Connect with us

Government

What HCPs think about mandatory vaccination

What HCPs think about mandatory vaccination The practice of making vaccinations mandatory within a population has always been
The post What HCPs think about mandatory vaccination appeared first on .

Published

on

What HCPs think about mandatory vaccination

The practice of making vaccinations mandatory within a population has always been controversial. Historically, the first example of this was during the smallpox epidemic in the 1800s, when some European countries attempted to make vaccination against the disease compulsory.

While it is hard to argue against the overall aim of disease eradication, there are many ethical, medical, and social issues intertwined with the idea of enforcing vaccination.

However, in recent months, there has been a resurgence in conversation on this topic, with the ongoing pandemic prompting nations around the world to consider whether mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 is an appropriate measure to introduce for certain people groups or even entire populations.

Healthcare professionals have their say

Over a four-month period between 11th July and 11th November 2021, 23,186 healthcare professionals (HCPs) worldwide posted on social media 188,235 times discussing the topic of mandatory vaccination. It is important to note that this is a highly disputed issue among HCPs, which has brought many varying opinions to the forefront.

The two main contrasting perspectives taken by HCPs are:

  1. Those who believe vaccine mandates are absolutely necessary.
  2. Those who believe that vaccines should be encouraged but not mandatory.

Necessary to protect public health

The first HCP perspective to be explored is that mandatory vaccines are completely necessary to protect the health of society at large by ensuring herd immunity. Many HCPs with this view argue that vaccinations should not be a matter of personal choice and freedom, but instead ‘the price of living in a civil society’.

They encouraged those who oppose the mandate proposals by saying that vaccine mandates or passports are simply an extension of immunisation records, which are kept by billions of people around the world. HCPs referenced the historical mandatory vaccine against smallpox as proof of the effectiveness of mass vaccination.

 

 

HCPs make comparisons with other vaccine mandates

In addition to COVID-19, which dominated HCP discussions, other key diseases mentioned in the context of mandatory vaccines included measles, polio and influenza.

 

 

When discussing these diseases, HCPs were mainly referring to existing vaccine mandate policies, which stipulate, for example, that in many places around the world.

For example, parts of the US and Canada, children must be vaccinated against diseases including measles and polio before attending school, and those working in hospitals in many areas must also prove their vaccination status in order to be permitted to work.

The question arising from this comparison was – why should COVID-19 be treated any differently?

Pro-vaccine, anti-mandate

 The second, contrasting, and more commonly expressed opinion of HCPs on social media is that vaccines are positive and should be highly encouraged but not enforced.

Whilst many HCPs with this view describe themselves as ‘pro-vaccine’, contrary to the above, they believe that vaccinations should indeed be a matter of personal choice and consent, and therefore presented arguments against the rollout of vaccine mandates or passports. HCPs also defended themselves when they came under fire from others, reinforcing the difference between opposing vaccine mandates, and opposing vaccines themselves.

 

 

How do vaccine mandates affect uptake?

Another factor in the debate around mandatory vaccination was the potential effect this could have on vaccine uptake rates. Again, there was a lack of alignment on this from HCPs, with some saying that making vaccines mandatory will only increase resistance from those who are already hesitant, and others giving examples of when doing so has led to increased adherence of vaccination appointments.

Another interesting point of view offered by some HCPs suggested that most people are not opposed to the vaccine; they simply do not believe in its importance for their own health but would get vaccinated if required to preserve their personal freedom.

 

 

HCPs weigh up large-scale vaccine mandate in United States

 

 

When analysing the daily social media activity of HCPs relating to mandatory vaccination, it is clear that the conversation reached its peak volume between 9-11 September. HCPs used social media as a platform to react to an announcement from US President Joe Biden regarding a new vaccine mandate that is anticipated to apply to about two-thirds of all US employees. The mandate itself requires anyone who works for a business with more than 100 employees to be fully vaccinated, with companies warned of substantial fines should they violate these rules.

HCPs offered many of the opinions explored earlier in this article, while also questioning why members of Congress have been made exempt from this rule. Another key concern expressed by HCPs was the segregation that may be caused as a result of the low vaccine uptake among the black and minority communities.

Keep monitoring the conversation

HCPs have been using social media to articulate their views about compulsory vaccination, with a wide variety of opinions underpinned by health, social and ethical factors.

While some HCPs support the idea of mandatory vaccination, most favour an individual-centred approach where vaccines are encouraged but not enforced. As the world waits to see the effects of COVID-19 vaccine mandates imposed by some nations, CREATION.co is monitoring the ongoing conversation.

 

About the author

Laura Marsh, senior insights analyst at CREATION.co leads research projects within the Insight team, helping address pharma business challenges. Marsh and her teams analyse online conversations to understand the perspective and unmet needs of healthcare professionals.

 

The post What HCPs think about mandatory vaccination appeared first on .

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

“The Real President Is Whoever Controls The Teleprompter”: Musk Delivers Scathing Criticism Of Biden

"The Real President Is Whoever Controls The Teleprompter": Musk Delivers Scathing Criticism Of Biden

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch…

Published

on

"The Real President Is Whoever Controls The Teleprompter": Musk Delivers Scathing Criticism Of Biden

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times,

Tech billionaire Elon Musk this week warned that the United States must take steps to address inflation or it will end up like socialist Venezuela.

Musk, who is currently in the process of acquiring Twitter, told a virtual conference that he believes the government has printed too much money in recent years.

“I mean, the obvious reason for inflation is that the government printed a zillion amount of more money than it had, obviously,” Musk said, likely referring to COVID-19 relief stimulus packages worth trillions of dollars that were passed in recent years.

U.S. inflation rose by 8.3 percent in April, compared with the previous year. That’s slightly lower than the 8.5 percent spike in March, but it’s still near the 40-year high.

“So it’s like the government can’t … issue checks far in excess of revenue without there being inflation, you know, velocity of money held constant,” the Tesla CEO said.

“If the federal government writes checks, they never bounce. So that is effectively creation of more dollars. And if there are more dollars created, then the increase in the goods and services across the economy, then you have inflation, again, velocity of money held constant.”

If governments could merely “issue massive amounts of money and deficits didn’t matter, then, well, why don’t we just make the deficit 100 times bigger,” Musk asked. “The answer is, you can’t because it will basically turn the dollar into something that is worthless.”

“Various countries have tried this experiment multiple times,” Musk said.

“Have you seen Venezuela? Like the poor, poor people of Venezuela are, you know, have been just run roughshod by their government.”

In 2018, Venezuela, a country with significant reserves of oil and gas, saw its inflation rise more than 65,000 percent amid an economic crash that included plummeting oil prices and government price controls. The regime of Nicolas Maduro then started printing money, thereby devaluing its currency, which caused prices to rapidly increase.

During the conference, Musk also said the Biden administration “doesn’t seem to get a lot done” and questioned who is actually in charge. 

“The real president is whoever controls the teleprompter,” he said.

“The path to power is the path to the teleprompter.”

“The Trump administration, leaving Trump aside, there were a lot of people in the administration who were effective at getting things done,” he remarked.

Musk’s comment about the White House comes as Jeff Bezos, also one of the richest people in the world, has increasingly started to target the administration’s economic policies. Bezos, in a series of Twitter posts, said the rapid increase in federal spending is the reason why inflation is as high as it is.

“Remember the Administration tried their best to add another $3.5 TRILLION to federal spending,” Bezos wrote on Monday, drawing rebuke from several White House officials. “They failed, but if they had succeeded, inflation would be even higher than it is today, and inflation today is at a 40-year high.”

Tyler Durden Tue, 05/17/2022 - 15:05

Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

Type-I interferon stops immune system ‘going rogue’ during viral infections

Hamilton, ON (May 17, 2022) – McMaster University researchers have found not only how some viral infections cause severe tissue damage, but also how…

Published

on

Hamilton, ON (May 17, 2022) – McMaster University researchers have found not only how some viral infections cause severe tissue damage, but also how to reduce that damage.

Credit: Georgia Kirkos/McMaster University

Hamilton, ON (May 17, 2022) – McMaster University researchers have found not only how some viral infections cause severe tissue damage, but also how to reduce that damage.

 

They have discovered how Type I interferon (IFN) stops the immune system ‘going rogue’ and attacking the body’s own tissues when fighting viral infections, including COVID-19.

 

Their paper was published in the journal PLOS Pathogens today.

  

Senior author Ali Ashkar said IFN is a well-known anti-viral signalling molecule released by the body’s cells that can trigger a powerful immune response against harmful viruses.

 

“What we have found is that it is also critical to stop white blood cells from releasing protease enzymes, which can damage organ tissue. It has this unique dual function to kick start an immune response against a viral infection on the one hand, as well as restrain that same response to prevent significant bystander tissue damage on the other,” he said.

 

The research team investigated IFN’s ability to regulate a potentially dangerous immune response by testing it on both flu and the HSV-2 virus, a highly prevalent sexually transmitted pathogen, using mice. Data from COVID-19 patients in Germany, including post-mortem lung samples, was also used in the study.

 

“For many viral infections, it is not actually the virus that causes most of the tissue damage, it is our heightened immune activation towards the virus,” said Ashkar, a professor of medicine at McMaster.

  

First co-author of the study and PhD student Emily Feng said: “Our body’s immune response is trying to fight off the virus infection, but there’s a risk of damaging innocent healthy tissue in the process. IFNs regulates the immune response to only target tissues that are infected.

 

“By discovering the mechanisms the immune system uses that can inadvertently cause tissue damage, we can intervene during infection to prevent this damage and not necessarily have to wait until vaccines are developed to develop life-saving treatments,” she added.

 

“This applies not just to COVID-19, but also other highly infectious viruses such as flu and Ebola, which can cause tremendous and often life-threatening damage to the body’s organs,” said first study co-author Amanda Lee, a family medicine resident. 

 

Ashkar said the release of harmful proteases is the result of a ‘cytokine storm’, which is life-threatening inflammation sometimes triggered by viral infections. It has been a common cause of death in patients with COVID-19, but treatment has been developed to prevent and suppress the cytokine storm.

 

Ashkar said that steroids like dexamethasone are already used to rein in an extreme immune response to viral infections. The authors used doxycycline in their study, an antibiotic used for bacterial infections and as an anti-inflammatory agent, inhibits the function of proteases causing the bystander tissue damage.

 

Lee added: “This has the potential in the future to be used to alleviate virus-induced life-threatening inflammation and warrants further research.” 

 

The study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

 

-30-

 

Editors:

Pictures of Ali Ashkar and Emily Feng may be found at https://bit.ly/3wmSw0D

  

 

 


Read More

Continue Reading

Spread & Containment

mRNA vaccines like Pfizer and Moderna fare better against COVID-19 variants of concern

A comparison of four COVID-19 vaccinations shows that messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines — Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna — perform better against the World…

Published

on

A comparison of four COVID-19 vaccinations shows that messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines — Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna — perform better against the World Health Organization’s variants of concern (VOCs) than viral vector vaccines — AstraZeneca and J&J/Janssen. Although they all effectively prevent severe disease by VOCs, the research, publishing May 17th in the open access journal PLOS Medicine, suggests that people receiving a viral vector vaccine are more vulnerable to infection by new variants.

Credit: Carlos Reusser Monsalvez, Flickr (CC0, https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)

A comparison of four COVID-19 vaccinations shows that messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines — Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna — perform better against the World Health Organization’s variants of concern (VOCs) than viral vector vaccines — AstraZeneca and J&J/Janssen. Although they all effectively prevent severe disease by VOCs, the research, publishing May 17th in the open access journal PLOS Medicine, suggests that people receiving a viral vector vaccine are more vulnerable to infection by new variants.

By March 2022, COVID-19 had caused over 450 million confirmed infections and six million reported deaths. The first vaccines approved in the US and Europe that protect against serious infection are Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, which deliver genetic code, known as mRNA, to the bodies’ cells, whereas Oxford/AstraZeneca and J&J/Janssen are viral vector vaccines that use a modified version of a different virus — a vector — to deliver instructions to our cells. Three vaccines are delivered as two separate injections a few weeks apart, and J&J/Janssen as a single dose.

Marit J. van Gils at the University of Amsterdam, Netherlands, and colleagues, took blood samples from 165 healthcare workers, three and four weeks after first and second vaccination respectively, and for J&J/Janssen at four to five and eight weeks after vaccination. Samples were collected before, and four weeks after a Pfizer-BioNTech booster.

Four weeks after the initial two doses, antibody responses to the original SARS-CoV-2 viral strain were highest in recipients of Moderna, followed closely by Pfizer-BioNTech, and were substantially lower in those who received viral vector vaccines. Tested against the VOCs – Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta and Omicron – neutralizing antibodies were higher in the mRNA vaccine recipients compared to those who had viral vector vaccines. The ability to neutralize VOCs was reduced in all vaccine groups, with the greatest reduction against Omicron. The Pfizer-BioNTech booster increased antibody responses in all groups with substantial improvement against VOCs, including Omicron.

The researchers caution that their AstraZeneca group was significantly older, because of safety concerns for the vaccine in younger age groups. As immune responses tend to weaken with age, this could affect the results. This group was also smaller because the Dutch government halted use for a period.

van Gils concludes, “Four COVID-19 vaccines induce substantially different antibody responses.”

#####

In your coverage, please use this URL to provide access to the freely available paper in PLOS Medicine:

http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003991

Citation: van Gils MJ, Lavell A, van der Straten K, Appelman B, Bontjer I, Poniman M, et al. (2022) Antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants induced by four different SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in health care workers in the Netherlands: A prospective cohort study. PLoS Med 19(5): e1003991. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003991

 

Author Countries: The Netherlands, United States

 

Funding: This work was supported by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) ZonMw (Vici grant no. 91818627 to R.W.S., S3 study, grant agreement no. 10430022010023 to M.K.B.; RECoVERED, grant agreement no. 10150062010002 to M.D.d.J.), by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (grant no. INV002022 and INV008818 to R.W.S. and INV-024617 to M.J.v.G.), by Amsterdam UMC through the AMC Fellowship (to M.J.v.G.) and the Corona Research Fund (to M.K.B.), and by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 program (RECoVER, grant no. 101003589 to M.D.d.J). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.


Read More

Continue Reading

Trending