Very few nursing home residents are up to date on their COVID-19 vaccination, and for staff, its even lower. New Mexicos numbers are not much better than the country overall.
A KFF analysis shows that New Mexicos nursing facility residents fall just below the national average with a 37% uptake. Staff, on the other hand, have one of the highest rates in the country at just 22%.
Priya Chidambaram, a senior policy analyst with KFF, said national numbers are on the decline.
That is lower than the share that received those same vaccines last year and much lower than the share that received their vaccines when they first became available in 2021, she said.
The numbers arent as low for non-profit facilities as they are for government-run ones.
We found that states that have more non-profit facilities in them have, overall, a higher vaccination rate, Chidambaram said.
The report also noted that states that voted for President Biden in 2020 had higher vaccinatino rates. Other factors included whether facilities had programs to keep residents up to date on vaccines.
KFF also found that over one-fifth of all U.S. COVID-19 deaths have occurred in long-term facilities.
About 90% of nursing home residents received the initial vaccine in 2021.
Even though COVID-19 poses a higher risk for older adults, about 72% of nursing home residentsreceived the flu vaccine as of December.
This coverage is made possible by the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and KUNM listeners.
A New York man pleaded guilty in Newark federal court Monday for his role in a kickback scheme involving COVID-19 testing, U.S. District Attorney Philip Sellinger announced on Tuesday.
David Weathers, 61, of Bronx, pleaded guilty to his involvement in soliciting kickbacks for the referral of COVID-19 test samples before U.S. District Judge Brian Martinotti, authorities said.
Weathers and co-conspirators solicited kickbacks in exchange for providing COVID-19 test samples to Metpath Laboratories, a clinical laboratory in Parsippany, that conducted testing to detect COVID-19 in samples obtained from individual patients, according to court documents.
Metpath paid kickbacks for the referrals of COVID-19 test samples while billing Medicare and other health care programs for the tests leading to a loss of more than $3.5 million for federal programs, authorities said.
The defendant in this case has admitted to seeking payments for sending COVID-19 tests to a particular lab for processing, Sellinger said in the release. There is no place in our healthcare system for illegal payments made in an attempt to influence medical decisions. My office will continue to prosecute those who attempt to corrupt the health care system.
Weathers faces up to five years in prison and a fine when he is sentenced, scheduled for July 10. Weathers was represented by Jeffery Greco.
Thank you for relying on us to provide the local news you can trust. Please consider supporting NJ.com with a voluntary subscription.
Deion Johnson may be reached at djohnson@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Instagram at @DeionRJohnson or X @DeionRJohhnson
(NewsNation) A new study discovered possible links between COVID-19 vaccines and possible neurological, blood and heart-related conditions.
The new study, published in the journal Vaccine, is the largest of its kind since the pandemic began and could reignite the debate over the risks and benefits of the vaccine.
Over the past three years, more than 13.5 billion doses of COVID-19 vaccines have been administered around the world. The World Health Organization recently announced vaccination has saved at least 1.5 million lives in Europe alone.
The study links vaccines to slight increases in neurological, blood and heart-related conditions such as myocarditis, pericarditis and Guillain-Barr syndrome.
Researchers stressed that an association between the vaccine and adverse side effects does not prove the vaccine caused them and that side effects were rare.
Of the more than 99 million people studied, researchers observed 190 cases of Guillain-Barr Syndrome, which is typically developed after a viral infection but has also been linked to vaccines in rare cases, and 69 cases of hematological conditions.
COVID-19 itself can also cause side effects that affect the heart, including myocarditis.
Those who have experienced side effects include 24-year-old George Watts Jr. of New York, a healthy college student who died of vaccine-related myocarditis two years ago. The condition is listed as a possible side effect of the Pfizer vaccine.
There has been partisan fighting for years, with Republicans objecting to vaccine mandates and saying the vaccine was rushed to market, while Democrats pushed for mandates in the name of public health for Americans overall.
Since the pandemic began in March 2020, nearly seven million people have died globally from COVID-19, including more than one million Americans.
Data source
In this retrospective cohort study, routine electronic medical records were retrieved from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority (HKHA). The Hospital Authority is a statutory body that manages all public hospitals and their ambulatory clinics in Hong Kong. The service is available to all HK residents (>7.2 million) covering ~80% of all routine hospital admissions38. Electronic medical records from the HKHA database consisted of disease diagnoses recorded in planned or unplanned doctor consultations from in- and outpatient hospitals and emergency visits, thus allowing timely capture of all medical records of all users of the public health services in HK. Records were obtained from the Hong Kong Deaths Registry to identify mortality in this study. Information on vaccination status was provided by the Department of Health, The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region whilst records of confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection were obtained from the Centre for Health Protection of the Government, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region and HKHA. Anonymized unique patient identifiers were used to integrate these databases. These population-based databases have been used in previous studies on the long-term sequelae of COVID-19 infection, COVID-19 vaccines safety surveillance and effectiveness3,6,38,39,40,41,42.
Individuals with data linkage to electronic medical records of Hong Kong Hospital Authority from January 1, 2018 to January 23, 2023 were eligible for this study. A cohort study was conducted to evaluate the risk of health consequences between patients with and without SARS-CoV-2 infection aged 18 years or above. Patients with an incident SARS-CoV-2 infection (confirmed by rapid antigen test [RAT] or polymerase chain reaction [PCR] test in throat swab, nasopharyngeal aspirate, or deep throat sputum specimens) between April 1, 2020 and October 31, 2022 were matched to non-infected controls without a positive SARS-CoV-2 test record throughout the study period with the exact birth-year and sex. All individuals without a record of positive test record of the same birth-year and sex were selected as matched controls. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection were further stratified into (1) unvaccinated (0 dose), (2) incompletely vaccinated (1 dose), (3) completely (2 doses), and (4) vaccinated with booster doses (3 doses) according to the number of BioNtech or CoronaVac vaccines received prior to first SARS-CoV-2 infection. The index date of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection was defined as the date of first diagnosis date of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The identical index date was assigned to randomly selected corresponding matched controls as the pseudo-index date.
All subjects were followed up from the index date until the date of death, the occurrence of outcome, SARS-CoV-2 re-infection or the end of the separate observation periods at 30, 90, 180, 270, and 365 days after the index date or the end of the study period January 31, 2023, whichever occurred earlier.
Anonymized longitudinal clinical healthcare data since 2016 and the earliest date of data availability were obtained for all subjects from HKHA. Relevant data included baseline demographic (sex, age and Charlson Comorbidity Index); pre-existing morbidities captured by clinical diagnosis codes (cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, respiratory, chronic kidney, liver diseases, rheumatoid arthritis and malignancy; Supplementary Table1), history of long-term medication (reninangiotensin-system agents, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, nitrates, lipid-lowering agents, insulins, antidiabetic drugs, oral anticoagulants, antiplatelets and immunosuppressants) and COVID-19 vaccination status before index date.
This study was reported according to the Reporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinely-collected Data (RECORD), extended from the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guideline.
The outcomes of this study were selected based on previous evidence on the risk of clinical sequelae associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection which includes incidences of major cardiovascular diseases (a composite outcome of stroke, heart failure and coronary heart disease), stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure, atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), chronic pulmonary disease, acute respiratory distress syndrome, seizure, end-stage renal disease, acute kidney injury, pancreatitis, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality1,8,9,10,43. Outcomes were identified based on the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM; Supplementary Table1).
Inverse Probability Treatment Weighting (IPTW)44 based on age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity index (CCI), history of separate class of medication (reninangiotensin system agents, beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, diuretics, nitrates, lipid-lowering agents, insulins, antidiabetic drugs, oral anticoagulants, antiplatelets and immunosuppressants), the number of hospital admission and doctor consultation within one year of index date was applied to account for potential confounding factors. Standardized mean difference (SMD) between cases and controls was estimated, SMD0.1 was regarded as sufficient balance between case and control groups45. Subjects with a history of outcome of interest were excluded from the analysis of the specific conditions whilst continued to be considered at risk for other disease outcomes. The incidence rate (per 1000 person-years), hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of each outcome were estimated between COVID and non-COVID-19 cohorts separately for each of the observation period using Cox proportional hazard regressions. Sensitivity analysis was performed by only including individuals with a positive PCR SARS-CoV-2 screening test results, cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection from the Omicron wave in Hong Kong46, unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 and matched control with the same vaccination status, adjusting for the likely variant of SARS-CoV-2 responsible for the infection, excluding patients who received their last dose of vaccine more than 6 months before SARS-CoV-2 infection owing to the waning of immunity following vaccination47,48, and controlling for the false discovery rate at 0.05 through Benjamin-Hochberg procedure49. Lung cancer, brain cancer, and lymphoma which were considered to have a prolonged latent period for their development were included as negative control outcomes to detect possible testing bias. Subgroup analyses were predefined taking account of the risk factors of post-COVID-19 condition50. Patients were stratified by (1) age (65, >65), (2) sex, (3) Charlson Comorbidity index (CCI; <4, 4).
All statistical analyses were performed using R version 4.1.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). All significance tests were twotailed. A P value less than 0.05 or 95% CI excluding 1.0 were taken to indicate statistical significance. At least two investigators (ICHL, RZ, and EYFW) conducted each of the statistical analyses independently for quality assurance.
EYFW and ICKW had full access to all the data in the study and took responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Ethical approval for this study was granted by the Institutional Review Board of the University of HK/HA HK West Cluster (UW20-556 and UW21-149) and Department of Health, HK (L/M21/2021 and L/M175/2022) with an exemption for informed consent from participants as patients confidentiality was maintained in this retrospective cohort study.
Further information on research design is available in theNature Portfolio Reporting Summary linked to this article.
An ongoing national blood shortage could delay critical medical procedures, Dr. Nick Bandarenko, Duke Healths medical director of transfusion services, told ABC11 last month.
Surgery, transplant or accident in a car. Suddenly theres a need for blood, said Dr. Bandarenko. The Red Cross is one of the major suppliers in our region. Theyve asked us to exercise conservation measures to make sure those who truly need blood will have it available.
But despite the critical need for blood donors, theres been some debate online about whether those who have received a COVID vaccine are eligible to donate.
The American Red Cross is now asking blood donors if they ever received the Covid vaccine, an X user posted last week. If you answer Yes, they want you to call ahead to see if youre still eligible. I thought the vax was safe and effective? What info are they hiding from us?
Similar rumors have been spread on Facebook and TikTok, Snopes reported but the claims concerning ineligibility are false.
If you have received a COVID vaccine, you are eligible to give blood but in rare cases you may have to wait before donating.
In most cases, there is no wait time to donate blood for those who received the COVID vaccine, according to the American Red Cross.
The Red Cross says those who received vaccines from the following manufacturers and are symptom-free do not have to wait to give blood:
However, if you got a vaccine from a manufacturer not listed above, or you dont know what type of vaccine you received, youll have to wait two weeks before donating blood, according to the Red Cross.
If you were vaccinated, you should have received a card or printout indicating which COVID vaccine you got, the Red Cross says.
The Red Cross encourages donors to bring those cards with them to their appointments.
In North Carolina, you must be at least 16 years old and weigh at least 110 pounds to donate blood, according to UNC Medical Center. Donors under 18 must have a signed parental consent form to donate blood on the day of donation.
Donors should feel well and healthy on the day of donation and free of infectious diseases, including colds, UNC Medical Center says.
Additional eligibility criteria may apply to individuals with certain medical conditions, or who are on medication, according to the Red Cross.
NC Reality Check is an N&O series holding those in power accountable and shining a light on public issues that affect the Triangle or North Carolina. Have a suggestion for a future story? Email realitycheck@newsobserver.com
According to HHS, there are several types of COVID-19 vaccines, including the mRNA vaccine and the live attenuated vaccine.
With that in mind, there are a lot of questions on social media about who can donate.
Can you give blood if you just received the COVID-19 vaccine?
This answer varies based on what type of vaccine you received, and when.
TRUE: According to the Red Cross, you can give blood right away if you get the mRNA COVID-19 vaccine manufactured by AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Novavax, or Pfizer.
FALSE: If you got the live COVID-19 vaccine or are unsure what type of COVID-19 vaccine you received, you must wait two weeks before donating blood.
According to HHS, there are several types of COVID-19 vaccines, including the mRNA vaccine and the live attenuated vaccine.
The mRNA gives your cells instructions on how to make a protein found on the surface of the COVID-19 virus, and your cells begin to make that protein so your body knows how to fight the virus.
The attenuated live vaccine uses a weakened form of the virus that causes illness. They help your immune response if you actually get COVID-19 cause your body recognizes the germ.
This rule does not just apply to the COVID-19 vaccine. According to AABB, you should wait before giving blood with other live attenuated, viral, and bacterial vaccines.
The recommendation is to wait two weeks after receiving vaccines for:
A four-week period is recommended after receiving vaccines for German measles and chickenpox or shingles. If you have the flu, COVID-19, or even a cold, the American Red Cross said to hold off on blood donations until you are healthy again.
Contact Meghan Bragg atmbragg@wcnc.comand follow her onFacebook,XandInstagram.
VERIFYis dedicated to helping the public distinguish between true and false information. The VERIFY team, with help from questions submitted by the audience, tracks the spread of stories or claims that need clarification or correction. Have something you wantVERIFIED? Text us at 704-329-3600 or visitVERIFY.
WCNC Charlotte's Verify series is all about trying to make a difference in the Carolinas by making sure the community has the correct information. WCNC Charlotte outlines concisely what we know and what we don't know. Sometimes the answer can be surprising. Watch previous stories where we verify social media claims in theYouTube playlist belowand subscribe to get updated when new videos are uploaded.
CLAIM: The American Red Cross banned people who have received a COVID-19 vaccine from donating blood because it is "tainted."
THE FACTS: No potential donors are deemed ineligible solely due to COVID-19 vaccines, a Red Cross spokesperson told the Associated Press. People who know they received a COVID-19 vaccine that is approved by the FDA may immediately donate blood if they are healthy. Those who received vaccines that contain a weakened form of the virus that causes COVID-19 -- or people who aren't sure -- are asked to wait 2 weeks before donating.
Social media users are misrepresenting a question the Red Cross asks potential blood donors to make false claims about donor eligibility and COVID-19 vaccine safety.
Many posts include a screenshot of the question as it appears on the Red Cross's RapidPass system. It asks: "Have you EVER had a Coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccine?" Below the question are instructions for potential donors who answer yes to call the Red Cross "before coming in to donate to determine if this will affect your eligibility."
"UPDATED eligibility requirements from @RedCross now BANS certain covid VACCINATED people from donating blood!" reads one post on X (formerly Twitter) that had received more than 3,200 likes and shares as of Friday. "(Another conspiracy theory proved true!) PURE BLOODS BE PROUD. The rest of you...retweet to warn your tainted friends and family."
Other widespread posts don't make claims about supposed bans but imply that the question is proof COVID-19 vaccines are dangerous.
"I thought the vax was 'safe and effective'?" another X post asks. "What info are they hiding from us?" It had received approximately 42,000 likes and 23,000 shares.
But the additional scrutiny has nothing to do with the safety of the vaccines. It is to assure that the COVID-19 virus is not present in blood being donated, as there is a risk that live attenuated vaccines -- those that contain a weakened form of the virus they protect against -- could pass the virus through blood.
The Red Cross follows FDA eligibility guidelines for blood donation. Its website states that people who received a non-replicating, inactivated, or mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine manufactured by Pfizer, Moderna, Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca, or Novavax can donate blood immediately if they are in good health.
Those who received vaccines that don't meet these requirements -- or if they don't know -- are asked to wait 2 weeks before donating. This includes COVID-19 vaccines that are live attenuated, none of which are currently approved for use in the U.S.
"There is no reason why a potential donor would be declared absolutely ineligible solely because they received a COVID vaccine," Daniel Parra, a spokesperson for the Red Cross, told the AP in an email.
The Red Cross's blood donation eligibility guidelines regarding COVID-19 vaccines have appeared on its website in their current form since early 2021. Potential donors who have received other vaccines that contain small amounts of live viruses, such as those for chicken pox, polio, and yellow fever, are also required to wait before donating blood.
"Basically, if you received an FDA-approved COVID vaccine, you remember the name of the vaccine manufacturer, and you are feeling healthy, you won't have a problem," Parra wrote. "If you don't know the name of your vaccine manufacturer, you will be deferred for 2 weeks, because it's not possible to determine with 100% certainty that you received an eligible vaccine."
COVID-19 vaccines are "safe and effective," according to the CDC. Blood donations from vaccinated people are not "tainted," and serious adverse events following vaccination are rare.
"Blood donations from individuals who have received a COVID-19 vaccine approved or authorized for use in the U.S. are safe for transfusion," reads a joint statement written last month by the Red Cross, America's Blood Centers, and the Association for the Advancement of Blood & Biotherapies.
This study was part of a project labeled as a National Research Priority by the National Orientation Committee for Therapeutic Trials and other research on COVID-19 (CAPNET). The investigators would like to acknowledge ANRS|Emerging infectious diseases for their scientific support and the French Ministry of Health and Prevention and the French Ministry of Higher Education, Research and Innovation for their funding and support. This work was also supported by a grant from the Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-22- CE36-0015-01).
Victoria Jones/PA Images/Getty Images
Parents are furious at a man who charged them as much as 35 (around $44) per ticket for a Willy Wonka-themed family event in Glasgow, Scotland this weekend. Thats because the immersive experience sold to them by a sketchy company called House of Illuminati turned out to be little more than a few set props and unprepared actors in a mostly barren warehouse with no chocolate whatsoever.
Customers, some of whom traveled from afar and waited in a long line with their children, were incensed enough to call the police after Willys Chocolate Experience turned out to be a ripoff and the organizer, Billy Coull, hastily closed it down on Saturday afternoon. Pictures from the botched tour went viral, in part because of the contrast between the lavish, colorful AI-generated artwork used in promotional materials and the depressing, laughably slapdash reality that greeted young fans of Roald Dahls fanciful novel and its various film adaptations.
Those taken in by the misleading promotion mobilized for refunds and press coverage in a Facebook group this week, alternately griping and joking about the candy-coated catastrophe and referring to Coull by crude nicknames like Willy Wanker in memes. But while Coulls attempt to cash in on a beloved childrens book is already the stuff of local legend, the rest of his digital footprint reveals a new kind of aspiring entrepreneur that may become all too common: the AI abuser.
Coull, who did not return a request for comment, seems to be the sole employee of House of Illuminati, one of several companies he has registered. (It wasincorporated in November; the company did not respond to a request for comment.) The House of Illuminati website, like the Willys Chocolate Experience website, is packed with AI-generated art advertising unparalleled immersive experiences such as Mystique Galas and Enchanted Retreats. The descriptions of the company and its supposed events are themselves almost certainly written by an AI chatbot, according to analysis by the detection tool GPTZero. (The text on the Willys Chocolate Experience page is also likely AI-written.)
Since the Wonka fiasco, Coull has taken steps to scrub various social accounts, taking down both a LinkedIn profile and a YouTube channel where it appears he presented himself as something of a business guru and life coach. His personal site, also deleted, touted a number of dubious academic degrees and said he worked as a consultant for a brand called Empowerity, which is now defunct. As of 2021, he was co-directing a Glasgow foodbank that he claimed fed thousands of families a month that, too, no longer exists, and some Glaswegians suspect it was not entirely above board.
While deleting much of the material that would lead internet sleuths from the Wonka incident to these earlier projects, Coull has, perhaps surprisingly, not shut down the entirely AI-spawned House of Illuminati business. The companys Facebook page continues to promise refunds, and some customers say theyve gotten their money back. Neither has he pulled down his Instagram account, which contains only a few posts hyping independently published books available on Amazon. These include titles such as Selling Innocence, a novel about a human trafficking survivor who navigates a treacherous landscape filled with politicians, clergymen, celebrities, and billionaires. The language hints at themes of the QAnon conspiracist movement and misinformation about the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
See more
The 16 books on Coulls Amazon author page were all published in the summer of 2023 some of them on the very same day. The synopsis for each is AI-generated, according to GPTZero analysis, and so is the text between the covers, as one irate reviewer has complained. Coull couldnt even be bothered to pen his own author bio, which declares him a rising star in the literary world who weaves spellbinding tales that delve into the mysterious realms of fictional thrillers and gripping conspiracies. While some of the stories are generic puzzle-driven plots in the vein of The DaVinci Code, others like Selling Innocence are geared toward paranoid right-wing politics. Operation Inoculation, for example, promises a conspiratorial journey into vaccination truth related to the so-called deep state, in which the carefully constructed facade of the vaccination campaign begins to crumble.
All in all, then, it looks as if Coull leaves a long trail of fishy schemes dating back many years but has lately used chatbots and AI image generators to expand the scope and ambition of his flimsy ventures. While its not clear how many Amazon shoppers have fallen for the bogus novels, the Wonka affair demonstrated what can happen when a corner-cutting huckster gets carried away with his AI-enhanced pitch. This time, it just meant an inconvenience and some confused kids, and if Coull compensates the families, he will probably avoid more serious repercussions. The next person to sell a purely AI fantasy for top dollar? They could make Fyre Festival look like a well-planned weekend in the Bahamas.
During the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, policy was being made in crisis management mode. Decisions had to be made faster than usual, and there was limited ability to undertake wider consultation and impact analysis.
Now the worst of the pandemic is over, we have the luxury of being able to reflect on what worked well and what didnt.
One of the more controversial policies implemented during the height of the pandemic was the vaccine mandates. Thousands of workers across a range of professions had to get vaccinated to keep their jobs.
This mandate presented a trade-off between public health considerations and the right of individuals to refuse medical treatment and earn a living in their chosen profession.
Our research looked at whether these vaccine mandates increased COVID-19 vaccination rates among these workers, and what their employment, earnings and workplace experiences were.
The stated purpose of the mandates was to increase vaccination rates among these workers to ensure the continuity of public services.
Read more: COVID vaccines don't violate the Nuremberg Code. Here's how to convince the doubters
In reality, the mandates had limited effect on increasing vaccine uptake. But they had a substantive negative effect on the employment, earnings and wellbeing of unvaccinated health workers.
Vaccination rates among healthcare, education and corrections workers were already high when the government announced the mandates in October 2021.
Almost 90% of healthcare workers and 86% of corrections workers had already received two doses of the vaccine. The share among education workers was somewhat lower (82%), but they also did not have early access to the vaccine. There were only six weeks between the vaccine becoming available to everyone over 12 years and the mandates being announced.
While vaccination rates among these mandated workers did increase after the mandates were announced, the data shows a continuation of an upward trend rather than a jump in uptake.
It wont surprise anyone that people dont like being told what to do. And this appears to have some bearing on mandatory vaccine uptake.
One German survey found just over 3% of people said they would not want the COVID-19 vaccination if it was voluntary. But more than 16% said they would not want to get vaccinated if it was mandatory.
A consequence of vaccine mandates is that they can erode trust in government and provoke more resistance. This erosion of trust could potentially strengthen anti-vaccination sentiment generally and reduce uptake, not just of COVID-19 vaccinations, but also other vaccines.
This outcome is especially concerning given research has found New Zealands routine childhood immunisation rates have decreased since the pandemic.
In addition to not causing a noticeable increase in vaccination rates, the mandates also had negative consequences for the employment and earnings of unvaccinated health workers.
Their employment rate fell by 15% and their earnings fell by 19%, compared with vaccinated health workers and those not subject to the mandates.
Read more: Parents were fine with sweeping school vaccination mandates five decades ago but COVID-19 may be a different story
Even after the health worker mandates were lifted in September 2022, the employment and earnings of unvaccinated workers never fully recovered.
This exacerbated existing health worker shortages. Closed borders and a global shortage of healthcare workers meant fewer moved into the health sector compared with the number leaving.
The effect of the mandates on health workers also went beyond financial consequences.
Affected health workers talked to us about the loss and ongoing trauma they have experienced. Those opposed to mandates are often incorrectly labelled as anti-vaxxers, or even conspiracy theorists.
All health workers we spoke to were pro-vaccination, but had legitimate reasons for not completing, or struggling to complete, the required vaccinations. They had researched the vaccine and made informed decisions based on their circumstances.
Some health workers pointed out that the case for mandates was not strong based on available evidence. While the vaccine reduces symptom severity, its ability to prevent transmission is currently limited.
As one health worker said:
I looked at the Australian data and couldnt see the logic of me potentially being exposed to another vaccine where my potential benefit was so low [] the evidence wasnt really strong.
Some workers had health conditions that put them at elevated risk from the vaccine. Or they had a history of adverse reactions to vaccines. But the mandates meant they either had to get vaccinated, sometimes against their doctors advice, or lose their jobs. While some medical exemptions were available, the threshold for these was very high.
In addition, even those with medical exemptions faced stigma. One health worker who got an exemption after suffering a stroke following their vaccination, described peoples reaction upon showing them the exemption.
That look on peoples faces, it was disgust [] it was really, really awful.
As another health worker explained:
Were supposed to be a caring profession. Nothing about this is caring [] Due to no fault of my own, I have now been labelled an anti-vaxxer and anti-science, and in some peoples opinion, not worthy of calling myself a nurse. This hurts me immensely. This is what mandates have done. There is no room for individual circumstances.
The people we spoke with said they lost their sense of control, and it eroded their trust in the health system and government.
What does this tell us about the use of vaccine mandates during future pandemics?
In the context of high voluntary compliance, mandates should be used judiciously. Mandating something is not always the most effective way to get people to do something for the greater good.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, a strong motivator for vaccination was the feel-good factor of knowing you were protecting yourself and others.
Ironically, the increase in distrust that resulted from the use of mandates in the COVID-19 pandemic may actually lower voluntary vaccine uptake in future pandemics.
As one health worker summed it up:
Someone whos been vaccinated badly, the trauma of that its not just them, its their entire social circle, its their entire whnau. Youre seeding distrust in the health system, not just for COVID vaccinations, but the whole system, everything to do with medicine and the whole immunisation programme [] if theres a policy thats as big as a mandate for a whole population or health professionals, you really need to think about what are the unintended consequences.
