Immuno-engineering, the use of “engineering tools and principles to investigate and modulate the immune system,” is a field poised to achieve remarkable breakthroughs in treating “myriad diseases, from cancer to infectious diseases to type 1 diabetes and autoimmune diseases.” However, just as life-saving and health-promoting products appear on the horizon, in some populations, higher levels of uncertainty and mistrust may prompt refusal to use them.
For decades, vaccines were justifiably celebrated for their crucial role in battling major diseases such as polio, smallpox, and deadly childhood diseases. The rapid development of the first effective vaccines for a coronavirus was the turning point in the COVID-19 pandemic. New vaccines for malaria, tuberculosis, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and other serious disease threats are poised to be “game changers.” Yet vaccine uptake is declining in some populations. In 2019, WHO identified “vaccine hesitancy” among ten key threats to global health. In 2023, UNICEF reported a decline in public perception of the importance of childhood vaccines during the pandemic in 52 of 55 countries studied. A concerning resurgence in vaccine-preventable diseases is now predicted.
There are varied reasons for this decline in vaccine confidence and uptake. One relatively new and potentially critical factor is the politicization of vaccines and immunization. During COVID-19, the weaponization of vaccines, notably by right-leaning political groups, was unprecedented. A few examples. Reuters reports that, under the Trump Administration, the US military “launched a secret campaign….to sow doubt about the safety and efficacy of vaccines…supplied by China” in 2020. This included “fake social media accounts…[to] amplify the disputed contention that, because vaccines sometimes contain pork gelatin, China’s shots could be considered forbidden under Islamic law.” Since 2021 Reform UK’s Nigel Farage has falsely claimed that the pandemic agreement would give the World Health Organization power to impose vaccine mandates worldwide. False claims about childhood vaccination are once again being used by the Republican Party to gain votes in the 2024 US elections. Consequently, vaccines are now firmly embedded in the identity politics now dividing many societies.
Evidence-informed discussions about the relative risks and benefits of vaccination are essential to public health policy. No vaccine is risk free. Adverse reactions are rare but do occur, and cases must receive appropriate support and compensation. The danger lies, as Hughes writes, when “politics cloud public health decision making.” Importantly, “social contagion” from the ideologically driven disinformation of one vaccine risks undermining public trust in other vaccines or public health as a whole. Moreover, disinformation can readily spread on-line from one setting to others, significantly amplifying its reach and potential impacts.
The need to protect public trust of existing and new vaccines is a key focus of the new Bridge Research Consortium. Funded in 2024 to advance Canada’s Biomanufacturing and Life Sciences Strategy, the Consortium is mobilizing social scientists from many disciplines to help realize the transformative potential of immuno-engineering. At the top of the list is the need to better understand the drivers of vaccine politicization and effective approaches to combat the harms being created for short-term political gain.
About the author
Kelley Lee is a Professor at the Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University and a Canada Research Chair Tier 1 in Global Health Governance and Co-Director, Bridge Research Consortium. She was previously Professor of Global Health Policy at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. She has served in several leadership roles including Co-Director of the WHO Collaborating Centre on Global Change and Health, and Chair of the WHO Scientific Resource Group on Globalization, Trade and Health.
Subscribe to our newsletter to stay up to date about blog posts and seminars from the Collective of the Political Determinants of Health
