Inside the Mind of the “Vaccine Hesitant”

by Anne Mason

Photo by Brandon Day on Unsplash

As you’ve been reading the news these days, have you noticed a new angle on the “anti-vaccine movement?” The same old rhetoric is being employed, but a bit more subtly. It’s couched in the context of pseudoscientific inquiry into the “phenomenon and psychology” of anyone critical of the vaccine program. Conveniently, media coverage focused on the “state of being vaccine hesitant” draws the conversation away from the actual concerns of the “vaccine hesitant”––such as vaccine injury, zero liability for vaccine manufacturers, an ever-increasing vaccine schedule (72 doses by age 18!) and no double-blind placebo safety testing for any childhood vaccine on the schedule.

All these pieces depict the “vaccine hesitant” as if they are a singularly minded subgroup characterized by a shared “affliction” which requires intervention. This is a clever pretense, but one that many well intended people have been led to believe is actually in earnest, as suggested by articles such as this piece in the Atlantic.

Or this NBC News piece, underscored by the cartoon image of the “vaccine hesitant” family running fearfully from the dripping syringe.

And if you haven’t heard, WHO has even listed “vaccine hesitancy” as one of the top ten threats to global health in 2019! Yes, folks, humanity has finally reached the point at which asking questions threatens its very existence! Did you think you’d live to see the day?

But the most blatant tactic in creating a divide between folks on this issue––and ensuring that reasonable questions about vaccines won’t even be heard––is this 17 minute “How to Defeat the Anti-Vax Movement” video by YouTuber David Pakman.

In this presentation, Pakman repeats CDC and WHO talking points about the safety of vaccines, but never once cites any studies about vaccines themselves. Instead, he spends much of the presentation detailing “sociological and psychological surveys” of the “vaccine hesitant.” If you buy into this narrative, you’ll assume those with concerns about vaccines are simply rebellious conspiracy theorists who are squeamish about needles, “don’t value science” or “don’t even understand how science works.”

This video, like the print articles, advises that employing facts and data to dissuade the “vaccine hesitant” won’t work, and that more “subtle” strategies should be employed. This includes appealing to emotion, using comedy––and targeting children through video games. Packman quotes this article in Human Vaccines and Immunotherapeutics:

‘We believe that public health efforts to address issues of vaccine hesitancy should increase their focus on childhood education. An opportunity exists to create positive, accurate vaccine attitudes through fun and interactive approaches early in life. Leveraging digital technologies may provide a way to deliver these messages to children in a way that complements immune system and immunization education in school curricula. We recommend that public health officials explore and identify the most effective ways to deliver positive digital messages to children in hopes of “inoculating” the next generation against vaccine hesitancy.’

Pakman covers this strategy and more in his video. Folks whose children play video games may be interested to know that pharma titan GlaxoSmithKline is collaborating with one of the video game companies in such efforts. Check out the video.

Furthermore, a US congressman has called on Facebook, Google and Amazon to remove content critical of the vaccine program. Amazon removed the documentary, “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe” from its streaming service, Pinterest removed searches about safer vaccines and vaccine injury, and YouTube demonetized channels “promoting anti-vaccination content.” Apparently, folks who question the vaccine program are so dangerous that they can’t even be heard. Pinterest even removed sites which promote alternative treatment for chronic illness.

Actual censorship is being liberally and openly practiced now in the US, and there is certainly a great deal of effort, study, funding and strategy being employed to counter the anti-vaccine movement. But none of it will work.

I know what will. And I’m willing to share this information with everyone concerned about “vaccine hesitancy.” I’m going to share this from the perspective of an actual “vaccine hesitant.” Wait for it. Wait for it…Ready?

Address our concerns.

  • A Harvard Medical School report estimated that the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System captures only 1% of vaccine adverse events.

In 2018 alone, 58,381 vaccine adverse events were reported to the VAERS database, including 412 deaths, 1,237 permanent disabilities and 4,217 hospitalizations.

How can CDC and WHO claim the safety of vaccines in light of these staggering numbers? Especially if these numbers only represent 1% of all adverse events following vaccines?

How can we mandate a liability free product be injected into our children?

  • The CDC now recommends 72 vaccine doses by the time a child reaches age 18.

Why have NO CDC studies been conducted on the cumulative effects of this ever increasing vaccine schedule?

  • Finally, how can we reconcile CDC’s vaccine schedule and increasing vaccine mandates with the hundreds of peer-reviewed, published articles implicating vaccines in the rise of the childhood epidemics we are currently experiencing in the U.S. and other industrialized nations?

It is troubling for any of us to suspect that our regulatory agencies––the very agencies which were put in place on our behalf––may not be doing their jobs. It is disconcerting, to say the least, to conclude that we cannot trust everything they have told us. It is disheartening to realize that conflicts of interest and industry money may have corrupted our regulatory agencies and our legislatures.

But silencing questions, avoiding the discussion and pretending that such concerns are invalid will not solve the problem. Focusing on the psychology and sociological demographic of those asking the questions will only temporarily distract us from the real problem. We must hold our regulatory agencies accountable. We must demand transparency. And we must uncover the truth.

We, the “vaccine hesitant,” are willing to do the work it takes to get these agencies back on track. We will do the research. We will ask the tough questions. And we will take them to task and make them work for you again.

All we ask is that you hear us.

27 Replies to “Inside the Mind of the “Vaccine Hesitant”

  1. Wonderful article. Thank you so much. It saves me the time to write something similar and Incan show this to my family as it’s written in a way that won’t trigger a kneejerk reaction to stop reading by the normies. 🙂

  2. Thank you for this well written article!
    Forced medical procedures without absolute proof of efficacy and safety is just scary.

    1. Scary indeed, especially when a state health department has a poster boasting how “future vaccines may modify DNA to help fight diseases.” Who appointed the government as God, with a mandate giving them license to play with and modify our children’s DNA?

  3. Well-crafted appeal to reason here. The identification of so many corporate driven persuasion techniques is astute, is revealing. It is terrifying; but there is no cry of hatred or disparities here. This is logic and empathy driving an appeal to every human being’s better nature.

  4. Ann, I appreciate the way you have stood the moral high ground in your reasoned and respectful piece. When you embrace the reality that something as soft as water has carved the Grand Canyon, you can have hope that a soft approach can begin to wear away the unthinking hostility we vaccine hesitant face. Thanks for your work.

  5. A dozen or so people get sick from eating Romaine lettuce and it’s pulled off the shelves nationwide. Babies DIE right after a vaccine and we think lettuce is more important than babies. We have lost our cognitive abilitiy to think logically because of the vaccines we got!

    1. Precisely! Even if vaccines were truly “safe and effective”, taking away litigation is ridiculous when compared to the number of times we have had brocolli, lettuce, etc. taken off of store shelves due to an e coli contamination. This is a product that is simply picked, trimmed and washed. Compared to a product with neuro-toxins, foreign dna from dead fetuses, animals, etc. The logic that there will never be an improperly prepared batch of vaccines is absurd.

      Just one more reason vaccines can’t be immune from litigation. They keep saying that injury is 1 in a million from vaccines. Well, then they can handle litigation.

  6. That about sums it up for me. Do proper studies. They won’t though. They know they’ve got a dangerous product & don’t care because no one can sue them anyway. Put the liability back on the manufacturers, the problem will solve itself.

  7. The most important study hasn’t been done. The fully vaccinated child vs unvaccinated child long term health outcome.

    #dothestudy

    1. Mark, even that study is virtually done. There are numerous doctors who treat Amish children (never vaccinated) who will tell you that their patients are the healthiest children in their practice. One doctor has delivered and treated 15,000 Amish children and not one case of Autism. And he is not alone.

      1. I know. Same with the pediatrician in Oregon that just released initial data on his 15000 patients that range from fully vaccinated to partially to none. WE know what the results are of course (much healthier children overall). This is why the CDC won’t do the study.

      2. It could be argued though, that this statistic can be attributed to their overall better health from natural food and more exercise. We need a more appropriate control group, to more accurately represent our malnurished society.

        1. Matt Naylor, but if you did the study using the same families who stopped vaccinating after their first child – or two children, say – were vaccinated (and perhaps resulted in serious reactions) and had children afterwards, you would control for a lot of those variables. And there are plenty of those families.

          1. Yes Hillary …. I can compare my two elder children’s health records with their three younger siblings. …..but that’s been dismissed by a journalist as simply correlation unfortunately. However I know there are many other families like us with identical outcomes. …..wonderfully healthy unvaccinated kids.

      1. If you read the study in full, the study was not vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. It was fully vaccinated, including MMR (to the Danish requirement), vs. all of the vaccines except for MMR.

        MMR is just one piece of the puzzle, and the study is effectively worthless.

        It is clearly possible for many children to be vaccinated without “apparent” damage, however this is not true for all, and you can’t deny a significant increase in chronic illness and even dementia for the elderly. These may all be connected . They may not. But they have NOT been studied to say they are not connected, and in fact there are plenty of studies worldwide that show connections.

  8. Very professional PROPAGANDA VIDEO!
    I am sure Joseph Geobbels the Nazi Propaganda Minister and his mentor Edward Bernays would be impressed by the totally twisted, false narrative, full of lies and character attacks that this video contains.
    Anyone who actually does some of their own thinking and reading will quickly find this to be the case.
    It looks like the Pro-Vaxxers are getting worried that we are starting to have and effect by our public outreach.
    Onward to VICTORY!

  9. Exactly! There is a PLANNED attack on those who would uncover the truth TO PRESERVE HEALTH. It’s not science-based, although they use the term “science” often. It’s not based on realistic concerns, but rather a drive to sell (and now mandate) as many vaccine doses as possible. Look at the CDC “Recipe to increase uptake” for the flu shot presentation from 2004, for example. In it, they literally give examples of how to scare the pants off people then tell them get the shot, get the shot. Never once do they describe empowering people to learn about the risks and benefits of the shot itself – in fact, they imply heavily IN the document that those who become informed may hamper the program. This is from the CDC, not Merck (although if you weren’t paying close attention the difference would be easily missed).

    And this orchestrated effort to appeal to children WITHOUT discussing the real concerns here . . sad, and sickening. Thank you for this article.

  10. “But silencing questions, avoiding the discussion and pretending that such concerns are invalid will not solve the problem.” This is medical gaslighting.

  11. Very well done. I loved the questions. These types of questions cannot be answered by the vaccine industry or the doctors that promote them. The blind faith that the vaccine proponents have in the studies that have not been done will need to be destroyed by those of us who speak the truth. Thank you.

  12. Matt Naylor, but if you did the study using the same families who stopped vaccinating after their first child – or two children, say – were vaccinated (and perhaps resulted in serious reactions) and had children afterwards, you would control for a lot of those variables. And there are plenty of those families.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *