This week, Americans began receiving COVID-19 vaccines, with the hope that by the middle of next year a pandemic that has claimed the lives of more than three hunded thousand Americans will be brought under control. Misinformation about the virus has been a staple of both the Trump Administration’s messaging and much of the junk science found on the Internet. Now, that misinformation will intersect with an American public that is already somewhat skeptical about vaccines, potentially imperilling the effort to get a sufficient number of Americans vaccinated. (The Times reported on Wednesday that many of the people spreading false claims about voter fraud have switched their messaging to the dangers of vaccines.)
Read The New Yorker’s complete news coverage and analysis of the coronavirus pandemic.
To try to understand why anti-vaccine sentiment is so prevalent in the United States, I recently spoke by phone with Dr. Peter Hotez, a professor of pediatrics and molecular virology at Baylor College of Medicine, and the co-director of the Texas Children’s Center for Vaccine Development. In March, he will publish a book called “Preventing the Next Pandemic: Vaccine Diplomacy in a Time of Anti-Science.” During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we discussed the historical reasons for vaccine skepticism among many Black Americans, how doctors can speak the truth without appearing political, and how the fight over vaccines became so similar to the fight over every political issue in America.
When we’re talking about why people are resistant to vaccines, how much is that a question for doctors to answer, and how much is it a question for social scientists or other people to answer?
Not all vaccines are created equal, and each vaccine has its own set of issues around hesitancy. In general, when we’re talking about vaccines, we’re usually talking about vaccines for kids. And the three vaccines that are primarily targeted are the M.M.R. vaccine for measles, mumps, rubella; the H.P.V. vaccine; and the flu vaccine. What’s happened in the United States is that, historically, there has been a rise and fall of anti-vaccine sentiment ever since colonial times, with smallpox vaccinations. But the modern piece of this really started to accelerate in the early two-thousands, after a paper by Andrew Wakefield and his colleague was published in The Lancet, falsely claiming that the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine had the ability to cause autism. Back then they called it pervasive developmental disorder.
That whole thing was debunked by a journalist for the Times of London, a guy named Brian Deer, who wrote a series of articles, first in the Times and then in the British Medical Journal, the BMJ. And that Lancet paper ultimately got retracted, but not until 2010. So that period enabled an anti-vaccine movement to flourish in the U.K., and then it took off in the United States. And in the United States it acquired its own flavor, in that, starting around 2014 or 2015, it got linked to the political right under this fake banner that they called “health freedom, medical freedom.” It started in Southern California, but it really got amplified here in Texas, and we started to see a steep increase in parents who were opting their kids out of getting vaccinated. And it coincided with the formation of these political-action committees, Texans for Vaccine Choice, Oklahomans for Vaccine and Health Choice. And they started getting money from organizations that traditionally would support the Tea Party and other far-right-wing causes. So they gave money, and power, and strength, and political alliances. And then it really took off with Robert F. Kennedy and his anti-vaccine group, Children’s Health Defense, which became one of the first major national anti-vaccine groups.
One of the things that seems interesting about anti-vaccine sentiment is that it is a far-right thing in certain ways, but it also crosses certain ideological lines. If you look at some of the places where opposition to vaccinations for children is highest, it’s places like Santa Monica and Marin County, which I don’t think of as part of a right wing—
Yeah, or in Seattle. So there’s a Pacific Northwest flavor to that, which is linked more to the health-and-wellness industry. The point is the anti-vaccine lobby doesn’t all speak with one voice. That’s absolutely true. That’s why I sometimes call it a confederacy more than one single organization. And that gets to the sources of funding as well, which we don’t really understand. Some of it’s coming from the health-and-wellness industry selling fake supplements and autism cures, while a lot of it is getting money from far-right-wing political causes. But it’s gotten very powerful now, to the point it really dominates the Internet.
You alluded to anti-vaccination sentiment rising and falling since colonial times. Is there a through line that can help us understand why sentiment rises or falls, or why distinct populations see sentiment within them rise or fall? Or is it just things like this Lancet paper, about which it would be hard to come up with some sort of historical explanation?
It comes from different causes. So for instance, because I have a daughter with autism, I wrote this book “Vaccines Did Not Cause Rachel’s Autism.” In the book, I report on doing a PubMed search, where you type in key words like autism and vaccines, and you do see one paper comes out of 1976, and a guy who was looking at smallpox vaccination and wondering, “Could there be a link to autism?” And then nothing. And then all of a sudden the Wakefield paper comes, and this thing just blows up after that.
So clearly it’s that Wakefield paper that was the trigger. But what gave it momentum, though, I think, was the political alliances and links. And again, under this banner of health freedom, we’re seeing that stuff expand this year. Because while it was very focussed on vaccines —which, by the way, started bringing people like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones into it—in 2020 it glommed on to the protest against masks and social distancing. So what was an anti-vaccine movement then morphed into a full-on anti-science movement.
And then the other thing that happened this year, which I hadn’t seen before, was it went outside the U.S. and North America. It went to western Europe. So you started seeing these protests in Paris and Berlin and London, again using that same health-freedom language. And we have anti-mask and anti-vaccine rallies. There are other versions of anti-vaccine activities globally, but this one had that American spin to it that I hadn’t seen before.
According to polls, if you ask people about their skepticism of COVID-19 vaccines, you see that Black and Latino adults are more skeptical. At the same time, you see Republicans as much more skeptical than Democrats. The explanation for the former has traditionally been that the medical community has a very checkered history with nonwhite populations in this country and elsewhere. Is that how you see it?
It’s the thing you mentioned. I think the other is the absence of African-American health-care providers, especially physicians, especially male physicians. We really are doing a very bad job training African-American physicians. But the third piece that no one really talks about, which I think is quite important, if you start looking into it, is that these anti-vaccine groups staged anti-vaccine rallies in Harlem in 2019. So I think there was specific targeting of African-American groups. The movement targets specific groups. It went after the Somali-immigrant community in Minnesota in 2017, and it basically generated a measles epidemic. Then they went after the Orthodox Jewish community in New York in 2018, 2019. And they use very inflammatory, exploitative language, comparing vaccines to the Holocaust.
