Essay #2 Annotated Bibliography Detailed Assignment Sheet Essay #2 is an annotated bibliography of sources for your research paper, the proposal argument (essay #3). An annotated bibliography is composed of an abstract of your research topic and a critical summary of each source you look at (whether you choose to use the source in your research paper or not). Abstract of your research topic: Your abstract is a preview of your completed research project. It should include your working title, followed by a paragraph that includes your research question and hypothesis, followed by an explanation of why you think this issue is urgent and the specific position that you intend to argue. 250 words maximum. For each source: Complete bibliographic citation in MLA Format—this is the same as the citation you will use in your Works Cited page of your research paper, assuming that you end up using the source. A one-page (max) evaluation of each source, to include a critical summary, an evaluation of the source’s credibility (especially important for websites), what you find useful (or not) about the source, how the source ties in with other sources you’ve found, and specifically what you intend to use the source for, to include any passages you will cite from that source. Required sources • • • • • At least one (1) recent (2016 and later) scholarly book on the topic; At least two (2) recent (2016 and later) articles from scholarly journals or trade publications; At least one (1) reputable website (I expect you to demonstrate why/how the site is reputable in your annotations); At least two (2) more reputable sources, for a minimum total of 6, to complete the assignment. No sources that are less than 5 pages long. Among the types of other sources you might use: • No more than one (1) interview with a subject matter expert (SME)—attach a complete transcript of your questions and the SME’s answers. • Government websites; • News magazines and newspapers—NO corporate TV news (CNN, Fox, Breitbart, or MSNBC); • Reputable journals of opinion. Other criteria • • • One source per page—see the requirements for each source (above); the summary and your commentary should require about 1 page per source. As always, edit your document sentence by sentence before turning it in for a grade. See the list of Forbidden topics in the Unit 2 folder before deciding on your topic. Grading Rubric—Annotated Bibliography Title Abstract: problem Abstract: solution Entries: Citations Below Average No title or title is boring. Average Title indicates the writer’s position on the topic. The issue the writer is The issue the writer addressing is too is addressing is broad, unclear, or clearly stated, but vaguely defined. may be bland, too broad, or lack urgency. The writer has not The writer has indicated their indicated a clear position or has stated position it in a way that is vague or unclear. The citations are Citations provide the missing or unclear necessary information. The summary is incomplete or vague. The summary gives a general sense of the source’s content. Entries: Commentary Commentary is missing or vague. Commentary provides some sense of how the writer intends to use the source. Source requirements The sources listed are too few and/or fail to meet the criteria explained in the assignment sheet. The writer has used the minimum number and correct types of sources. Editing The writer has not edited the document sufficiently. The document has one or two sentence level errors. Entries: Summaries Above Average Title is clever, original, or otherwise attention getting. The writer shows the urgency and immediacy of the issue. The writer’s proposed solution is nuanced, innovative, and thoughtful. Citations are complete and correctly formatted following MLA guidelines. The summary is concise but informative and gives a good sense of the source’s content beginning to end. Commentary ties each source to the thesis and even to main supporting points; writer may indicate which parts of each source s/he intends to cite and why. The writer has chosen all reputable, recent sources that are on topic; writer may have gone beyond minimum number of sources required. The document is free of errors.
 

Vaccine Hesitancy in the COVID-19 Era

Abstract

Vaccines are instrumental preventive measures to safeguard public health against the threat of vaccine-preventable diseases. Between 2010 and 2015, the WHO estimates that over 10 million deaths were prevented by vaccines globally. There is a vast body of literature and empirical data that proves the efficacy of vaccines in curbing the spread of VPDs. Nonetheless, there is growing skepticism about the efficacy of vaccines. Vaccine hesitancy poses a considerable barrier to promoting public health because it counteracts the overall goal of mass vaccinations. Proponents of the anti-vaccination camp have raised a plethora of reasons to support their skepticism towards the efficacy of vaccines. Key among these arguments is the perceived likelihood of developing autism, based on past studies. The efficacy of vaccines has also contributed to the pessimistic view. Proponents of anti-vax argue that they do not need vaccines to be safe from VPDs yet the only reason they do not contract these diseases is because of the same pharmacological agents they oppose. Anti-vaccination was not a major threat during the pre-COVID-19 era since the prevalence and incidence of VPDs had been decimated thanks to the vast majority who are vaccinated. However, COVID-19 poses a major threat because of its virulence, infectivity rate, and mortality rate. The available literature suggests that perception of risk is one of the motivating factors behind anti-vax. COVID-19 poses an inarguably high risk to public health and also has a mortality rate above that of any other VPDs. Six variants of COVID-19 have emerged since the pandemic first broke out. Each variant presents a formidable barrier to overcoming the pandemic since it is, until its incidence, unknown in both severity, infectivity, and mortality rates. Anti-vax poses a substantial threat to public health, especially during the COVID-19 era. How does the heightened perception of risk impact vaccine hesitancy, and what are the effects of such ideology on public health?

Fridman, A., et al. "COVID-19 and vaccine hesitancy: A longitudinal study." PLoS ONE, vol. 16, no. 4, 2021, pp. 1-12, doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250123. Accessed September 22 2021.

Vaccines have unquestionable efficacy. WHO reports indicates that 10 million lives were saved by vaccines globally between 2010 and 2015; this translates to two million persons per year. Vaccine production technology has improved tremendously over the years to the point that the likelihood of being harmed by them is nearly negligible. However, since every life counts, anti-vaxers will want to show how some people have been harmed by vaccines, intimating that they could be better off without these prophylactic agents. The available empirical evidence, however, proves that the efficacy of vaccines has contributed to shaping the illusion of safety even without taking these substances. Since the incidence, prevalence, and severity of VPDs has declined over the years, thanks to highly effective vaccines, some people are deluded into believing that they would be safe without. However, in reality, this would not be the case. COVID-19 has, however, shifted the dynamic as now virtually anyone could be exposed to the disease, which could turn fatal at any point. The pandemic has eroded the false sense of safety from VPDs, which is instrumental in shaping vaccination attitudes. 

COVID-19 has risen to become among the major pandemics the world has faced, with the death toll rising to over 4.5 million and a daily average of 9,568 as of September 16, 2021. While there are several vaccines already available to the public, vaccine hesitancy remains to be a grave concern since it jeopardizes public health, making it impossible to attain herd immunity. Fridman, Gershon, and Gneezy, in their article, articulate the effect of vaccine hesitancy on the incidence and prevalence of a disease. Most milestones to curb VPDs were attained before the popularization of vaccine hesitancy. Subsequently, most proponents of this ideology have not faced the risk of death from a VPD in real life; their opinion and attitude have been shaped by retrospective analysis. I intend to use this source to elucidate vaccine hesitancy and what this means in the COVID-19 era, especially given the elevated perception of risk and the uncertainty surrounding the pandemic.

Soares, P., et al. "Factors Associated with COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy." Vaccines, vol. 9, no. 300, 2021, pp. 1-14, doi.org/10.3390/vaccines9030300. Accessed September 22 2021.

2021 unfolded into the new reality of the COVID-19 pandemic with over 89 million cases and 2 million deaths. Fortunately, vaccination against the pandemic was beginning to take root globally. The success of mass vaccination against COVID-19 has, however, been jeopardized by the vaccination hesitancy. Vaccine hesitancy is not merely opposition to the vaccine but also delay in acceptance, reluctance, and or refusal. The WHO ranks vaccine hesitancy among the top ten threats to global health.

The authors posit that vaccine hesitancy results from a sophisticated decision-making process inspired by a plethora of factors, including individual experience, contextual, individual or group factors. Other factors include religion, culture, gender, socioeconomic, political, and geographic, communication, media, historical influence, risk perception, and the nature of the vaccination program. Vaccine-specific factors also contribute to hesitancy. Some of the predisposing factors for vaccine hesitancy include being male, low level of education, and membership to minority religious groups. Factors that boost vaccine acceptance include individual information-seeking behavior, trust in the healthcare system, and confidence in the efficacy of vaccines. Other factors that promote acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine include advanced age, high levels of education, trust in government programs, and acknowledgement of the pandemic as a threat, health insurance, being a health practitioner, and knowing infected persons.

I will use this article as a source of literature on how different factors influence an individual's decision regarding the COVID-19 vaccine. The literature will be crucial in shaping the narrative on how vaccine hesitancy could influence the future of the world in the post-COVID-19 era if such a time is feasible. The study findings from this article and the empirical data discussed therein will also influence the context surrounding vaccine hesitancy.

Hausman, B. L. Anti/Vax: Reframing the vaccination controversy. ILR Press, 2019.

Safety is a major concern in vaccination. Anti-vaxers use safety, or its lack thereof, as one of the arguments against vaccinations. The book contextualizes safety in relation to mundane everyday life activities and also in vaccination. Safety, in this context, implies 'harmless', suggesting the activity referred to is devoid of meaningful adverse consequences. Unfortunately, no vaccine is safe, at least as far as the above meaning goes. Most vaccines are associated with some adverse effects of varying severity; these mainly include tenderness or redness at the site of injection. Some vaccines have more severe effects, including high-grade fever. While these events have no lasting implications on the health of the individual, they can be unsettling. The authors, however, contextualizes safety in everyday activities to illustrate that the relative 'unsafety' associated with vaccines applies equally to mundane activities, yet no one raises qualms with these events. For example, over 350 people die annually from bath or shower related accidents, while another 200 die when food lodges in their windpipe. Nonetheless, no one raises any concerns from such occurrences, yet anti-vaxers are hell-bent on publicizing the 'harmful' nature of vaccines.

I will use this source to contextualize the safety or unsafety of vaccines in light of the available empirical data. Anti-vaxers paint vaccines in a negative light by intimating that they do more harm than good. I will use this source to deconstruct this argument by demonstrating that the risk of sustaining permanent harm from a vaccine is no greater than that of injuries from mundane activities. Anti-vaxers want everyone to believe taking a vaccine will indubitably harm them but fail to use the available empirical data to support their claims. The book has adequate literature to contextualize the vaccine hesitancy debate, which will be invaluable in this paper. 

OECD. "Enhancing Public Trust in COVID-19 Vaccination: The Role of Governments." OECD, October 10 2021, www.oecd.org/coronavirus/policy-responses/enhancing-public-trust-in-covid-19-vaccination-the-role-of-governments-eae0ec5a/. Accessed September 22 2021.

Trust in government programs and decisions is a key motivator for accepting or declining a vaccine. The government must foster trust in the public to encourage vaccine acceptance, especially because the world is facing a pandemic of a new disease not known to science. COVID-19 vaccination is further enshrouded by a wave of conspiracy and doubt in the efficacy of the vaccines considering their rather rushed development and incomplete testing. The lack of adequate data to determine the safety of these vaccines gives anti-vaxers an advantage in their campaign. The source highlights some of the hiccups related to the development of the COVID-19 vaccine, their implication on public trust in government machinery, and the role of the government in promoting acceptance.

Battling COVID-19 necessitates prompt attainment of herd immunity status. Herd immunity requires the vaccination of a dominant proportion of the global population. However, the development and rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine pose numerous limitations. Among the barriers to this endeavor is the waning public trust in the government's capability to ensure vaccines are developed with safety as a key priority, particularly considering that most were developed faster than they would normally take. The source reiterates the role of the government in promoting public confidence in both the effectiveness and the safety of the vaccines.

According to OECD, there is growing hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccine globally influenced by public distrust in their governments' ability to manage the crisis effectively. The resulting skepticism has jeopardized vaccine acceptance and adherence to public health guidelines. The growing disinformation about the vaccine continues to empower anti-vaxers at the expense of public health. I will use this source to frame the role of governments as key stakeholders in public health and in influencing vaccine hesitancy.

Graham, David A. "It's Not Vaccine Hesitancy. It's COVID-19 Denialism." The Atlantic, April 27. 2021, www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/its-not-vaccine-hesitancy-its-covid-denialism/618724/. Accessed September 22 2021.

The world has faced pandemics countless times. The perception of these pandemics, from a vaccination point of view, has often differed. The source uses a study conducted on the willingness of participants to undertake a H1N1 vaccine to frame COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The study, conducted in 2009, further classified hesitancy by age, race, and partisanship, among other parameters. H1N1 and COVID-19 are inarguably different. The number of people infected by the H1N1 and those who succumbed to the viral infection pales compared to the disease burden and mortality rate of COVID-19. However, this study's findings are relevant in understanding the basis of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. According to the author, two-thirds of the participants in the 2009 study were unwilling to undergo vaccination, with the older persons being more receptive than the young. Whites and Latinos were also more willing than Blacks, while Democrats were more willing than Democrats.

COVID-19 pandemic has reshaped the distribution of vaccine acceptance and hesitancy. Unlike 12 years ago, the available data shows vaccine hesitancy parity across racial lines, with young conservatives being the outliers. The author also presents the findings from the Kaiser Family Foundation poll indicating that 13% of Americans are hesitant to the COVID-19 vaccine; these include 18% of persons between 30 and 39 years and 29% of Republicans. Rural dwellers and white evangelicals have a higher hesitancy, with hesitancy being positively correlated to church attendance. I will use this source to explore current hesitancy patterns to create a more accurate representation of who is or is unwilling to receive the vaccine. Such information will be instrumental in estimating the probable consequence of hesitancy on public health and the overall effect on herd immunity.

Beleche, T., et al. "COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: Demographic Factors, Geographic Patterns, and Changes over Time." ASPE | Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, May 2021, aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/private/pdf/265341/aspe-ib-vaccine-hesitancy.pdf. Accessed September 22 2021.

Vaccine hesitancy is a continuum ranging from complete refusal to total acceptance. Reluctance to undertake vaccination precipitates partial or delayed vaccination but could also result in a decline. In the COVID-19 era, hesitancy is particularly significant because it makes the concept of herd immunity, which is essential in curbing the spread of the virus, elusive. Besides, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy directly influences how fast, or slow, the pandemic can be contained.

According to the source, addressing the dominant hesitancy issues on the COVID-19 vaccine goes a long way in reducing disease transmission and ultimately ending the pandemic. By the end of the last quarter of 2020, three COVID-19 vaccines were almost ready for the public. However, there was widespread skepticism about the efficacy and safety since they were developed faster than they would normally take, raising concerns about their quality. The article reports that by this time, hesitancy was at an all-time high as the public expressed widespread distrust in the government's oversight. The source explores the changes in hesitancy over the first three months of 2021.

I intend to use this source to track changes in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the first three months of 2021. In these three months, three vaccines were rolled out amidst a rising number of cases and fatalities globally. While the public ought to have been pressured to undertake vaccination, there was a counterbalance based on widespread distrust in the government. The infodemic prevailing during this time resulted in numerous conflicting theories on the COVID-19 vaccine, which inspired fear and spread mistrust in the government's intentions. The data will be instrumental in shaping my argument of the various perspectives of hesitancy and their overall effect on vaccine acceptance.

Introduction

How does the heightened perception of risk impact vaccine hesitancy, and what are the effects of such ideology on public health?

Paragraph 1

• Vaccines are instrumental preventive measures to safeguard public health against the threat of vaccine-preventable diseases
• Between 2010 and 2015, the WHO estimates that over 10 million deaths were prevented by vaccines globally

Paragraph 2

• • • Vaccines have unquestionable efficacy
    • WHO reports indicates that 10 million lives were saved by vaccines globally between 2010 and 2015; this translates to two million persons per year.

Paragraph 3

• 2021 unfolded into the new reality of the COVID-19 pandemic with over 89 million cases and 2 million deaths
• Fortunately, vaccination against the pandemic was beginning to take root globally