← Quick Find

Conspiracist Ideation

Distrust

Unwarranted beliefs

Worldview and politics

Religious concerns

Moral concerns

Fear and phobias

Distorted risk perception

Perceived self interest

Epistemic relativism

Reactance

When it comes to vaccines - why are people talking about 'Systemic corruption' ?

Healthcare authorities are corrupt and have conflicts of interest

One of the strongest predictors of vaccine hesitancy is people’s general mistrust of authorities and those perceived as working for them.

The distrust is often expressed in claims about vested interests, or it reveals itself as a lack of knowledge about vaccinations.

It can be directed towards different targets, for example:

  • Health and medical professionals and organisations.
  • Pharmaceutical companies.
  • Governments.
  • Scientists.
  • The ‘medical establishment’.

It can also be directed towards the scientific process and to vaccines themselves.

Although distrust is related to conspiracist beliefs, arguments framed within this attitude root are distinct in that the reasons for distrust may be due to a person’s lived experience (e.g., having experienced discrimination in the healthcare system). Arguments stemming from distrust also need not relate to conspiracies. Instead, distrust often manifests as vague statements, full of suspicion and uncertainty, with conclusions drawn based on the source of the message.

This theme suggests that a range of authorities are untrustworthy because they are allegedly corrupt. These authorities may include healthcare and government systems, politicians, health care professionals, health agencies, celebrities, and the media. They are considered to be in cahoots with pharmaceutical companies, to have conflicts of interest, and/or to be biased and deceptive.

Following that, arguments are made that science is untrustworthy because it has been “corrupted by the system“. Therefore we should have proper open debate and question the motives of healthcare providers.

Is there any truth in it?

Distrust towards authorities is sometimes justified. For example, some people may be concerned about vaccination advice because some medical professionals behaved disreputably in the past and corruption does occasionally exist in healthcare systems. In fact, some of the most damaging conflicts of interest occurred when several doctors received undisclosed funding from personal injury lawyers to find links between vaccines and adverse effects. We should definitely highlight signs of corruption, and most countries will have a channel for us to report them. In the UK, healthcare professionals are regulated by their professional bodies and corruption is extremely rare.

What could I say to someone fixed on this belief?

Dialogue between patients and healthcare professionals is most productive if it is guided by empathy, and an opportunity for the patient to affirm the reasons underlying their attitudes and to express understanding for that. That’s why it is important to understand the attitude roots behind people’s overt opinions. To affirm a person’s underlying attitude root does not mean we need to agree with the specifics of their argument. For example, we can acknowledge that:

Distrust towards authorities is sometimes justified. For example, some people may be concerned about vaccination advice because some medical professionals behaved disreputably in the past and corruption does occasionally exist in healthcare systems. In fact, some of the most damaging conflicts of interest occurred when several doctors received undisclosed funding from personal injury lawyers to find links between vaccines and adverse effects. We should definitely highlight signs of corruption, and most countries will have a channel for us to report them. In the UK, healthcare professionals are regulated by their professional bodies and corruption is extremely rare.



Having set the stage through this (partial) affirmation, we can then proceed to correct the patient’s particular misconception.

Fortunately, vaccine recommendations do not come from just one person, so we can evaluate all the evidence from multiple sources, such as independent scientists and non-governmental organisations worldwide.

When experts take an advisory role, they are required to publicly declare any conflict of interest, including financial payments received. In most countries, you can find these declarations.

Advisory bodies increasingly deliberate in public. In some countries these deliberations are recorded and you can watch them on YouTube.

The priority of these bodies is whether vaccines are safe and beneficial to public health.

Where can I find out more?

Additional information: 

Academic references:

en_GBEnglish
fr_FRFrench es_ESSpanish de_DEGerman ro_RORomanian en_GBEnglish

MISINFORMATION & DISTRUST

One of the strongest predictors of vaccine hesitancy is people’s general mistrust of authorities, pharmaceutical companies, scientists, the medical “establishment”, and scientific research methods and findings. The distrust is often expressed in claims about vested interests or a lack of knowledge about vaccinations. It can be directed towards different targets, for example, health and medical authorities or professionals, pharmaceutical companies, the government, and the scientific process and vaccines themselves.

 

Although distrust is related to conspiracist ideation, arguments framed within this attitude root are distinct in that the reasons for distrust may be due to a person’s lived experience (e.g., having experienced discrimination in the healthcare system). Arguments stemming from distrust also need not relate to conspiracies. Instead, distrust often manifests as vague statements, full of suspicion and uncertainty, with conclusions drawn based on the source of the message.