not increase health risk to others.