You might recall that “behavioural fatigue” was a previously unheard of phenomenon invoked by government advisers (chiefly Chris Whitty, it seems) to justify their (mistaken) belief that the public would not comply with lockdowns that lasted more than a couple of weeks.
In response, a large group of behavioural scientists signed an open letter asking for the evidence for this alleged phenomenon that they’d never heard of. (They never received an answer).
So is "vaccine fatigue" a real thing? I'm familiar with the literature in this area-I've recently published research about vaccine hesitancy and I have a good understanding of the factors affecting vaccine behaviour. I've never come across this term.
So I did a literature search for the term “vaccination fatigue”. It came up with a grand total of 4 results.
Two of these four search results are papers written in German that use the term “Impfmüdigkeit”. That can be translated literally as “vaccine fatigue”, but it’s clear from the context of the articles that it’s actually referring to what’s known in English as vaccine hesitancy.
We know quite a lot about vaccine hesitancy. One of its key determinants is vaccine confidence, which can be undermined by exaggeration of risks, as in these comments by (checks notes) members of JCVI. bbc.co.uk/news/uk-581700…telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/3…
Incidentally, the research that I published with Ryan McKay and @mattgolding suggests that experience with other vaccines, far from promoting "vaccine fatigue", is something that helps to overcome vaccine hesitancy. theconversation.com/vaccines-for-c…
Another of the four papers that mentions “vaccination fatigue” is about post-vaccination fatigue in those who have had the rubella vaccine. That’s clearly not relevant to what JCVI are claiming.
The only paper I found that used the term “vaccination fatigue” in the sense JCVI is using it was a throwaway comment in a 2016 paper about challenges to eradicating polio. It's suggested that parents in Pakistan may experience VF after their children have had >15 vaccinations.
There's no evidence provided for that claim in the paper, and they also note that another relevant factor may be outright bans on vaccination (e.g., by the Taliban). None of this seems relevant to the situation in the UK.
Just to be comprehensive I also ran a literature search for the term “vaccine fatigue”. This search found a single, solitary result.
That paper (from 2009) reports on focus groups conducted in Monroe County, NY. The participants were health-care providers (doctors and nurses). Some of those in the suburbs mentioned "vaccine fatigue".
Why would this factor be mentioned by those in the suburbs but not those in urban settings? It sounds like, rather than “vaccine fatigue” this phenomenon might reflect how people access vaccination.
We know that maximising vaccine uptake requires going to where people are. In the case of children, this is routinely achieved by holding vaccination clinics in schools.
In the last 18 months that approach has been disrupted due to uncontrolled transmission of Covid, which has led to school closures and self-isolation of hundreds of thousands of children at a time.
Ironically, perhaps, the mass self-isolation of school children we saw in July might have been avoided had JCVI recommended the Covid vaccine for 12-15 year olds once it had been approved by the regulator. That would’ve allowed more immunisation to take place.
Interestingly, that paper which mentioned “vaccine fatigue” also suggested that it might actually refer to attitudes among those *giving* the vaccines rather than those being offered them. I wonder if something similar might apply to JCVI?
In summary, vaccination fatigue isn't really a thing. But then again, maybe the members of JCVI know something that the rest of the world's scientists don't?
While we're making up new conditions, how about vacillation fatigue: the increasing frustration with public health experts who can't decide whether to give children a vaccine that will protect them against COVID-19? pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/politi…
And there's no need to stop there. The pandemic has given rise to:
As does the fact that my son has now tested positive. So rather than spreading antivax talking points and then making up excuses for why vaccination isn't happening, I'd really like to see JCVI pull their finger out and get this vaccination program moving. [ENDS].
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The minister for education is very keen for children to learn Latin. So here’s a thread with some Latin that I’d like @GavinWilliamson to learn. (All Latin etymology via etymonline.com).
An easy one for starters:
1)Virus. Latin for “poison”.
2)Transmission. From Latin transmittere "send across, cause to go across, transfer, pass on," from trans "across, beyond" + mittere "to release, let go; send, throw"
3)Mitigation. From the Latin mitigatus, past participle of mitigare "soften, make tender, ripen, mellow, tame," figuratively, "make mild or gentle, pacify, soothe".
Order has been restored, and the link between cases and hospital admissions seems to be re-established. But this still leaves the puzzle of what happened in the middle of July, when cases and admissions briefly became unstuck.
On this graph, the black line shows the number of cases we'd expect, based on the number of (subsequent) admissions. The actual number fits the prediction (postdiction, technically) very nicely, except in the circled area.
The puzzle isn't what caused the spike. Pretty much everyone seems happy to lay the blame on football (people watching in groups indoors).
The puzzle is twofold:
1) Why didn't the case spike produce an admissions spike? 2) How did the spike dissipate so quickly without a trace?
My TL is absolutely full of people who look at this graph and *still* want to say “the link is broken” or “the link has weakened” or “the jury is out”. So let me have another go at explaining a distinction that confuses some people (and is wilfully abused by others). [THREAD]
Of course vaccines have reduced the proportion of cases that lead to hospitalisation. I'm not denying that. I've published research about how important it is that we talk about the high efficacy of COVID vaccines, because this could increase vaccine uptake.bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…
Anyone who wants to claim that the link between cases and hospitalisation has been "broken" or "severed" might like to explain why the red line (cases) and the blue line (admissions) have been moving in near-perfect synchrony since the start of June.
One of the things I was at pains to point out in this interview is that we haven't broken the link (0:25).
Some people were confused that the plot above had separate scales on the left and right. This version might help. Note that hospitalisations are actually coming 7 days later than the case specimen date; the plot takes the lag into account so you can see the lines moving together.
Someone posted this image (with no text) in response to some info about vaccination clinics. The highlighting draws attention to there having been more deaths among the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. So let's briefly review why these numbers mean *you SHOULD get vaccinated*.🧵
The bottom row of the table shows that among the over-50s, there were 50 deaths among people who'd been double-vaccinated versus only 38 among those who hadn't been vaccinated. So it's better not to get vaccinated, right? Wrong!
This is an example of what psychologists call the base-rate fallacy. If you made this mistake, don't feel bad, because pretty much everyone does, including experienced health-care professionals who confront this problem daily. Here's some more info. thedecisionlab.com/biases/base-ra…
If you live in #Bristol it's worth knowing that the Covid rate is still growing fast (the log plot shows the rate doubling every 8 days at present). We're now #16 in the list of local authorities with highest rates (most of those higher in the list are in the NE or NW).
In Bristol, the fastest growth is currently in 30-34 year olds (note this is a log scale).