Moralization and Mismoralization in Public Health

Seven insights from Albert Camus's Plague about epidemics, public health and morality

For Albert Camus, plague was both a fact of life and a powerful metaphor for the human condition. Camus engaged most explicitly and extensively with the subject of plague in his 1947 novel, The Plague (La peste), which chronicles an outbreak of what is presumably cholera in the French-Algerian city of Oran. I often thought of this novel-and what it might teach us-during the recent COVID-19 pandemic. In this article, I discuss seven important insights from The Plague about epidemics, public health and morality.

What qualitative research can tell us about food and nutrition security in the UK and why we should pay attention to what it is telling us

Poor dietary patterns leading to poorer health and increased health care use have affected people living in disadvantaged economic circumstances in the UK for decades, which many fear will be exacerbated due to the UK's current so-called 'cost of living crisis'. The voices of experts by experience of those health and social inequalities are not routinely included in health improvement intervention development in relation to obesity prevention policy and programmes. Obesity is highly correlated with food insecurity experience in high-income country contexts (where food insecurity data are routinely collected) and is similarly socially patterned. Using a health equity lens, this review paper highlights qualitative research findings that have revealed the perspectives and direct experiences of people living with food insecurity, or those others supporting food-insecure households, that shed light on the role and influence of the socio-economic contextual factors food-insecure people live with day-to-day. Insights from qualitative research that have focused on the granular detail of day-to-day household resource management can help us understand not only how food insecurity differentially impacts individual household members, but also how behavioural responses/food coping strategies are playing into pathways that lead to avoidable ill health such as obesity, diabetes and other chronic health conditions, including mental health problems. This review paper concludes by discussing research and policy implications in relation to food-insecure households containing people with chronic health conditions, and for pregnant women and families with infants and very young children living in the UK today.

Addressing stigma in infectious disease outbreaks: a crucial step in pandemic preparedness

There is a complex interplay between infectious disease outbreaks and the stigmatization of affected persons and communities. Outbreaks are prone to precipitating stigma due to the fear, uncertainty, moralisation, and abatement of freedoms associated with many infectious diseases. In turn, this stigma hampers outbreak control efforts. Understanding this relationship is crucial to improving coordinated outbreak response. This requires valid and reliable methods for assessing stigma towards and within impacted communities. We propose adopting a cross-outbreak model for developing the necessary assessment tools. A stigma-informed approach must then be integrated into outbreak preparedness and response efforts to safeguard public health and promote inclusivity and compassion in future outbreaks.

A Scalar Approach to Vaccination Ethics

Should people get vaccinated for the sake of others? What could ground-and limit-the normative claim that people ought to do so? In this paper, we propose a reasons-based consequentialist account of vaccination for the benefit of others. We outline eight harm-based and probabilistic factors that, we argue, give people moral reasons to get vaccinated. Instead of understanding other-directed vaccination in terms of binary moral duties (i.e., where people either have or do not have a moral duty to get vaccinated), we develop a scalar approach according to which people can have stronger or weaker moral reasons to get vaccinated in view of the moral good of vaccination. One advantage of our approach is that it can capture why a person might have strong moral reasons to get vaccinated with Vaccine A, but only weak moral reasons to get vaccinated with Vaccine B. We discuss theoretical strengths of our approach and provide a case study of vaccination against COVID-19 to demonstrate its practical significance.

The Ethical Significance of Post-Vaccination COVID-19 Transmission Dynamics

The potential for vaccines to prevent the spread of infectious diseases is crucial for vaccination policy and ethics. In this paper, I discuss recent evidence that the current COVID-19 vaccines have only a modest and short-lived effect on reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission and argue that this has at least four important ethical implications. First, getting vaccinated against COVID-19 should be seen primarily as a self-protective choice for individuals. Second, moral condemnation of unvaccinated people for causing direct harm to others is unjustified. Third, the case for a harm-based moral obligation to get vaccinated against COVID-19 is weak. Finally, and perhaps most significantly, coercive COVID-19 vaccination policies (e.g., measures that exclude unvaccinated people from society) cannot be directly justified by the harm principle.

Altruistic Vaccination: Insights from Two Focus Group Studies

Vaccination can protect vaccinated individuals and often also prevent them from spreading disease to other people. This opens up the possibility of getting vaccinated for the sake of others. In fact, altruistic vaccination has recently been conceptualized as a kind of vaccination that is undertaken primary for the benefit of others. In order to better understand the potential role of altruistic motives in people's vaccination decisions, we conducted two focus group studies with a total of 37 participants. Study 1 included three focus groups on the subject of HPV vaccination for boys. Study 2 included three focus groups on the subject of pertussis and measles vaccination for childcare workers. We found substantial evidence of other-regarding motives across all focus groups, which suggests that altruistic motives could be an important factor when it comes to people's vaccination decisions. We address the significance of these findings for vaccination policy surrounding HPV vaccination for boys and vaccination for childcare workers. We also extend the findings to normative work on vaccination for the sake of others more generally.