Cargando…

Fact vs Fallacy: The Anti-Vaccine Discussion Reloaded

In the light of the COVID-19 pandemic, anti-vaccine sentiments have been on the rise, with a recent seminal study on the development of anti-vaccine views in social media even making its way into Nature Communications. Yet, with the current scientific consensus being in overwhelming agreement over t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stolle, Lucas B., Nalamasu, Rohit, Pergolizzi, Joseph V., Varrassi, Giustino, Magnusson, Peter, LeQuang, JoAnn, Breve, Frank
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Healthcare 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7509825/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32965654
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-020-01502-y
_version_ 1783585676387680256
author Stolle, Lucas B.
Nalamasu, Rohit
Pergolizzi, Joseph V.
Varrassi, Giustino
Magnusson, Peter
LeQuang, JoAnn
Breve, Frank
author_facet Stolle, Lucas B.
Nalamasu, Rohit
Pergolizzi, Joseph V.
Varrassi, Giustino
Magnusson, Peter
LeQuang, JoAnn
Breve, Frank
author_sort Stolle, Lucas B.
collection PubMed
description In the light of the COVID-19 pandemic, anti-vaccine sentiments have been on the rise, with a recent seminal study on the development of anti-vaccine views in social media even making its way into Nature Communications. Yet, with the current scientific consensus being in overwhelming agreement over the safety and efficacy of vaccines, many scientists lose their grasp on the fears, concerns, and arguments that the opposition may hold. This paper discusses and evaluates vaccine-hesitant individuals on a socioeconomic, historical, and philosophical landscape. It also provides an analysis of common argumentative patterns and the psychological impact that these arguments may have on undecided individuals. The discussion also explores why anti-vaccine sentiments are on the rise, and how members of the scientific and medical community require a more structured approach to communicating key arguments. This is particularly important if vaccination rates and herd immunity are to be sustained. No longer is it sufficient to win arguments based on a factual and scientific basis, but rather scientists and medical practitioners have to focus on conveying confidence and reassurance on both an informative and emotional level to those with doubts and fears.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7509825
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75098252020-09-23 Fact vs Fallacy: The Anti-Vaccine Discussion Reloaded Stolle, Lucas B. Nalamasu, Rohit Pergolizzi, Joseph V. Varrassi, Giustino Magnusson, Peter LeQuang, JoAnn Breve, Frank Adv Ther Commentary In the light of the COVID-19 pandemic, anti-vaccine sentiments have been on the rise, with a recent seminal study on the development of anti-vaccine views in social media even making its way into Nature Communications. Yet, with the current scientific consensus being in overwhelming agreement over the safety and efficacy of vaccines, many scientists lose their grasp on the fears, concerns, and arguments that the opposition may hold. This paper discusses and evaluates vaccine-hesitant individuals on a socioeconomic, historical, and philosophical landscape. It also provides an analysis of common argumentative patterns and the psychological impact that these arguments may have on undecided individuals. The discussion also explores why anti-vaccine sentiments are on the rise, and how members of the scientific and medical community require a more structured approach to communicating key arguments. This is particularly important if vaccination rates and herd immunity are to be sustained. No longer is it sufficient to win arguments based on a factual and scientific basis, but rather scientists and medical practitioners have to focus on conveying confidence and reassurance on both an informative and emotional level to those with doubts and fears. Springer Healthcare 2020-09-23 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7509825/ /pubmed/32965654 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-020-01502-y Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Commentary
Stolle, Lucas B.
Nalamasu, Rohit
Pergolizzi, Joseph V.
Varrassi, Giustino
Magnusson, Peter
LeQuang, JoAnn
Breve, Frank
Fact vs Fallacy: The Anti-Vaccine Discussion Reloaded
title Fact vs Fallacy: The Anti-Vaccine Discussion Reloaded
title_full Fact vs Fallacy: The Anti-Vaccine Discussion Reloaded
title_fullStr Fact vs Fallacy: The Anti-Vaccine Discussion Reloaded
title_full_unstemmed Fact vs Fallacy: The Anti-Vaccine Discussion Reloaded
title_short Fact vs Fallacy: The Anti-Vaccine Discussion Reloaded
title_sort fact vs fallacy: the anti-vaccine discussion reloaded
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7509825/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32965654
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12325-020-01502-y
work_keys_str_mv AT stollelucasb factvsfallacytheantivaccinediscussionreloaded
AT nalamasurohit factvsfallacytheantivaccinediscussionreloaded
AT pergolizzijosephv factvsfallacytheantivaccinediscussionreloaded
AT varrassigiustino factvsfallacytheantivaccinediscussionreloaded
AT magnussonpeter factvsfallacytheantivaccinediscussionreloaded
AT lequangjoann factvsfallacytheantivaccinediscussionreloaded
AT brevefrank factvsfallacytheantivaccinediscussionreloaded
AT factvsfallacytheantivaccinediscussionreloaded