What exactly IS an "Anti Vaxxer"?

Nurses COVID

Updated:   Published

A formal definition for this term is offered by Merriam-Webster.

Definition of anti-vaxxer - Merriam-Webster

Debates over COVID have made this term a popular choice to describe those with objections to vaccines for the virus.  

What exactly do you consider an Anti Vaxxer to be? What arguments and perspectives do you classify as attributable to an Anti Vaxxer?

Be specific, avoiding broad generalizations.

Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
1 hour ago, BostonFNP said:

What would you call the people that remain unvaccinated for reasons other than medical contraindication at this point? What about the unvaccinated people that are unvaccinated for political/non-scientific reasons? 

Well they've been called "covidiots" but people find that too derogatory so we landed on antivaxxer which is now confusing to those same people.  I think jive turkey wants us to call them deep thinkers or righteous skeptics or brave warriors or something.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in A variety.
4 hours ago, BostonFNP said:

1.What would you call the people that remain unvaccinated for reasons other than medical contraindication at this point?

2.What about the unvaccinated people that are unvaccinated for political/non-scientific reasons? 

1. If they've had other vaccines,  I would call them hesitant.  If the former applies and they are turning it down or avoiding it because they've had the infection, talked to their doctor and are low risk,  I'd also call them hesitant if they are considering taking it in the future.  Otherwise, I'd  call them uninterested if they had had the facts and accept the risk to themselves. 

2. For me to call someone an A.V. they need to be against all vaccines.  So if they're picking on this vaccine for political affiliation,  I may call that ignorant.  Same goes for people with wild theories like microchips.  As for other non-scientific reasons it depends what it is.  Most of what's left is fear of adverse affects and lack of trust for governing bodies.  I'd call those people afraid, uninformed, or hesitant. 

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in A variety.
6 hours ago, hherrn said:

Nah.

1. Most of these folks are not actually against mandatory vaccines.  They are against mandating this vaccine.  

Very few of them advocate for re-introducing polio for example.  Or Rubella.  (Obviously some nut jobs do, but not the bulk of them.)  

I have not heard any of them say that they would like immigrants to this country choose which vaccines to take.  All in favor of mandatory vaccines in that case.

The governors who are calling "choice" a fundamental right all mandate vaccines.  All of them.  Coincidentally, they are all vaccinated.  Along with many of the anti-mandate public figures who refuse to disclose their vaccination status.  They know the benefits of vaccination, but are too chicken poop to speak the truth publicly for fear of getting booed like Trump was in Alabama. 

This "choice" thing is pure caca.  (sp?) 

It is true that "anti-vaxxer" is a confusing term, as, historically it referred to a different kind of mis-lead, mis-misinformed threat to public health.  This new breed of mis-lead, mis-informed threats to public health really does deserve its own name.  

2.OTOH- Language evolves as culture changes.  And, in context, use of the term is easily understood by many.  But, in the interest of not offending the new nut jobs by lumping them with the old nut jobs, maybe we should use a different term  I nominate Neo Anti Vaxxer.  It's a new world, and they deserve a new name.

 

1. To add to your point which I agree with to an extent, is there are those taking issue with mandating a vaccine that won't be as effective as other vaccines that have been mandated.  There's also the issue of mandating the vaccine for people that have had the infection already.  Add to that the newness as you mentioned.  A forgotten element is looking beyond the vaccine and potential consequences of teaching the government and corporations they can, at will, if they scare you enough,  use people's jobs and other economic needs to control them more than they already do even when the supporting information is unavailable, limited,  or frequently changing.  This issue is bigger than the vaccine. 

2. Labeling people presents its own challenges.  This risks reinforcing rebellion.  You call someone a Neo-Antivaxxer they'll be resentful, and create a name for those with an opposing view.  That changes the issue to a battle of wits, an "us vs them" rather than educating and informing to solve a problem. Look at Democrats and Republicans. 

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
45 minutes ago, jive turkey said:

Labeling people presents its own challenges.  This risks reinforcing rebellion.  You call someone a Neo-Antivaxxer they'll be resentful, and create a name for those with an opposing view.  That changes the issue to a battle of wits, an "us vs them" rather than educating and informing to solve a problem. Look at Democrats and Republicans.

Sure.

The reality is that those type of inflammatory labels are used in exactly THESE type of anonymous digital encounters and rarely in face to face encounters.  These inflammatory labels are used in engagement with people who aren't seeking more information with which to make an informed decision but rather seem intended to elevate poorly reasoned excuses to remain unvaccinated.

Up Vote Up Vote ×

I would say, that most people who have decided against based on their "research" fit into the category.

I have a bachelors degree, an AD nursing, RN, current CEN, former CCRN, and totally nailed Micro and A&P while in school.

I have not "done my research", as I am not qualified.  What I am qualified to do is understand who the actual experts are- folks respected by other experts in the field.  When somebody says they decided against vaccination after doing their research, I am pretty sure they mean that they read the drivel spoon fed to them by the facebook algorythms.

 

8f3raaqxsjw6.jpg

7
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in CRNA, Finally retired.
On 9/17/2021 at 10:04 PM, BostonFNP said:

Antivaxxers, traditionally, have held to this notion that natural immunity is safe (think of parents having chicken pox parties) and vaccines are dangerous. I've never heard of covid parties but there is this undercurrent that the vaccine is more dangerous than the illness. 

In most of our lifetimes we have not seen emergent vaccines for illness which many living had as children (varicella, HPV are probably the notable ones). It will take time to determine how lasting and protective immunity is, but the fact remains if you have no immunity, vaccines are vastly safer for acquiring immunity. 

I'm not sure what is meant by "injury part reducing effectiveness". 

From chicken pox comes shingles:(

Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in CRNA, Finally retired.
On 9/20/2021 at 2:59 PM, toomuchbaloney said:

Sure.

The reality is that those type of inflammatory labels are used in exactly THESE type of anonymous digital encounters and rarely in face to face encounters.  These inflammatory labels are used in engagement with people who aren't seeking more information with which to make an informed decision but rather seem intended to elevate poorly reasoned excuses to remain unvaccinated.

And they argue with the logic of a young child.

1
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in CRNA, Finally retired.
On 9/20/2021 at 2:43 AM, RKM2021 said:

No just keeping calling all of them that, even those that have had the COVID shoot, that's what the news media does, I suppose the same is said for here. 

We know there will be booster shots for everyone at some point. Or you will have to get the shot every year.

We could call the anti booster crowd (if that comes up) anti-boosters or anti-boos LOL 

They reject the proven benefit of this particular vaccine yet think it's appropriate to show up at an emergency room when they get sick.  So you believe that hospital treatment is somehow beneficial but the vaccine is not?  

3
Up Vote Up Vote ×
Specializes in Public Health, TB.
12 minutes ago, subee said:

They reject the proven benefit of this particular vaccine yet think it's appropriate to show up at an emergency room when they get sick.  So you believe that hospital treatment is somehow beneficial but the vaccine is not?  

But only the treatment they dictate, apparently. 

4
Up Vote Up Vote ×
13 hours ago, subee said:

They reject the proven benefit of this particular vaccine yet think it's appropriate to show up at an emergency room when they get sick.  So you believe that hospital treatment is somehow beneficial but the vaccine is not?  

Yes since vaccinated people still get and die from COVID

Up Vote Up Vote ×

Does any one even know the true numbers of COVID? You don't because there are probably tens of thousands of people who got  it, and never went to the hospital.  I am not saying that it is not serious for some, but I bet that true number of infection is much higher, which means the survival rate is much higher. Not to mention, have you ever done a drive thru test? I have, they give you a swab that goes up your nose, do you know the failed percentage rate of those that don't sick up their nose far enough and get a false negative rate, when they have it? No, you don't I don't either. But I have meet 2 or three people now that have told me they found out later through some of other means that they had COVID and they did not even know it. Israel did a study that shows natural immunity is 33 times stronger than the vaccine, when Dr. Facui was asked about this study all he could say was well I will have to look into it and get back to you on that, when he was asked about natural immunity.  But everyone needs to get the vaccine? What about those with natural immunity? 

Up Vote Up Vote ×
On 9/20/2021 at 5:55 PM, hherrn said:

I would say, that most people who have decided against based on their "research" fit into the category.

I have a bachelors degree, an AD nursing, RN, current CEN, former CCRN, and totally nailed Micro and A&P while in school.

I have not "done my research", as I am not qualified.  What I am qualified to do is understand who the actual experts are- folks respected by other experts in the field.  When somebody says they decided against vaccination after doing their research, I am pretty sure they mean that they read the drivel spoon fed to them by the facebook algorythms.

 

8f3raaqxsjw6.jpg

I don't claim to have "done my research" I will tell you that I have read everything put out by Pfizer, Mondera and J&J on the vaccines, on their website, along with the CDC And WHO, and the WHO again still shows that most people who get COVID have mild or moderate symptoms and that most recover. The WHO also says don't wear a mask while exercising. So which one carries more weight?

from the WHO mythbusters page 

FACT: People should NOT wear masks while exercising 

People should NOT wear masks when exercising, as masks may reduce the ability to breathe comfortably.

Sweat can make the mask become wet more quickly which makes it difficult to breathe and promotes the growth of microorganisms. The important preventive measure during exercise is to maintain physical distance of at least one meter from others.

FACT: Most people who get COVID-19 recover from it

Most people who get COVID-19 have mild or moderate symptoms and can recover thanks to supportive care. If you have a cough, fever and difficulty breathing seek medical care early - call your health facility by telephone first. If you have fever and live in an area with malaria or dengue seek medical care immediately.

Up Vote Up Vote ×
+ Add a Comment