One of the lessons that can already be learned from COVID-19 is that, despite repeated calls by the authorities to comply with health measures, citizens are reluctant to comply fully. This is all the more inexplicable given that breaking the rules can have serious, even fatal, consequences for yourself and your loved ones.
The current pandemic is unique: the respect of directives by a large majority is being erased, or if not considerably compromised, by the delinquency and negligence of a minority. No region seems to escape it, the duration of this crisis being essential as an aggravating factor.
This obviously banal observation is however more complex if we dwell on it more. Let us assume that each person has their own interpretation or perception of a risk associated with breaking a rule, beyond their responsibility to assume it or not.
As with our decision to comply with health rules, we will soon have to decide on the vaccination. Are we going to agree to be vaccinated or will we take the risk of not doing it? What will we decide? Risk not being vaccinated for various reasons or personal beliefs or getting the vaccine with the risk of side effects, if any.
Two inclinations
The analysis of behavior in relation to vaccination is not new. In 1990, researchers noted two inclinations or prejudices in the subjects observed. The first is a tendency to abstain from being vaccinated when one knows the existence of a potential risk. The second inclination is that of not getting vaccinated or of postponing vaccination due to lack of proof of efficacy of the vaccine.
This undoubtedly questionable analysis nevertheless illustrates the fact that a person having to make the decision to be vaccinated will also have to question his own responsibility. Will I be responsible for a decision that I have made or have not taken, that is to say not to be vaccinated, whether it is out of prudence or because of the lack of proof? efficiency? Will the severity and magnitude of COVID-19 have an impact?
What can we conclude from all this, if not that we should not take for granted that the recommendations for vaccination will be fully respected? As proof, there are currently 28 available vaccines in Quebec, which prevent 21 serious diseases. But what about reality or, more technically, vaccination coverage, ie the proportion of people vaccinated? It is interesting to note that in 2017-2018, for a vaccine as banal as that against influenza, only 32% of people aged 18 to 74 were vaccinated, well below the target of 80% set. by the national public health program. Higher, but not necessarily optimal, levels are found in people aged 75 and over, at 65%.
The COVID-19 crisis is obviously a situation never seen before and not very comparable with the influenza virus, measles, shingles or pneumonia. It is a monstrous virus that will certainly continue to wreak havoc. It may well be that we are throwing ourselves on the vaccination massively, but nothing guarantees an optimal adherence, because of the abstainers or the deniers. Mandatory vaccination might be a solution, but it is also up to our governments to take into account prejudices about vaccination in their communication and advocacy strategies.
–
–
