Vaccines and vitriol: an anthropological commentary on vaccine hesitancy, decision-making and interventionism among religious minorities

The role of religion and COVID-19 vaccine uptake in England

BACKGROUND

While many countries have successfully deployed COVID-19 vaccination programmes, there are disparities in their uptake. One factor influencing vaccine coverage is religion. Existing research has found a link between religious beliefs and vaccine hesitancy. This study looks at religion in England to examine its relationship with public health.

METHODS

This analysis used data from a survey of over 12,000 respondents in England, conducted through the YouGov Online Panel. Respondents were asked whether they identified with a religion, and if so which, and the number of COVID-19 vaccinations they had received. We employed logistic regressions to analyse the data, accounting for age, gender, education, generalised trust, trust in government, and political ideology.

RESULTS

We find that respondents who identify as part of the Church of England have had significantly more COVID-19 vaccinations. Conversely, adherents to the Pentecostal Evangelical and Islamic faiths have had significantly fewer COVID-19 vaccinations. These relationships hold even when adjusting for age, education, level of trust, and political affiliation.

CONCLUSION

This research indicates a potential influence of religious affiliation on vaccine uptake, highlighting the need for more carefully-tailored public health programmes. Recognizing the diverse associations of different religious affiliations on health behaviour is important for shaping future vaccination campaigns and policy interventions. Engaging with religious communities and leaders may be one method through which to deal with vaccine hesitancy and improve public health.

Hesitation towards the COVID-19 vaccine in the United States: a digital ethnographic study

Following the authorization the use of COVID-19 vaccines in babies age six months through children four years old in the United States, some individuals (parents, pediatricians, and communicators) framed COVID-19 vaccination as an issue of access, while many others expressed hesitancy and some resisted recommendations from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In this context, this study aimed to explore: 1) divergent reactions to the authorization of COVID-19 vaccine use in children aged six months to four years; and 2) opposing logics underlying attitudes towards pro-vaccination, anti-vaccination, and vaccine hesitancy regarding COVID-19 vaccines. To achieve this, a digital ethnography was conducted, involving monitoring of 5,700 reactions to a series of eight infographics published on social media by the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and participant observation in an online focus group over a one-year period, from December 2021 to December 2022, consisting of 18 mothers. The findings suggest that healthcare professionals should consider different notions of "risk" when interacting with patients, especially those who are hesitant to vaccinate.

How and why to use 'vulnerability': an interdisciplinary analysis of disease risk, indeterminacy and normality

In recent years, 'vulnerability' has been getting more traction in theoretical, professional and popular spaces as an alternative or complement to the concept of risk. As a group of science and technology studies scholars with different disciplinary orientations yet a shared concern with biomedicine, self and society, we investigate how vulnerability has become a salient and even dominant idiom for discussing disease and disease risk. We argue that this is at least partly due to an inherent indeterminacy in what 'vulnerability' means and does, both within and across different discourses. Through a review of feminist and disability theory, and a discussion of how vulnerability and disease both get recruited into a binary conceptualisation of normal versus abnormal, we argue that vulnerability's indeterminacy is, in fact, its strength, and that it should be used differently than risk. Using COVID-19 management in the UK as an illustration of the current ambivalence and ambiguity in how vulnerability versus risk is applied, we suggest that instead of being codified or quantified, as it has started to be in some biomedical and public health applications, vulnerability and its remedies should be determined in conjunction with affected communities and in ways that are polyvalent, flexible and nuanced. The concept of vulnerability encapsulates an important precept: we must recognise inequality as undesirable while not attempting to 'solve' it in deterministic ways. Rather than becoming fixed into labels, unidirectional causalities or top-down universalising metrics, vulnerability could be used to insist on relational, context-specific understandings of disease and disease risk-in line with contemporary social justice movements that require non-hierarchical and non-universal approaches to problems and solutions.

"In the beginning, I said I wouldn't get it.": Hesitant adoption of the COVID-19 vaccine in remote Alaska between November 2020 and 2021

Achieving sufficient COVID-19 vaccination coverage has been hindered in many areas by vaccine hesitancy. Many studies based on large survey samples have characterized vaccine refusal, but there are fewer in-depth qualitative studies that explore hesitant adoption: the middle-ground between vaccine acceptance and refusal, and how individuals may move across this continuum depending on their lived experience. For this paper, we use the narratives of 25 adults living in off-road, predominately Alaska Native communities to describe the complex decision-making processes undertaken by 'hesitant adopters', defined in our study as those who completed their initial COVID-19 series despite reporting hesitancy. Interviewees' stories help illustrate how hesitant adopters' decision-making processes involved making sense of information through interactions with trusted individuals, lived experiences, observations, emotions, and personal motivations. For the majority of these hesitant adopters' (n = 20, 80%) interpersonal interactions were key in helping to make the decision to get vaccinated. Over half of the interviewees (n = 14, 56%) described how conversations with individuals they trusted, including healthcare providers, family, friends, and interactions through their professional network made them feel safe. One third of the hesitant adopters (n = 7, 28%) attributed their decision to get vaccinated based on the influence of Alaska Native Elders including their knowledge, personal experiences, as well as being motivated by the desire to protect them. Independent research was also important to about a quarter of hesitant adopters (n = 6, 24%), and for these interviewees it was the process of gathering information on their own and learning from others, especially healthcare providers who could answer their questions and alleviate their concerns. This paper illustrates the temporality of vaccine decision-making: vaccine acceptance for those who are hesitant may be an ongoing process that is influenced by personal experience, relationships, and context.

COVID-19 vaccination decisions among Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller communities: A qualitative study moving beyond "vaccine hesitancy"

BACKGROUND

Many people refuse vaccination and it is important to understand why. Here we explore the experiences of individuals from Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller groups in England to understand how and why they decided to take up or to avoid COVID-19 vaccinations.

METHODS

We used a participatory, qualitative design, including wide consultations, in-depth interviews with 45 individuals from Gypsy, Roma, and Traveller, communities (32 female, 13 male), dialogue sessions, and observations, in five locations across England between October 2021 and February 2022.

FINDINGS

Vaccination decisions overall were affected by distrust of health services and government, which stemmed from prior discrimination and barriers to healthcare which persisted or worsened during the pandemic. We found the situation was not adequately characterised by the standard concept of "vaccine hesitancy". Most participants had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose, usually motivated by concerns for their own and others' health. However, many participants felt coerced into vaccination by medical professionals, employers, and government messaging. Some worried about vaccine safety, for example possible impacts on fertility. Their concerns were inadequately addressed or even dismissed by healthcare staff.

INTERPRETATION

A standard "vaccine hesitancy" model is of limited use in understanding vaccine uptake in these populations, where authorities and health services have been experienced as untrustworthy in the past (with little improvement during the pandemic). Providing more information may improve vaccine uptake somewhat; however, improved trustworthiness of health services for GRT communities is essential to increase vaccine coverage.

FUNDING

This paper reports on independent research commissioned and funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Policy Research Programme. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care or its arm's length bodies, and other Government Departments.

Decisions about adopting novel COVID-19 vaccines among White adults in a rural state, USA: A qualitative study

PURPOSE

Many people, especially in rural areas of the United States, choose not to receive novel COVID-19 vaccinations despite public health recommendations. Understanding how people describe decisions to get vaccinated or not may help to address hesitancy.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 17 rural inhabitants of Maine, a sparsely populated state in the northeastern US, about COVID-19 vaccine decisions during the early rollout (March-May 2021). We used the framework method to compare responses, including between vaccine Adopters and Non-adopters.

FINDINGS

Adopters framed COVID-19 as unequivocally dangerous, if not personally, then to other people. Describing their COVID concerns, Adopters emphasized disease morbidities. By contrast, Non-adopters never mentioned morbidities, referencing instead mortality risk, which they perceived as minimal. Instead of risks associated with the disease, Non-adopters emphasized risks associated with vaccination. Uncertainty about the vaccine development process, augmented by social media, bolstered concerns about the long-term unknown risks of vaccines. Vaccine Adopters ultimately described trusting the process, while Non-adopters expressed distrust.

CONCLUSION

Many respondents framed their COVID vaccination decision by comparing the risks between the disease and the vaccine. Associating morbidity risks with COVID-19 diminishes the relevance of vaccine risks, whereas focusing on low perceived mortality risks heightens their relevance. Results could inform efforts to address COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the rural US and elsewhere.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Members of Maine rural communities were involved throughout the study. Leaders of community health groups provided feedback on the study design, were actively involved in recruitment, and reviewed findings after analysis. All data produced and used in this study were co-constructed through the participation of community members with lived experience.

[How have Japanese primary care physicians carried out vaccinations against COVID-19? : Attempts at making the non-scalable 'scalable']

Vaccine rollouts have been underway to combat the COVID-19 pandemic globally. Based on ongoing interviews with ten primary care physicians 'in the field', this paper elucidates how in practice the vaccinations were carried out in Japan in 2021 from a cultural anthropological perspective. We examine what the primary care physicians did to prepare for the rollouts, what problems they faced, and how they responded to these problems. Large-scale vaccination projects are supposed to proceed smoothly and quickly, or to have what Anna Tsing calls 'scalability'. In practice, however, they required a variety of tasks for coordination, information sharing, and promotion. Despite feeling stressed by the lack of information and exhausted by the work overload, the primary care physicians carried out the vaccinations as an important service to their patients and communities. The findings of this paper will provide valuable materials for improving future vaccine rollouts.

COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and its socio-demographic and emotional determinants: A multi-country cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Multiple COVID-19 vaccines have now been licensed for human use, with other candidate vaccines in different stages of development. Effective and safe vaccines against COVID-19 have been essential in achieving global reductions in severe disease caused by severe acute respiratory coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), but multiple factors, including vaccine supply and vaccine confidence, continue to impact global uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. In this study, we explore determinants of COVID-19 vaccination intent across17 countries worldwide.

METHODS

In this large-scale multi-country study, we explored intent to accept a COVID-19 vaccine and the socio-demographic and emotional determinants of uptake for 17 countries and over 19,000 individuals surveyed in June and July 2020 via nationally representative samples. We used Bayesian ordinal logistic regressions to probe the relationship between intent to accept a COVID-19 vaccine and individuals' socio-demographic status, their confidence in COVID-19 vaccines, and their recent emotional status. Gibbs sampling was used for Bayesian model inference, with 95% Bayesian highest posterior density intervals used to capture uncertainty.

FINDINGS

Intent to accept a COVID-19 vaccine was found to be highest in India, where 77⋅8% (95% HPD, 75⋅5 to 80⋅0%) of respondents strongly agreeing that they would take a new COVID-19 vaccine if it were available. The Democratic Republic of Congo (15⋅5%, 12⋅2 to 18⋅6%) and France (26⋅4%, 23⋅7 to 29⋅2%) had the lowest share of respondents who strongly agreed that they would accept a COVID-19. Confidence in the safety, importance, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines are the most widely informative determinants of vaccination intent. Socio-demographic and emotional determinants played a lesser role, with being male and having higher education associated with increased uptake intent in five countries and being fearful of catching COVID-19 also a strong determinant of uptake intent.

INTERPRETATION

Barriers to COVID-19 vaccine acceptance are found to be country and context dependent. These findings highlight the importance of regular monitoring of COVID-19 vaccine confidence to identify groups less likely to vaccinate.

"We think this way as a society!": Community-level science literacy among ultra-Orthodox Jews

Despite growing interest in community-level science literacy, most studies focus on communities of interest who come together through particular science, environmental or health-related goals. We examine a pre-existing community-ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel-with a particular history and politics vis-à-vis science, technology, and medicine. First, we show how Haredi cosmologies and culture come together to critique science as an epistemology while engaging with science as a technology. Then, we demonstrate how community-based medical experts serve as both science-related knowledge mediators and gatekeepers. Whereas Haredi Jews are constantly critiqued for their low levels of individual secular and science education, these community-based webs of knowledge seemingly position Haredi individuals with knowledge that surpasses the average "secular" Israeli. This case study develops unique analytical tools in the growing field of community-level science literacy, while pushing forward conversations about self-ascribed experts, knowledge gatekeeping, and the socio-political contexts of group critiques of science.

"We don't routinely check vaccination background in adults": a national qualitative study of barriers and facilitators to vaccine delivery and uptake in adult migrants through UK primary care

OBJECTIVES

Explore primary care professionals' views around barriers/facilitators to catch-up vaccination in adult migrants (foreign-born; over 18 years of age) with incomplete/uncertain vaccination status and for routine vaccines to inform development of interventions to improve vaccine uptake and coverage.

DESIGN

Qualitative interview study with purposive sampling and thematic analysis.

SETTING

UK primary care.

PARTICIPANTS

64 primary care professionals (PCPs): 48 clinical-staff including general practitioners, practice nurses and healthcare assistants; 16 administrative-staff including practice managers and receptionists (mean age 45 years; 84.4% women; a range of ethnicities).

RESULTS

Participants highlighted direct and indirect barriers to catch-up vaccines in adult migrants who may have missed vaccines as children, missed boosters and not be aligned with the UK's vaccine schedule, from both personal and service-delivery levels, with themes including: lack of training and knowledge of guidance among staff; unclear or incomplete vaccine records; and lack of incentivisation (including financial) and dedicated time and care pathways. Adult migrants were reported as being excluded from many vaccination initiatives, most of which focus exclusively on children. Where delivery models existed, they were diverse and fragmented, but included a combination of opportunistic and proactive programmes. PCPs noted that migrants expressed to them a range of views around vaccines, from positivity to uncertainty, to refusal, with specific nationality groups reported as more hesitant about specific vaccines, including measles, mumps and rubella (MMR).

CONCLUSIONS

WHO's new Immunization Agenda 2030 calls for greater focus to be placed on delivering vaccination across the life course, targeting underimmunised groups for catch-up vaccination at any age, and UK primary care services therefore have a key role. Vaccine uptake in adult migrants could be improved through implementing new financial incentives or inclusion of adult migrant vaccination targets in Quality Outcomes Framework, strengthening care pathways and training and working directly with local community-groups to improve understanding around the benefits of vaccination at all ages.

Contributions of Trustworthiness, Health Literacy, and Self-Efficacy in Communicating With COVID-19 Vaccine–Hesitant Audiences: Web-Based Survey Study

Background

Large-scale health communication challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic, such as widespread misinformation and distrust in health care professionals, have influenced reluctance to take the COVID-19 vaccine, also known as vaccine hesitancy. Trust in health professionals, adequate health literacy, and high self-efficacy are key components of actively pursuing preventative and protective health care measures. These factors may be associated with intentions to seek and complete a COVID-19 vaccine dosing.

Objective

The objective of this analysis was to identify factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

Methods

In February 2021, US adults (N=5872) responded to a web-based survey on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and components of health communication (trust in sources of health information, health literacy, and self-efficacy). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to explore associations between these factors and vaccine hesitancy while adjusting for key demographics. We hypothesized that low levels of trust, health literacy, and self-efficacy would be associated with increased vaccine hesitancy.

Results

The adjusted odds of vaccine hesitancy was greater among those who placed little to no trust in health professionals compared to those who held a lot of trust (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 8.54, 95% CI 6.52-11.19). The odds of vaccine hesitancy was also greater among those who felt frustrated about finding health information compared to those who did not (AOR 2.10, 95% CI 1.62-2.70). Participants who had little to no confidence in receiving health advice or information had greater odds of vaccine hesitancy compared to those who had a lot of confidence (AOR 3.05, 95% CI 2.34-3.97).

Conclusions

This study underscores the importance of trust between health professionals and their patients, and a need for improving health literacy regarding vaccines. Perceptions of mistrust and low levels of health literacy were associated with high levels of vaccine hesitancy, providing empirical support of framing these factors as perceived barriers to vaccine uptake.

"A Free People, Controlled Only by God": Circulating and Converting Criticism of Vaccination in Jerusalem

This paper explores how criticism surrounding the ethics and safety of biomedical technologies circulates and 'converts' through global-local religious encounters, producing new claims of moral opposition and rights to religious freedom. The paper is concerned with the question of what rhetorical devices make vaccine safety doubt relevant to religiously Orthodox settings and what implications arise? Based on an ethnographic study of vaccine decision-making and non-vaccination advocacy in Jerusalem, the paper examines how opposition is forged amidst evolving global-local encounters and relations. The data reveal how Christian activists attempt to engender ethical and moral opposition to vaccination among American Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem by 'converting' public criticism around safety into a religious discourse of bodily governance. Pinpointing how critiques of biomedical technologies discursively 'convert' offers a conceptual template in anthropology to chart how counter-positions are formed and transformed amidst evolving tensions between biomedical and religious cosmologies.

Running away from the jab: factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Brazil

OBJECTIVE:

To investigate how sociodemographic conditions, political factors, organizational confidence, and non-pharmaceutical interventions compliance affect the COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in Brazil.

METHODS:

Data collection took place between November 25th, 2020 and January 11th, 2021 using a nationwide online survey. Subsequently, the researches performed a descriptive analysis on the main variables and used logistic regression models to investigate the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.

RESULTS:

Less concern over vaccine side effects could improve the willingness to be vaccinated (probability changed by 7.7 pp; p < 0.10). The current vaccine distrust espoused by the Brazilian president is associated with vaccine hesitancy, among his voter base. Lower performance perception (“Very Bad” with 10.7 pp; p < 0.01) or higher political opposition (left-oriented) regarding the current presidency is associated with the willingness to be vaccinated. Higher compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is usually positively associated with the willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine (+1 score to NPI compliance index is associated with higher willingness to be vaccinated by 1.4 pp, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION:

Willingness to be vaccinated is strongly associated with political leaning, perceived federal government performance, vaccine side effects, and compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs).

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Medical Students: The Next COVID-19 Challenge in Wuhan, China

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to explore the level of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine hesitancy among medical students in Wuhan, China, and to identify the factors and barriers associated with their vaccination decision.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was launched with 612 medical students recruited by convenience sampling from 6 universities. Data collection measures mainly included a demographic questionnaire, COVID-19 vaccine knowledge questionnaire, and the vaccine hesitancy scale.

RESULTS

A total of 58.2% of medical students reported vaccine hesitancy. The most common reasons for this were worrying about the side effects of vaccines (44.4%), uncertainty about vaccine safety (40.4%), and underestimating the risk of exposure to COVID-19 (27.9%). The main factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among participants were their knowledge about COVID-19 vaccine, training related to COVID-19 vaccines, family address, and education level (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The government, health department and universities in China need to work together and actively communicate with vaccine-hesitant students, establish a standardized COVID-19 vaccine course, and provide on-campus vaccination services.

Strategies and action points to ensure equitable uptake of COVID-19 vaccinations: A national qualitative interview study to explore the views of undocumented migrants, asylum seekers, and refugees

INTRODUCTION

Early evidence confirms lower COVID-19 vaccine uptake in established ethnic minority populations, yet there has been little focus on understanding vaccine hesitancy and barriers to vaccination in migrants. Growing populations of precarious migrants (including undocumented migrants, asylum seekers and refugees) in the UK and Europe are considered to be under-immunised groups and may be excluded from health systems, yet little is known about their views on COVID-19 vaccines specifically, which are essential to identify key solutions and action points to strengthen vaccine roll-out.

METHODS

We did an in-depth semi-structured qualitative interview study of recently arrived migrants (foreign-born, >18 years old; <10 years in the UK) to the UK with precarious immigration status between September 2020 and March 2021, seeking their input into strategies to strengthen COVID-19 vaccine delivery and uptake. We used the 'Three Cs' model (confidence, complacency and convenience) to explore COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, barriers and access. Data were analysed using a thematic framework approach. Data collection continued until data saturation was reached, and no novel concepts were arising. The study was approved by the University of London ethics committee (REC 2020.00630).

RESULTS

We approached 20 migrant support groups nationwide, recruiting 32 migrants (mean age 37.1 years; 21 [66%] female; mean time in the UK 5.6 years [SD 3.7 years]), including refugees (n = 3), asylum seekers (n = 19), undocumented migrants (n = 8) and migrants with limited leave to remain (n = 2) from 15 different countries (5 WHO regions). 23 (72%) of 32 migrants reported being hesitant about accepting a COVID-19 vaccine and two (6%) would definitely not accept a vaccine. Participants communicated concerns over vaccine content, side-effects, lack of accessible information in an appropriate language, lack of trust in the health system and low perceived need. A range of barriers to accessing the COVID-19 vaccine were reported and concerns expressed that their communities would be excluded from or de-prioritised in the roll-out. Undocumented migrants described fears over being charged and facing immigration checks if they present for a vaccine. Participants (n = 10) interviewed after recent government announcements that COVID-19 vaccines can be accessed without facing immigration checks remained unaware of this. Participants stated that convenience of access would be a key factor in their decision around whether to accept a vaccine and proposed alternative access points to primary care services (for example, walk-in centres in trusted places such as foodbanks, community centres and charities), alongside promoting registration with primary care for all, and working closely with communities to produce accessible information on COVID-19 vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

Precarious migrants may be hesitant about accepting a COVID-19 vaccine and face multiple and unique barriers to access, requiring simple but innovative solutions to ensure equitable access and uptake. Vaccine hesitancy and low awareness around entitlement and relevant access points could be easily addressed with clear, accessible, and tailored information campaigns, co-produced and delivered by trusted sources within marginalised migrant communities. These findings have immediate relevance to the COVID-19 vaccination initiatives in the UK and in other European and high-income countries with diverse migrant populations.

FUNDING

NIHR.

"If a rabbi did say 'you have to vaccinate,' we wouldn't": Unveiling the secular logics of religious exemption and opposition to vaccination

Maintaining 'faith' in vaccination has emerged as a public health challenge amidst outbreaks of preventable disease among religious minorities and rising claims to 'exemption' from vaccine mandates. Outbreaks of measles and coronavirus have been particularly acute among Orthodox Jewish neighbourhoods in North America, Europe and Israel, yet no comparative studies have been conducted to discern the shared and situated influences on vaccine decision-making. This paper synthesises qualitative research into vaccine decision-making among Orthodox Jews in the United Kingdom and Israel during the 2014-15 and 2018-19 measles epidemics, and 2020-21 coronavirus pandemic. The methods integrate 66 semi-structured informal interviews conducted with parents, formal and informal healthcare practitioners, and religious leaders, as well as analysis of tailored non-vaccination advocacy events and literature. The paper argues that the discourse of 'religious' exemption and opposition to vaccination obscures the diverse practices and philosophies that inform vaccine decisions, and how religious law and leaders form a contingent influence. Rather than viewing religion as the primary framework through which vaccine decisions are made, Orthodox Jewish parents were more concerned with safety, trust and choice in similar ways to 'secular' logics of non-vaccination. Yet, religious frameworks were mobilised, and at times politicised, to suit medico-legal discourse of 'exemption' from coercive or mandatory vaccine policies. By conceptualising tensions around protection as 'political immunities,' the paper offers a model to inform social science understandings of how health, law and religion intersect in contemporary vaccine opposition.

Knowledge and Attitudes Toward Covid-19 and Vaccines Among a New York Haredi-Orthodox Jewish Community

The Covid-19 pandemic has exposed the difficulty of the US public health system to respond effectively to vulnerable subpopulations, causing disproportionate rates of morbidity and mortality. New York Haredi-Orthodox Jewish communities represent a group that have been heavily impacted by Covid-19. Little research has examined their experience or perceptions toward Covid-19 and vaccines. We conducted a cross-sectional, observational study to explore the experience of Covid-19 among Haredim. Paper surveys were self-administered between December 2020 and January 2021 in Haredi neighborhood pediatricians' offices in Brooklyn, New York. Of 102 respondents, 43% reported either a positive SARS-CoV-2 viral or antibody test. Participants trusted their physicians, Orthodox medical organizations, and rabbinic leaders for medical information. Knowledge of Covid-19 transmission and risk was good (69% answered ≥ 4/6 questions correctly). Only 12% of respondents would accept a Covid-19 vaccine, 41% were undecided and 47% were strongly hesitant. Independent predictors of strong vaccine hesitancy included believing natural infection to be better than vaccination for developing immunity (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.28; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-14.86), agreement that prior infection provides a path toward resuming communal life (aOR 4.10; 95% CI 1.22-13.77), and pandemic-related loss of trust in physicians (aOR 5.01; 95% CI 1.05-23.96). The primary disseminators of health information for self-protective religious communities should be stakeholders who understand these groups' unique health needs. In communities with significant Covid-19 experience, vaccination messaging may need to be tailored toward protecting infection-naïve individuals and boosting natural immunity against emerging variants.

A study of ethnic, gender and educational differences in attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines in Israel - implications for vaccination implementation policies

Background

Vaccines for COVID-19 are currently available for the public in Israel. The compliance with vaccination has differed between sectors in Israel and the uptake has been substantially lower in the Arab compared with the Jewish population.

Aim

To assess ethnic and socio-demographic factors in Israel associated with attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines prior to their introduction.

Methods

A national cross-sectional survey was carried out In Israel during October 2020 using an internet panel of around 100,000 people, supplemented by snowball sampling. A sample of 957 adults aged 30 and over were recruited of whom 606 were Jews (49% males) and 351 were Arabs (38% males).

Results

The sample of Arabs was younger than for the Jewish respondents. Among the men, 27.3% of the Jewish and 23.1% of the Arab respondents wanted to be vaccinated immediately, compared with only 13.6% of Jewish women and 12.0% of Arab women. An affirmative answer to the question as to whether they would refuse the vaccine at any stage was given by 7.7% of Jewish men and 29.9% of Arab men, and 17.2% of Jewish women and 41.0% of Arab women. Higher education was associated with less vaccine hesitancy. In multiple logistic regression analysis, the ethnic and gender differences persisted after controlling for age and education. Other factors associated with vaccine hesitancy were the belief that the government restrictions were too lenient and the frequency of socializing prior to the pandemic.

Conclusions

The study revealed a relatively high percentage reported would be reluctant to get vaccinated, prior to the introduction of the vaccine. This was more marked so for Arabs then Jews, and more so for women within the ethnic groups. While this was not a true random sample, the findings are consistent with the large ethnic differences in compliance with the vaccine, currently encountered and reinforce the policy implications for developing effective communication to increase vaccine adherence. Government policies directed at controlling the pandemic should include sector-specific information campaigns, which are tailored to ensure community engagement, using targeted messages to the suspected vaccine hesitant groups. Government ministries, health service providers and local authorities should join hands with civil society organizations to promote vaccine promotion campaigns.

When abortion becomes public - Everyday politics of reproduction in rural Zambia

This article takes the public reaction to the discovery of an aborted foetus in a rural Zambian community as the empirical starting point for exploring the everyday politics of reproduction. It builds on eleven months of ethnographic fieldwork on abortion and abortion policy in Zambia in 2017 and 2018, including participant observation in the community where the episode took place and interviews with clinic staff and neighbours. The article explores local dynamics of abortion opposition in a country where abortion is legally permitted on broad grounds. By analysing this case as an anthropological event, it discusses how opposition to abortion is dynamic and changes depending on the situation at hand. While abortions that avoid public attention may be silently tolerated, abortions that become openly known are harshly condemned. Through scrutiny of a specific case of collective moral judgement of abortion, the article examines how values like responsible motherhood, sexual virtue and protection of life emerge and are shared, allowing participants to protect and accumulate their own integrity in a moral economy that forges stronger social ties within the community. The article argues that even the harshest expressions of opposition to abortion may not be as categorical as they first appear. It calls for increased attention to dynamics of moral and political opposition to abortion to understand what is socially at stake for those who engage in it.