In spite of the safety and efficiency of the COVID-19 vaccines and the many promotion efforts of political and expert authorities, a fair portion of the population remained hesitant if not opposed to vaccination. Public debate and the available literature point to the possible role of people’s attitudes towards medical institutions as well as their preference for so-called alternative medicine (SCAM) on their motivations and intentions to be vaccinated. Other potential ideological factors are beliefs about environmental laissez-faire and divine providence insofar as they encourage people to let the pandemic unfold without human interference.

In three cross-sectional samples (total N = 8214), collected at successive moments during the Belgian vaccination campaign, the present research examines the distal role of these psychological and ideological factors on vaccination intentions via motivational processes.

  • Study 1 gauges the relation between trust in medical institutions and preference for SCAM on intentions to get vaccinated via motivations.
  • Study 2 examines the role of beliefs in the desirability of letting nature take its course (‘environmental laissez-faire beliefs’) on vaccination intention via motivations.
  • Study 3 tests whether people’s adherence to environmental laissez-faire and beliefs about divine providence are linked to their motivations for vaccination via trust in the medical institutions and SCAM.

The results show that adherence to SCAM has a deleterious effect on vaccination intentions, whereas trust in medical institutions has a positive effect. Both ideological factors pertaining to external control are only moderately related, with environmental laissez-faire beliefs having stronger effects on SCAM, medical trust and vaccination motivations.

The evidence of an association between SCAM and willingness to get vaccinated is undeniable. On this blog, we have discussed it repeatedly, e.g.:

But what exactly is the nature of this association?

  • Does SCAM-use predispose to vaccination hesitancy?
  • Does Vaccination hesitancy predispose to SCAM use?
  • Is both true?

After reading all this research that has emerged on the subject, I get the impression that we are mostly dealing here with a cross-correlation where a certain mind-set of being

  • prone to conspiracy theories,
  • anti-establishment,
  • anti-science,
  • irrational,
  • of low intelligence,
  • unable of critical thinking,
  • etc., etc,

determines both the SCAM-use and the vaccination hesitancy.


14 Responses to Do views about so-called alternative medicine (SCAM), nature and god influence people’s vaccination intentions?

  • quote
    “Do views about so-called alternative medicine (SCAM), nature and god influence people’s vaccination intentions?”

    No, but reality *does* influence people’s vaccination intentions.
    Dr Clair Craig gives the evidence on this video yesterday:

  • The truth of the matter is:
    Why Are So Many Anti-Vaxxers in Educated, Affluent Areas?

    “Studies show that affluent urban areas with high education rates can have large pockets of people against vaccines”

    You will all love this paragraph from this article:
    “But according to Peter Hotez, a vaccine scientist and dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, especially in urban areas, anti-vaxxers tend to be more affluent. They also come from regions of the country with the highest education rates, like college and tech towns. These anti-vaxxers have better access to the internet and more time to visit websites and chatrooms that already align with their belief system. Online and in books, they can find plenty of fuel to feed their fire. Amazon and Facebook, says Hotez, are some of the biggest providers of false information and anti-vaccination books.”

  • Dr. Peter Gøtzsche co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration, once considered the world’s preeminent independent medical research organization. Gøtzsche has published more than 97 papers in the “big five” medical journals (JAMA, Lancet, New England Journal of Medicine, British Medical Journal, and Annals of Internal Medicine).

    And yet, THIS esteemed physician/scientist was black-listed on social media, and here, he reports about a highly respected Harvard professor who was fired because he questioned the narrative on the Covid vaccine.

    Here’s Peter’s recent article:

    BTW, The Brownstone Institute was founded by professors at Oxford, Harvard, Yale, and Stanford.

    • “BTW, The Brownstone Institute was founded by professors at Oxford, Harvard, Yale, and Stanford.”

      Jeffrey A. Tucker
      Jeffrey Tucker is Founder, Author, and President at Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Life After Lockdown, and many thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.

    • @Dana Ullman
      Looks to me like science in optima forma: no matter your credentials, no matter your alma mater, if you start spouting pseudoscientific nonsense (like Kulldorff did), you will be criticized by your peers, and eventually ousted from your position as a scientist.

    • Dr. Peter Gøtzsche co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration

      Indeed he did, Dana. And if you’re holding the Cochrane in such esteem, you should mention that he was later thrown out from the organisation for an “ongoing, consistent pattern of disruptive and inappropriate behaviours …, taking place over a number of years, which undermined this culture and were detrimental to the charity’s work, reputation and members.”

      And yet, THIS esteemed physician/scientist was black-listed on social media

      Once-esteemed, Dana. Once-esteemed. He is now seen as the crank he is and is, like you, ignored.

      • It is telling that DUllman repeatedly omits unpleasant details or dangerous missteps from his so-called key witnesses because they do not fit into his pseudo-medical/pseudo-scientific world view. In the case of Peter Gøtzsche, there is also the fact that he spreads misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines.

      • It is SO classic that you, Lenny, portray HALF-KNOWLEDGE. Let’s see what Wikipedia says about this:

        “Gøtzsche, critical of the pharmaceutical industry and what he sees as its influence on medicine, expressed concern about “growing top-down authoritarian culture and an increasingly commercial business model” at Cochrane that “threaten the scientific, moral and social objectives of the organization.”[32] He stated that “Cochrane no longer lives up to its core values of collaboration, openness, transparency, accountability, democracy and keeping the drug industry at arm’s length.”[34] After the expulsion, four members of the Board resigned and two had to leave to restore a balance between appointed and elected members, throwing the organization into turmoil.[33]

        So, getting kicked out of the Cochrane is a badge of honor because Peter is too pro-science and too critical of those people who brown-nose Big Pharma, like you, Lenny.

        • That’s Wikipedia quoting Gøtzsche, Dana. Nothing more.

          Strange how you suddenly seem to be so keen on citing Wikipedia. Aren’t you banned from editing entries on it? You obviously now like Wikipedia. Shall we see what it says about homeopathy? Which bits do you want me to paste in?

    • glad to hear that you value the Cochrane Collaboration.
      in this case, you’ll be interested to hear what Cochrane reviews say about homeopathy:
      “The findings of currently available Cochrane reviews of studies of homeopathy do not show that homeopathic medicines have effects beyond placebo.”

    • BTW, The Brownstone Institute was founded by professors at Oxford, Harvard, Yale, and Stanford.

      Dear Dana, this is wonderful a wonderful example of “argumentum ab auctoritate”. How is it that a smart guy like you falls into this trap with his eyes open? 😉

    • BTW, The Brownstone Institute was founded by professors at Oxford, Harvard, Yale, and Stanford.

      The Brownstain Institute was founded by foaming libertarian antivax loon Jeffrey A. Tucker, Dana. He is not an academic in any sense of the word. So that’s you being demonstrably and provably wrong. Again.

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Subscribe via email

Enter your email address to receive notifications of new blog posts by email.

Recent Comments

Note that comments can be edited for up to five minutes after they are first submitted but you must tick the box: “Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.”

The most recent comments from all posts can be seen here.