"Tratamento precoce", antivacinação e negacionismo: quem são os Médicos pela Vida no contexto da pandemia de COVID-19 no Brasil? / "Early Treatment", Anti-Vaccination, and Denialism: who are the Doctors for Life in the COVID-19 pandemic context in Brazil?

Resumo O artigo pretende identificar quem são os "Médicos pela Vida" (MPV), suas informações acadêmicas e profissionais, quais as premissas utilizadas para a defesa do "tratamento precoce" e da negação das vacinas contra COVID-19 e qual a representatividade de seus discursos no contexto da prática médica no Brasil. A análise baseia-se na lista de 276 profissionais médicos catalogados no site dos MPV e em informações acadêmicas e profissionais coletadas nos sites do Conselho Federal de Medicina e da Plataforma Lattes, do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico. A análise do conteúdo aponta para a centralidade das especialidades da Homeopatia e Acupuntura na população de MPV quando comparada ao conjunto dos especialistas do Brasil. A adesão significativa de homeopatas e acupunturistas ao movimento dos MPV pode iluminar a compreensão sobre racionalidades médicas específicas, permitindo distinguir quais categorias e ideias acerca dos processos de saúde e doença estão em disputa. Conclui-se que, para além de descrever a problemática, é preciso estabelecer suas correlações com um conjunto de acontecimentos, práticas, decisões políticas, encadeamentos econômicos, compartilhamento de crenças e uma corrente de processos que configuram seu caráter inegavelmente social.

Abstract The article aims to identify who the "Doctors for Life" are, their academic and professional information, which assumptions have been mobilized for the defense of "early treatment" and the denial of vaccines for COVID-19, and the representativeness of their discourses in the medical practice context in Brazil. The analysis is based on a list of 276 doctors' names, cataloged from their website, and on academic and professional information obtained through research on the Federal Medical Conseil website and the Scientific and Technological Development Nacional Council platform. The content analysis points to the centrality of the medical specialties of homeopathy and acupuncture in the population of Doctors for Life when compared to the set of specialist doctors in Brazil. The significant accession of homeopaths and acupuncturists to the Doctors for Life movement can clarify the understanding of specific medical rationalities, allowing us to distinguish which categories and ideas about the health-disease process are in dispute. It is concluded that, more than describing the problem, it is needed to establish its correlations with a group of events, practices, political decisions, economic linkages, shared beliefs, and a chain of processes that configure its undeniably social characteristics.

Vaccination Litigation: The Need for Rethinking Compensation for Victims of Vaccination Injury.

Opposition to vaccination has a lengthy history dating back to shortly after the discoveries by Jenner in relation to smallpox. In recent years though governments have sought to counter the concerns of anti-vaccinationists in a variety of ways, including legislatively in Australia, in an effort to protect against childhood diseases and to maintain herd immunity. However, cases continue to make their way through the courts where parents oppose the vaccination of their children, often inspired by the views of both registered and unregistered health practitioners, including homeopaths and chiropractors. This article catalogues recent decisions by the courts in Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and Canada, most of which are in favour of vaccination and have dismissed the arguments of those opposed to vaccination as unscientific. It argues that Australia should give serious consideration to emulating the model existing in multiple countries, including the United States, and should create a no-fault vaccination injury compensation scheme.

General practitioners' perceptions of vaccination controversies: a French nationwide cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to study general practitioners' (GPs') perceptions of vaccines that have been a subject of controversy in France. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey in 2014 asked a representative national sample of GPs, randomly selected from the exhaustive database of health professionals in France, about their perceptions of the likelihood of serious adverse events potentially associated with six different vaccines: for two of them the association was based on some scientific evidence, whereas for the other four this is not the case. We performed a cluster analysis to construct a typology of GPs' perceptions about the likelihood of these potential six associations. Factors associated with certain clusters of interest were identified using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Overall, 1582 GPs participated in the questionnaire survey (1582/1712 GPs who agreed to participate, 92%). Cluster analysis identified four groups of GPs according to their susceptibility to vaccine controversies: 1) limited susceptibility to controversies (52%); 2) overall unsure, but rejected the association between hepatitis B vaccine and multiple sclerosis (32%); 3) highly susceptible to controversies (11%); and 4) unsure (5%). We found that GPs who occasionally practised alternative medicine (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.65-4.45), and those who considered information provided by mass media as reliable (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.65-3.99) were more susceptible to controversies. CONCLUSIONS: GPs had different profiles of susceptibility to vaccination controversies, and most of their perceptions of these controversies were not based on scientific evidence.

Why parents refuse immunization?

Rates of child immunization are falling in many countries, leading to the increase of morbidity and mortality from diseases controlled by vaccinations. The simplified model of the natural history of immunization follows a sequence of fear of the disease before vaccination, followed by acceptance of the vaccination until plateau, where the population forgets the morbidity and mortality of pre-immunization. Historical factors including withdrawals of vaccines, and publications regarding the true or falsified dangers of vaccines still resonate with parents. Building on these historical factors, unscientific sources such as naturopaths, homeopaths, chiropractors, celebrities and lay-people with anecdotal evidence and even scientific sources such as some universities and some medical doctors push their views on anti-vaccination, which proves to make the decision to vaccinate more difficult on parents. The main reason that parents refuse vaccination is a desire to protect their children. These parents believe that vaccination is harmful, or that not vaccinated children are healthier than vaccinated children. Scientific data often will lose with pseudoscientific, false or anecdotal data that have higher sensational and emotional impact on parents. With so many sources giving so many factors which sometimes contradict themselves, it is indeed difficult for a parent to make a clear decision for their child.

Addressing the anti-vaccination movement and the role of HCWs.

Over the last two decades, growing numbers of parents in the industrialized world are choosing not to have their children vaccinated. Trying to explain why this is occurring, public health commentators refer to the activities of an anti-vaccination movement. The aim of this paper is to review the literature about the anti-vaccination movements and to highlight the knowledge and the skills needed for HCWs to fight against their ideas. The main theoretical structures of anti-vaccination ideology in the 19th and 20th centuries are: vaccines cause idiopathic illness; opponents against vaccines accused vaccine partisans to be afraid of the "search after truth," they fear unveiling errors; the vaccination law not only insults every subject of the realm, but also it insults every human being; vaccine immunity is temporary; an alternative healthy lifestyle, personal hygiene and diet stop diseases. Proponents against vaccination now have additional means to communicate their positions to the general public, the Internet in particular. Doctors and HCWs constantly have to face parents and patients who search information about vaccination. A lot of these people have previously found data about vaccinations from a lot of sources, such as papers, media or in websites and in these sources most contents come from anti-vaccine movements. For these reasons doctors and HCWs need to have updated knowledge about the vaccinations and to know the contents proposed by vaccine sceptics. Educating the general public cannot be fully effective unless there is a corresponding provision, enthusiasm and commitment by trained HCWs.