Recent studies have demonstrated that sociopolitical attitudes partially explain variance in (SARS-CoV-2) vaccine hesitancy and uptake. Other attitudes, such as those towards esoteric beliefs, so-called alternative medicine (SCAM), and religion, have also been proposed. However, pertinent studies provide limited direction for public health efforts, as the impact of such attitudes has been tested in isolation or on different outcomes. Moreover, related associations between SARS-CoV-2 immunization drivers as well as views towards other modes of immunization (e.g., routine pediatric immunization), remain unclear.
Based on a sample of ~7400 survey participants (Germany), where esoteric belief systems and SCAM (Waldorf, homeopathy) are rather prevalent, and controlling for other sociological factors, this study found that:
- individuals with positive attitudes towards Waldorf education and homeopathy are significantly less likely to have received a (further) dose of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine compared to those with positive views of mainstream medicine;
- for the former, immunization decisions are primarily driven by external pressures, and for the latter overwhelmingly by voluntary considerations;
- attitudes influencing adult SARS-CoV-2 vaccine uptake similarly influence views towards routine pediatric immunization.
The authors concluded that their findings provide significant evidence informing a more nuanced design of public health and communication campaigns, and pertinent policies.
As the authors of this study point out, the attitudes towards mainstream medicine remained the single most influential factor for vaccine uptake. Individuals who viewed mainstream medicine highly favorably, received on average an estimated 1.48 (p < 0.001) more doses of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine than those who held very negative views. In contrast, those who viewed homeopathy highly positively received on average 0.51 (p < 0.001) fewer doses than those who viewed homeopathy highly negatively.
Regarding religious denominations, individuals self-classifying as Roman-Catholic or Protestant received on average 0.17 (p < 0.001) and 0.15 (p < 0.001) more vaccine doses than those self-classifying as non-denominational. The associations between other denominations and vaccine doses were statistically insignificant.
While these associations have been observed before or at least seem logical to me (and we discusses them frequently on this blog), one finding is, I think new (albeit not surprising, in my view): Supporters of the right-wing populist AfD received 1.37 (p < 0.001) fewer vaccine doses than the reference category Christian democrats.
So, does that in essence mean that the typical (German) vaccination hesitant person votes extereme right and loves SCAM?
10 Responses to Does the typical vaccine hesitant German vote extreme right and love SCAMs?
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
During the corona pandemic, there were many demonstrations against vaccinations in Baden-Württemberg, in which the participants could be assigned to the green-voting milieu (i.e. the left).
Other protesters received more or less clear support from FDP politicians. Wolfgang Kubicki, who often argued in a very populist manner, is particularly worthy of mention here.
Studies have also shown that the participants in the corona demonstrations took a very libertarian stance. They placed personal freedom of choice above all else, so they took a very negative view of the German government’s calls for them to be vaccinated.
Vaccination opponents are/were(?) ultimately a politically very inhomogeneous mass, although the supporters of the AfD and other right-wing parties stood out due to their extreme demands and also threats against democratic politicians and experts such as the virologist Christian Drosten.
The gwup-blog has also published a series of (German-language) articles on this topic.
These are your impressions; the study presents data.
At least one study was also referenced on the GWUP blog. I will do some research and then link it here. If I hopefully find the study again. 🙂
excellent!
I have found an article, but I have to qualify my previous statement.
The article is from December 2020. A lot has happened since then. Furthermore, it does not deal with vaccination skepticism, but looks at the “Querdenker” movement.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347556450_Politische_Soziologie_Coronaproteste_Uni_Basel_22_12_20
There is also an interview with the author, sociologist Oliver Nachtwey, on Deutschlandfunk.
https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/studie-zur-querdenker-bewegung-kommt-zum-teil-von-links-100.html
What does far Right even mean? It is now used as a pejorative term for anyone who doesn’t vote for crazy greens.
In Germany, it currently means AfD
In USA, it means anyone who supports and/or votes for the convicted felon named Trump. It is that simple.
AfD, Neue Rechte and Identitarian movement
In Austria the right winged FPÖ was from the begin of the pandemic against COVID-19 vaccination. The head of FPÖ Herbert Kickl told us that a deworming drug (for horses) is better.
the Austrian Journal “Profil” in 2024 published an Artikle on the facts- in German
https://www.profil.at/faktiv/corona-impfung-wurde-die-oeffentlichkeit-wirklich-belogen/402717466