Suppressing Scientific Discourse on Vaccines? Self-perceptions of researchers and practitioners

Vaccines and the Eye: Current Understanding of the Molecular and Immunological Effects of Vaccination on the Eye

Vaccination is a public health cornerstone that protects against numerous infectious diseases. Despite its benefits, immunization implications on ocular health warrant thorough investigation, particularly in the context of vaccine-induced ocular inflammation. This review aimed to elucidate the complex interplay between vaccination and the eye, focusing on the molecular and immunological pathways implicated in vaccine-associated ocular adverse effects. Through an in-depth analysis of recent advancements and the existing literature, we explored various mechanisms of vaccine-induced ocular inflammation, such as direct infection by live attenuated vaccines, immune complex formation, adjuvant-induced autoimmunity, molecular mimicry, hypersensitivity reactions, PEG-induced allergic reactions, Type 1 IFN activation, free extracellular RNA, and specific components. We further examined the specific ocular conditions associated with vaccination, such as uveitis, optic neuritis, and retinitis, and discussed the potential impact of novel vaccines, including those against SARS-CoV-2. This review sheds light on the intricate relationships between vaccination, the immune system, and ocular tissues, offering insights into informed discussions and future research directions aimed at optimizing vaccine safety and ophthalmological care. Our analysis underscores the importance of vigilance and further research to understand and mitigate the ocular side effects of vaccines, thereby ensuring the continued success of vaccination programs, while preserving ocular health.

COVID-19 mortality paradox (United States vs Africa): Mass vaccination vs early treatment

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) mortality rate in 55 African countries is almost 4.5 times lower than in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) despite Africa having over 4.2 times more people. This mortality paradox is also evident when comparing Nigeria, a heavily populated, poorly vaccinated and weakly mandated country to Israel, a small, highly vaccinated and strictly mandated country. Nigeria has almost 4 times lower COVID mortality than Israel. In this Field of Vision perspective, I explain how this paradox has evolved drawing upon my academic, clinical and social experience. Since April 2020, I've developed and been using the Egyptian immune-modulatory Kelleni's protocol to manage COVID-19 patients including pediatric, geriatric, pregnant, immune-compromised and other individuals suffering from multiple comorbidities. It's unfortunate that severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is still evolving accompanied by more deaths. However in Africa, we've been able to live without anxiety or mandates throughout the pandemic because we trust science and adopted early treatment using safe, and effective repurposed drugs that have saved the majority of COVID-19 patients. This article represents an African and Egyptian tale of honor.

Self-Deception in Clinical Nursing Practice: A Concept Analysis

In this paper, we explore the phenomenon of "self-deception" within the context of nursing, focusing on how nurses employ this coping mechanism when faced with dissonance, distress, and conflicting situations in clinical settings. Our primary objective is to examine the phenomenon of self-deception using Rodgers' evolutionary method of concept analysis. Focusing on nurses' experiences in challenging situations, our analysis highlights how self-deception is often employed as a coping strategy. According to our conceptual analysis, self-deception in nursing clinical practice highlights tensions between different paradigms and expectations in healthcare settings. These tensions stem from the power dynamics and subservience that nurses often face, which can hinder their ability to advocate for themselves, their patients, and the nursing profession.

Is Covid-19 "vaccine uptake" in postsecondary education a "problem"? A critical policy inquiry

Since the launch of the Covid-19 global vaccination campaign, postsecondary institutions have strongly promoted vaccination, often through mandates, and the academic literature has identified "vaccine uptake" among postsecondary students as a problem deserving monitoring, research, and intervention. However, with the admission that vaccines do not stop viral spread, that older-age and co-morbidities are major determinants of poor outcomes, and that many vaccine side effects disproportionately affect the young, it cannot be assumed that a risk-benefit analysis favors vaccinating postsecondary students. Drawing from critical policy studies, I appraise the literature on Covid-19 vaccine uptake in postsecondary education. I find that this literature reflects the "scientific consensus," hardly acknowledging contradictory medical evidence, ignoring coercive elements underlying "vaccine acceptance," and neglecting ethical tensions built into the very design of vaccination policies. I discuss potential explanations for my findings, and their implications for academia's role in society in the COVID-19 era and beyond.

How Scientists View Vaccine Hesitancy

This paper examines possible causes, consequences, and potential solutions for addressing vaccine hesitancy in the United States, focusing on the perspectives of academic scientists. By examining the experiences of scientists, who are arguably a critical community in US society, we gain deeper insights into how they understand the complexities of vaccine hesitancy and whether their insights and opinions converge with or diverge from the current literature. We present findings from a national survey of a representative sample of academic scientists from the fields of biology and public health regarding vaccine hesitancy and related topics. Empirical analysis using descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses covers multiple topics, including vaccine controversy, trust in science, causes of vaccine hesitancy, preferred policy and regulatory approaches, risk perceptions, and scientists' ethics and perceived communication roles. The results highlight a diversity of opinions within the scientific community regarding how to improve science-society communication in regard to vaccines, including the need to be transparent and candid to the public about the risk of vaccines and their research.

Autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA) in 2023

In 2011, a syndrome entitled ASIA (Autoimmune/inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants; Shoenfeld's syndrome) was first described. ASIA aimed to organize under a single umbrella, the existing evidence regarding certain environmental factors which possess immune stimulatory properties, in order to shed light on a common pathway of autoimmune pathogenesis. Such environmental immune stimulators, or adjuvants, include among others: aluminum salts as in vaccines, various medical implants, as well as various infectious agents. After the launch of the ASIA syndrome, the expansion and recognition of this syndrome by different researchers from different countries began. During the past decades, evidence had been accumulating that (auto)immune symptoms can be triggered by exposure to environmental immune stimulatory factors that act as an adjuvant in genetically susceptible individuals. A panoply of unexplained subjective and autonomic-related symptoms has been reported in patients with ASIA syndrome. The current review summarizes and updates accumulated knowledge from the past decades, describing new adjuvants- (e.g. polypropylene meshes) and vaccine- (e.g. HPV and COVID vaccines) induced ASIA. Furthermore, a direct association between inflammatory/autoimmune diseases with ASIA syndrome, will be discussed. Recent cases will strengthen some of the criteria depicted in ASIA syndrome such as clear improvement of symptoms by the removal of adjuvants (e.g. silicone breast implants) from the body of patients. Finally, we will introduce additional factors to be included in the criteria for ASIA syndrome such as: (1) dysregulated non-classical autoantibodies directed against G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) of the autonomic nervous system and (2)) small fiber neuropathy (SFN), both of which might explain, at least in part, the development of 'dysautonomia' reported in many ASIA patients.

Protecting public's wellbeing against COVID-19 infodemic: The role of trust in information sources and rapid dissemination and transparency of information over time

Objectives

This study examined how trust in the information about COVID-19 from social media and official media as well as how the information was disseminated affect public's wellbeing directly and indirectly through perceived safety over time.

Methods

Two online surveys were conducted in China, with the first survey (Time1, N = 22,718) being at the early stage of the pandemic outbreak and the second one (Time 2, N = 2,901) two and a half years later during the zero-COVID policy lockdown period. Key measured variables include trust in official media and social media, perceived rapid dissemination and transparency of COVID-19-related information, perceived safety, and emotional responses toward the pandemic. Data analysis includes descriptive statistical analysis, independent samples t-test, Pearson correlations, and structural equation modeling.

Results

Trust in official media, perceived rapid dissemination and transparency of COVID-19-related information, perceived safety, as well as positive emotional response toward COVID-19 increased over time, while trust in social media and depressive response decreased over time. Trust in social media and official media played different roles in affecting public's wellbeing over time. Trust in social media was positively associated with depressive emotions and negatively associated with positive emotion directly and indirectly through decreased perceived safety at Time 1. However, the negative effect of trust in social media on public's wellbeing was largely decreased at Time 2. In contrast, trust in official media was linked to reduced depressive response and increased positive response directly and indirectly through perceived safety at both times. Rapid dissemination and transparency of COVID-19 information contributed to enhanced trust in official media at both times.

Conclusion

The findings highlight the important role of fostering public trust in official media through rapid dissemination and transparency of information in mitigating the negative impact of COVID-19 infodemic on public's wellbeing over time.

Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics

The emergence of COVID-19 has led to numerous controversies over COVID-related knowledge and policy. To counter the perceived threat from doctors and scientists who challenge the official position of governmental and intergovernmental health authorities, some supporters of this orthodoxy have moved to censor those who promote dissenting views. The aim of the present study is to explore the experiences and responses of highly accomplished doctors and research scientists from different countries who have been targets of suppression and/or censorship following their publications and statements in relation to COVID-19 that challenge official views. Our findings point to the central role played by media organizations, and especially by information technology companies, in attempting to stifle debate over COVID-19 policy and measures. In the effort to silence alternative voices, widespread use was made not only of censorship, but of tactics of suppression that damaged the reputations and careers of dissenting doctors and scientists, regardless of their academic or medical status and regardless of their stature prior to expressing a contrary position. In place of open and fair discussion, censorship and suppression of scientific dissent has deleterious and far-reaching implications for medicine, science, and public health.

Examining the Prevailing Negative Sentiments Related to COVID-19 Vaccination: Unsupervised Deep Learning of Twitter Posts over a 16 Month Period

Despite the demonstrated efficacy, safety, and availability of COVID-19 vaccines, efforts in global mass vaccination have been met with widespread scepticism and vaccine hesitancy or refusal. Understanding the reasons for the public's negative opinions towards COVID-19 vaccination using Twitter may help make new headways in improving vaccine uptake. This study, therefore, examined the prevailing negative sentiments towards COVID-19 vaccination via the analysis of public twitter posts over a 16 month period. Original tweets (in English) from 1 April 2021 to 1 August 2022 were extracted. A bidirectional encoder representations from transformers (BERT)-based model was applied, and only negative sentiments tweets were selected. Topic modelling was used, followed by manual thematic analysis performed iteratively by the study investigators, with independent reviews of the topic labels and themes. A total of 4,448,314 tweets were analysed. The analysis generated six topics and three themes related to the prevailing negative sentiments towards COVID-19 vaccination. The themes could be broadly understood as either emotional reactions to perceived invidious policies or safety and effectiveness concerns related to the COVID-19 vaccines. The themes uncovered in the present infodemiology study fit well into the increasing vaccination model, and they highlight important public conversations to be had and potential avenues for future policy intervention and campaign efforts.

Are Lockdowns Effective in Managing Pandemics?

The present coronavirus crisis caused a major worldwide disruption which has not been experienced for decades. The lockdown-based crisis management was implemented by nearly all the countries, and studies confirming lockdown effectiveness can be found alongside the studies questioning it. In this work, we performed a narrative review of the works studying the above effectiveness, as well as the historic experience of previous pandemics and risk-benefit analysis based on the connection of health and wealth. Our aim was to learn lessons and analyze ways to improve the management of similar events in the future. The comparative analysis of different countries showed that the assumption of lockdowns’ effectiveness cannot be supported by evidence—neither regarding the present COVID-19 pandemic, nor regarding the 1918–1920 Spanish Flu and other less-severe pandemics in the past. The price tag of lockdowns in terms of public health is high: by using the known connection between health and wealth, we estimate that lockdowns may claim 20 times more life years than they save. It is suggested therefore that a thorough cost-benefit analysis should be performed before imposing any lockdown for either COVID-19 or any future pandemic.