Here's Why Vaccine Hesitancy Is A Growing Problem

Published Nov 22, 2024, 11:23 AM

Public health experts have expressed alarm over Donald Trump picking a vaccine-skeptic to head the US Department of Health and Human Services. Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s nomination comes as falling vaccination rates for diseases such as measles have led to a spike in cases globally. What's behind anti-vaccine sentiment, how is it evolving and what effect is it having on public health? Sam Fazeli, PhD in pharmacology and Director of Research at Bloomberg Intelligence, joins host Stephen Carroll to discuss.

Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News. I'm Stephen, Carol and vis Is Here's Why, where we take one news story and explain it in just a few minutes with our experts here at Bloomberg. There have been several surprises in Donald Trump's choices for key roles in his administration, but his nominee to lead the Health Department that's been particularly controversial.

He's a very long anti vaccine activist. He is a science denihilist, and he's a conspiracy theorist. This is not the kind of person you want to head health agencies. I mean, he has said that no vaccine is a benefit is tremendous power over all Americans' day to day lives.

He wants to make people healthy.

It's driven him pretty wild over the last number of years, and today I nominated him for I guess if you like health, then if you like people that live a long time, it's the most important position.

RFK Junior Bobby Robert F.

Kennedy Junior has been vocal in his opposition to vaccines, notably during the COVID nineteen pandemic. He was widely condemned for calling the shots a crime against humanity. If he's confirmed. His position of influence on US health policy comes at a time when anti vaccine sentiment has already undermined progress in tackling diseases such as measles. Cases jumped by twenty percent last year, exposing the gaps in vaccine coverage for a preventable illness. So here's why vaccine hesitancy is a growing problem. Sam Fazali, director of research at Bloomberg Intelligence, joins me now for more. Sam, this idea of being opposed to vaccines or skeptical or hesitant about them isn't new, But how far can we trace the sort of philosophy back.

Generally vaccine hesitancy. Vaccine questions, as we all know, have been around like any other medicine, really as soon as something is available. Right now, we have obcent drugs and lots of people are questioning about O weekitly drugs. So any new product, any new technology that comes along, there are skeptics. And sometimes that's very useful because it pushes you to think it harder to make sure you have the data and the science backing the risk benefit ratio, and that is the critical element of any intervention.

Than we do in our lives risk benefit ratio.

So is there any concept that this sentiment is on the rise of what effect can we think that it has in terms of public health?

There is evidence that the view of particularly parents with regards to childhood vaccinations in terms of negativity is rising. If you think back, we had that zudo scientific paper that was published quite a long time ago suggesting that certain.

Vaccines lead to autism.

Was of course that the study was flawed, that statistics were flawed, the analysis was flawed, and that's been proven over and over again. So but there is a tendency and there seems to be an increasing attitude you toward I don't want to expose my child to whatever it is that people think that they're doing negative for their kids, which of course is as far as I'm concerned, super dangerous.

I've got some stats for your measles that we can talk about.

Well, let's because that's one of the ones that the WHL has particularly been warning about. U.

Yeah, the data twenty twenty four is still we're in it right.

Twenty twenty three, there was a twenty percent increase in the cases of measles. Now, remembering vaccines don't prevent infections. Vaccines prevent disease, and I think that's one of the things that perhaps people got a bit confused about.

During COVID.

You get your vaccinations and a few months later you still get COVID infection. But why did that happen? I think perhaps we didn't communicate very well. So let's say, measles, this infection, twenty percent increase could be a statistical fluke, but let's see, well how twenty twenty four turns out. But there's definitely a trend toward increases. And we've heard stories around the UK where there are outbreaks and there have been some cases. But let me just say, before the vaccine came through, two point six million people a year were.

Dying nineteen sixty three.

Imagine how what their your world population was that time now much larger, And so far last year or this year, we've only had one hundred and seven thousand deaths only. I mean, you know that's obviously a single death is bad. But so this is something where vaccines really stand out in medical treatments.

For people who are hesitant or unsure about vaccines, how much trust can we have on the process that leads to their approval. This was part of the conversation around COVID as well. It appeared that the process moved much quicker in that case.

Yeah, I mean, don't forget COVID. We were in a pandemic.

Let's say I'm not saying you well, let's say mpox becomes the new small box, right, what are we going to do. We have to get vaccinations at as fast as possible to prevent the ultimate millions of deaths that will occur.

That is a very specific period. So COVID was a very special situation.

People should not assume that vaccines used to take years to get.

To market previously and they continue to be the case. Now, that was a special period.

Vaccines go through significant rigor because by definition, you're giving something a medical intervation to a hell healthy person, So you need to be absolutely sure as much as humanly possible of its safety.

What can be done then to counteract the sentiment if we can place more emphasis on the rigor of these approval systems for vaccines to trust people they're safe. There is there more mastering that we can do to ensure people know and can trust in vaccines.

I think good high quality scientific messaging that that is acceptable, understandable by people, not bamboozling them with strange terminology and data, and really just highlighting the sorts of stats that are just given. Nineteen sixty three, two point six million deaths last year, one hundred and seven thousand from measos. These are facts that people need to know. It's not that MESOS virus has disappeared. The virus has always stay with us in some form or another. So that's the question.

I mean, we have got rid of one which was small box. But this is what people need to understand.

Let's give them more information and be ready there to coolly converse with folks with other skeptical.

How much influence could someone in charge of the Health and Human Services Department in the United States have on vaccine uptake if the messaging is coming from a different point of.

View, significant significant, So I mean, you know, even if the ADA approves a vaccine, I think the head of the HS can have an influence on it actually being able to launch, actually being able to use. This is a very powerful position, and I'm hoping given that Doroth K. Junior has some very good views about food additives, the types of food that are consumed that logic will prevail over mythology if it's the best phrase of can news.

Part of your day job is researching pharmaceutical companies. I wonder how they approach this issue of hesitancy around uptake of vaccines.

Yeah.

Look, farmer companies are there to make a profit. They're there to get their product to market faster and keeping on the market for longest. The agencies, the FDA, the European Agency for Medical Regulation and Approvals it so they are there to gatekeep I'm not saying farmer companies do bad things, but there is a significant barrier between a company who's incentivized to get his products to market, which in a majority of the times they do with good conscience. There is a barrier, there's a significant filter with the public, and that's what these.

Agencies are for.

That is where we hope that the HHS and the new administration that's coming into the US doesn't undermine that ability. Yes, remove red tape, but don't undermine the critical nature of their work, which is safety.

Thanks to Sam Fazzali, director of research at Bloomberg Intelligence, for more explanations like this one from our team of twenty seven hundred journalists and analysts around the world. Search for quick take on the Bloomberg website or Bloomberg Business App. I'm Stephen Carroll. This is here's why. I'll be back next week with more. Thanks for listening.

In 1 playlist(s)

  1. Here's Why

    51 clip(s)

Here's Why

Here's Why: Where we take one news story and explain it in just a few minutes with help from our exp 
Social links
Follow podcast
Recent clips
Browse 51 clip(s)