Department of Criminology, The Max Stern Yezreel Valley College, Jezreel Valley, Israel.
Institute of Criminology, Department of Sociology & Anthropology, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel.
HEC Forum. 2024 Mar;36(1):71-89. doi: 10.1007/s10730-022-09479-7. Epub 2022 May 19.
The controversy over vaccines has recently intensified in the wake of the global COVID-19 pandemic, with calls from politicians, health professionals, journalists, and citizens to take harsh measures against so-called "anti-vaxxers," while accusing them of spreading "fake news" and as such, of endangering public health. However, the issue of suppression of vaccine dissenters has rarely been studied from the point of view of those who raise concerns about vaccine safety. The purpose of the present study was to examine the subjective perceptions of professionals (physicians, nurses, researchers) involved with vaccines through practice and/or research and who take a critical view on vaccines, about what they perceive as the suppression of dissent in the field of vaccines, their response to it, and its potential implications on science and medicine. Respondents reported being subjected to a variety of censorship and suppression tactics, including the retraction of papers pointing to vaccine safety problems, negative publicity, difficulty in obtaining research funding, calls for dismissal, summonses to official hearings, suspension of medical licenses, and self-censorship. Respondents also reported on what has been termed a "backfire effect" - a counter-reaction that draws more attention to the opponents' position. Suppression of dissent impairs scientific discourse and research practice while creating the false impression of scientific consensus.
由于全球 COVID-19 大流行，疫苗引发的争议最近愈演愈烈，政客、卫生专业人员、记者和公民呼吁对所谓的“反疫苗接种者”采取严厉措施，指责他们传播“假新闻”，从而危及公共健康。然而，从对疫苗安全表示担忧的人的角度来看，很少有研究关注压制疫苗异议者的问题。本研究的目的是通过实践和/或研究来检查参与疫苗接种的专业人员（医生、护士、研究人员）对疫苗的主观看法，这些专业人员对疫苗持批评态度，他们认为疫苗领域存在压制异议的现象，以及他们对此的反应及其对科学和医学的潜在影响。受访者报告说，他们受到了各种审查和压制策略的影响，包括撤回指出疫苗安全问题的论文、负面宣传、难以获得研究资金、被要求解雇、被传唤参加官方听证会、吊销医疗执照和自我审查。受访者还报告了所谓的“反向效应”——一种引起更多人关注对手立场的反作用。压制异议会损害科学话语和研究实践，同时造成科学共识的假象。
