The meaning behind anti-vax and why its impossible to be anti-vax, or pro-vax

Any person who chooses not to take the covid vaccine is labelled as anti-vax.

According to the Cambridge online dictionary, an anti-vaxxer is “used to describe a person or group that does not agree with vaccinating people (= giving them injections to prevent disease) and spreads and encourages opinions against vaccines.”

This corresponds with my understanding of what an anti-vaxxer is – someone fervently against all vaccines and who spreads information about that opinion. Obviously, to disagree with all vaccinations is ignorant, because vaccines and their given side-effects and efficacy’s vary from vaccine to vaccine. I can perfectly understand peoples disdain for these individuals – because they may be proliferating harmful information and causing harm to people.

But, equally as igonorant and bizarre, is the modern framing around vaccines, that equates anyone who does not want the covid vaccine as being an anti-vax extremist.

This framing creates a discourse around vaccines with two opposing teams: team pro-vax and team anti-vax. Instantly we know this is an unhelpful and reductive dynamic, because reducing a complex matter down to two arbitrary sides causes polarization, whereby people feel both allied to their side and a disdain for the opposing side. This is exactly what the anti-vax label is designed to achieve. Tribal affiliation takes precedence over individual morality and an individuals ability to think independently is partly dulled down through allegiance to the team and fear of what other individuals within their tribe might think if they were to hold an unacceptable opinion. The pro-vax side encompasses the majority of people and is perceived as the side of sense and sanity – whilst people declining the covid vaccine are outright delegitimized by being labelled as anti-vaxxers – a group whom, in reality, are an extremist minority in the discussion. Categorizing someone declining the covid vaccine as anti-vax is exactly the same logic as equating someone politically right wing with Hitler to try and discredit them, by linking them to the most extreme and deplorable group from their side.

You don´t want the vaccine so you are anti-vax. You are politically right wing so you support Hitler.

This polarization, with one side being demonized, serves many functions – one is to distort the opinions and characters of those people who decline the vaccine by equating them with “anti-vaxxers”. It also closes down any reasonable debate around the subject : If all people declining the covid jab are mad conspiracy theorist anti-vaxxers – then no debate is possible because they are mad – or needed, because the pro-vax side knows that it is in the right. We saw a similar dynamic unfold during the Brexit referendum in Britain. People on the remain side were so desperate to feel that they belonged the side of virtue, that they often caricatured the leave side as either ignorant, racist, or misinformed.

A recent article in the Evening Standard provides a good example of how highly respected, intelligent individuals can fall for this. Professor Stephan Lewandowsky, chair in cognitive psychology at the University of Bristol, is calling for a “deradicalization” program for anti-vaxxers, like that given to former terrorist, or cult members. He said: “They´ll refuse anything – ‘I’m not going to wear a mask’, ‘I’m not going to get vaccinated’, ‘I don’t think climate change is happening’, ‘Covid is a hoax’, and, you know, ‘Hillary Clinton is actually a reptilian shapeshifter’.

You don´t want a vaccine so you also must believe Hilary Clinton is a lizard.

Don´t engage in sensible debate and combat what you consider misinformation with good information – simply claim all the refuseniks who have an opinion you disagree with and dislike, are mad.

The term “vaccine hesitant”, which has only existed since covid, is interesting. This is a softer, less scathing term than “anti-vax” and it may have gained traction because many people can see how utterly stupid it is to claim all people declining the jab are extremist anti-vaxxers. The term infers that to be hesitant about an injection is somehow perverse, or irrational. This is pure Orwellian newspeak. Of course – we should all investigate anything we inject into our bodies as well as we can, and be hesitant and sceptical. An obvious criticism of people who identify as being pro-vax, is that this inability to tolerate any criticism of, or nuance around vaccines, might incline them to accept any vaccine, without researching or questioning it. For example, I would have concerns about how thorough the safety trials were, that were conducted for the current boosters being rolled out in England and question if these boosters are needed for most people. Also – I would look at Boris Johnson and question for who´s benefit he is doing this booster rollout – Is this man acting out of concern for my health ? Professor Stephan Lewandowsky goes on to say that people are vaccine hesitant because they believe in conspiracy theories.

You don’t feel the need to get a covid vaccine, so the only possible explanation for this is that you 100 % believe in mad conspiracy theories.

Another huge flaw in this irrational thinking is the implication that to believe conspiracy theories is sufficient to smear someone’s character. Its human nature to believe in all kinds of irrational things – From ghosts, extreme anxiety, God, horoscopes, to conspiracy theories. Some forms of delusional thinking, such as a belief in heaven, are socially acceptable and others, like conspiracy theories, will tarnish a persons reputation.

I think many people in the pro-vaccine team who play on the anti-vax insult are aware of this ridiculous dynamic, but they go along with it because: 1 ) it affirms they belong to the virtuous majority of sanity and common sense – humans take comfort in belonging to the herd and fear deviating from it and its accepted norms. By equating everyone declining the covid jab with extreme anti-vaxers, they can delegitimize those people, eradicate any nuanced discussion and so their sense of belonging to the side of sanity and common sense is reinforced – its an ego booster, which is hard to resist. And 2 ) They can negate the possibility of a detailed discussion – which might lead to grey areas, nuance, and possible downsides to the covid vaccine – which might cause doubt. People hate ambiguity and doubt, especially regarding the possibility of a downside to something that has been injected into their bodies.

To actually be against all vaccines is impossible, unless any person can claim an omniscient knowledge of vaccines. No person on earth can claim to know everything about all vaccines, so that position is impossible. Equally, no person can posses the knowledge that all vaccines are good and safe, so therefore no person can claim to be pro-vaccine at all times. We know that many medications, including vaccines, have at one time or other caused harm to people – for example the USA government have paid out over 4 Billion dollars to people injured by vaccines since 1986 , when the pharmaceutical companies were given indemnity. We also know, regarding the covid vaccines, that the AstraZeneca vaccines have been banned in several countries for causing blood clots and the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines for causing myocarditis. I am very interested in the way stringently pro-vax people process this information. Many simply refuse to acknowledge it – others will try to downplay the significance of covid vaccines being banned across the board – and others will accuse you of being an anti-vaxer simply for acknowledging it. To be 100% pro-vaccine is as irrational as standing against all vaccines. History proves these reductive categories of pro-vax, or anti-vax are logically impossible positions.

If a person claimed to be anti all prescription drugs- they would rightfully be considered idiotic. And, equally, if a person claimed to be be vehemently pro all prescription drugs, then they too would be considered ignorrant, misinformed and stupid. Why do people fall into this distorted way of thinking around vaccines ?

Another illogical part of the anti-vax definition, is the idea that, because you don´t want something – you are automatically anti that thing. I don´t want to eat sushi, but that doesn´t make me anti-sushi. I don´t want to watch Game of Thrones, but that doesn´t make me anti-Game of Thrones. I don´t want to listen to Alt-J, but that doesn´t make me anti-Alt-J. ( well, maybe a bit with that one ) I don´t want a Paracetamol, but that doesn’t make me anti-paracetamol. Just because people don´t want a covid jab, that doesn´t mean they are anti the covid jab. Put aside the way the term anti-vax equates people with conspiracy theorist extremists – simply insinuating someone is “anti” itself exaggerates and distorts that persons opinion, by falsely suggesting a person is fiercely against something, when the truth is that they simply don´t want it, and respect everyone else´s free right to what they want.

I believe that my reasons for not taking the vaccine are simple and sensible. I had covid a few months ago and it was the mildest cold I have ever had – no medication was required then and certainly none is required now. That is not to try and downplay how serious an illness covid is for other people, many of whom should probably certainly take the vaccines. The risk covid poses varies wildly from person to person, and therefore so does the extent to which a person needs the protection of a vaccine. If people believe that I should get the vaccine to protect others – they are wrong for two reasons. 1 – Despite high vaccination rates, we are seeing record cases of covid – this does not suggest the covid vaccines reduce transmission. 2 – From the start – the covid vaccines were sold to us, not as conferring immunity, but making people injected safe from hospitalization or serious illness. If this is correct – then people should not be concerned with other peoples vaccine status, because if they themselves are vaccinated, they should be protected, and other people, whether vaccinated or not, can still catch and pass on covid. People accusing people of selfishness for not getting vaccinated are actually just saying “I got it, so I want you to get it” and most people I speak to openly admit they got the jab, not to protect anyone, but so they can easily do normal things. Of course – big pharma, governments and the media are propagating the idea that the covid vaccines do confer some immunity, so suggesting vaccinated people are a bit less likely to pass covid on to someone. I highly doubt this is true and the record cases we are seeing indicates this idea is a matter of face saving . In Spain – 90% of people over 12 are vaccinated, but we are seeing some of the highest cases numbers this year, and hospitalizations for covid are increasing. Next time you read about record cases of covid – notice how the blame will be directed to a new variant, increased socializing, or a lack of mask wearing. No mainstream news outlet will ever make the common sense observation that a 70% vaccination rate coinciding with record cases indicates that the vaccines do not reduce transmission and so in this specific sense – the vaccines are not very good.

If we all believe in the principal of personal freedom and bodily autonomy – then the reason for not taking the vaccine is totally irrelevant – you can believe any old tosh – that’s your free right to be misinformed. If people think the answer to misinformation propagated by actual anti-vaxxers is to censor them, then they obviously don´t understand or want freedom of expression. Boris Johnson stands there and lies through his pompous teeth – but I perfectly respect his freedom to misinform people. If people think that the covid vaccines are a Bill Gates conspiracy – they are perfectly entitled to believe that – its perfectly legal. Equally – if people want to believe in god, that´s also delusional – religions are guilty of propagating misinformation on a scale anti-vaxxers can only dream of by telling people that they will go to heaven. Best of luck to them – its their free right to misinform people and espouse delusional beliefs.

Conclusion

An anti-vaxxer is someone who holds the extreme view that all vaccines are harmful. Unfortunately, this word is being appropriated to suggest that any person who does not want the covid jab is an anti-vax conspiracy theorist. People get sucked into believing in this divisive dynamic because it is propagated by the media and politicians, and they get a sense of validation in feeling that they belong to the majority and the side of sanity and common sense. By demonizing one side, you also massage the ego´s of the other. It also negates the need to listen to an opinion they dislike and disagree with, by equating the other side with mad anti-vax conspiracy theorists. This shows how susceptible people are to irrational and reductive thinking – regardless of whether they are labelled pro, or anti-vax.

Indeed – these very categories of pro and anti-vax are symptomatic of a zeitgeist underpinned by polarization, groupthink and people insulting the character of those who have a different opinion to them, rather than engaging in good faith discourses based upon logic, reason and mutual respect.