Agency in urgency and uncertainty. Vaccines and vaccination in European media discourses.

Although Covid-19 was not the first pandemic, it was unique in the scale and intensity with which societies responded. Countries reacted differently to the threat posed by the new virus. The public health crisis affected European societies in many ways. It also influenced the way the media portrayed vaccines and discussed factors related to vaccine hesitancy. Europeans differed in their risk perceptions, attitudes towards vaccines and vaccine uptake. In European countries, Covid-19-related discourses were at the centre of media attention for many months. This paper reports on a media analysis which revealed significant differences as well as some similarities in the media debates in different countries. The study focused on seven European countries and considered two dimensions of comparison: between the pre-Covid period and the beginning of the Covid pandemic period, and between countries. The rich methodological approach, including linguistics, semantic field analysis and discourse analysis of mainstream news media, allowed the authors to explore the set of meanings related to vaccination that might influence actors' agency. This approach led the authors to redefine vaccine hesitancy in terms of characteristics of the "society in the situation" rather than the psychological profile of individuals. We argue that vaccine hesitancy can be understood in terms of agency and temporality. This dilemma of choice that transforms the present into an irreversible past and must be taken in relation to an uncertain future, is particularly acute under the pressure of urgency and when someone's health is at stake. As such, it is linked to how vaccine meaning is co-produced within public discourses.

Researching childhood vaccine hesitancy in the wake of COVID-19.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a seismic effect on public healthcare, vaccine production, and on society. However, the pandemic has also had a methodological impact on social researchers, including those seeking to better understand vaccine hesitancy in relation to childhood vaccines. In this short communication, we describe the challenging experience of recruiting and conducting qualitative interviews with UK healthcare professionals and vaccine hesitant parents in early 2022. We also explore the way in which the context of COVID influenced our data analysis. Finally, we make recommendations for how researchers, including those using qualitative or quantitative methods, might learn from our experiences, as the complex and delicate relationship between society and vaccines continues to evolve in the wake of the pandemic.

Trust matters: The Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in Europe Study.

This article presents the design of a seven-country study focusing on childhood vaccines, Addressing Vaccine Hesitancy in Europe (VAX-TRUST), developed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study consists of (a) situation analysis of vaccine hesitancy (examination of individual, socio-demographic and macro-level factors of vaccine hesitancy and analysis of media coverage on vaccines and vaccination and (b) participant observation and in-depth interviews of healthcare professionals and vaccine-hesitant parents. These analyses were used to design interventions aimed at increasing awareness on the complexity of vaccine hesitancy among healthcare professionals involved in discussing childhood vaccines with parents. We present the selection of countries and regions, the conceptual basis of the study, details of the data collection and the process of designing and evaluating the interventions, as well as the potential impact of the study. Laying out our research design serves as an example of how to translate complex public health issues into social scientific study and methods.

Recruiting a Hard-to-Reach, Hidden and Vulnerable Population: The Methodological and Practical Pitfalls of Researching Vaccine-Hesitant Parents.

While recruitment is an essential aspect of any research project, its challenges are rarely acknowledged. We intend to address this gap by discussing the challenges to the participation of vaccine-hesitant parents defined here as a hard-to-reach, hidden and vulnerable population drawing on extensive empirical qualitative evidence from seven European countries. The difficulties in reaching vaccine-hesitant parents were very much related to issues concerning trust, as there appears to be a growing distrust in experts, which is extended to the work developed by researchers and their funding bodies. These difficulties have been accentuated by the public debate around COVID-19 vaccination, as it seems to have increased parents' hesitancy to participate. Findings from recruiting 167 vaccine-hesitant parents in seven European countries suggest that reflexive and sensible recruitment approaches should be developed.

Two Worlds in One: What 'Counts' as Animal Advocacy for Veterinarians Working in UK Animal Research?

The concept of advocacy is of increasing importance to the veterinary profession internationally. However, there are concerns around the ambiguity and complexity of acting as an advocate in practice. This paper explores what 'animal advocacy' involves for veterinarians working in the domain of animal research, where they are responsible for advising on health and welfare. In focusing on the identity of veterinarians working in an arena of particular contestation, this paper provides empirical insights into how veterinarians themselves perform their role as an 'animal advocate'. Analysing interview data with 33 UK 'Named Veterinary Surgeons', this paper therefore examines what 'counts' as animal advocacy for veterinarians, considering the way their role as animal advocate is performed. Focusing on the themes of 'mitigating suffering', 'speaking for', and 'driving change' as three central ways in which veterinarians working in animal research facilities act as animal advocates, we draw out some of the complexities for veterinarians working in areas where animal care and harm coexist. Finally, we conclude by calling for further empirical exploration of animal advocacy in other veterinary domains and for more critical attention to the wider social systems which produce the need for such advocacy.

Animal research, ethical boundary-work, and the geographies of veterinary expertise.

The veterinary profession has been relatively understudied in social science, though recent work has highlighted the geographic dimensions of veterinary expertise. This paper draws on in-depth qualitative interviews with Named Veterinary Surgeons (NVSs) working in UK animal research to demonstrate how and why they distinguish between ethical aspects of veterinary work in the spaces of the laboratory and general clinical practice. The paper mobilises the sociological concept of ethical boundary-work to help understand how animal research - often assumed to represent a contentious ethical space - is constructed positively as a space for veterinary work. Findings suggest first, that NVSs differentiate between laboratory veterinary-work and clinical work based on the scale at which veterinary expertise functions in the provision of healthcare to animals. Second, NVSs highlight a geography of veterinary authority in which veterinary expertise is felt to be more successfully applied in the laboratory compared with the clinic, where professional expertise competes with other sources of information and clients' finances and behaviours. Third, NVSs articulate a geography of consistency in which veterinary care in the laboratory is claimed to be more consistent between animals, as opposed to in the clinic, where animal experience may be influenced by individual owner characteristics. Overall, we show how through engaging in this kind of ethical boundary-work NVSs are not only presenting a form of scientific practice as 'ethical', they are also constructing a professional topology of veterinary practice and expertise. Finally, the paper argues for greater attentiveness to veterinary geographies beyond the more routine spaces of veterinary practice.

Vets and Vaccines: A Discursive Analysis of Pet Vaccine Critique.

Critique of vaccination policy and practice has a long history, and social scientists and others have devoted significant efforts to understanding this phenomenon. This attention has only increased in light of the coronavirus pandemic, with public health concerns expressed about opposition to vaccination strategies. However, much less attention has thus far been devoted to understanding veterinary vaccine critique. This is problematic, given the central role of animals in the production and consumption of vaccines, and the existence of veterinary professional anxiety and international media coverage. The lack of existing literature may reflect a wider paucity of research on the veterinary profession; a paucity actively being challenged by new fields of veterinary anthropology and sociology. This short report is based on a discourse analysis of a UK campaign group, which questions aspects of companion animal vaccine policy. Findings suggest that the kinds of discourses used are similar to those made in the human vaccine domain: questions of risk, trust in expertise and imaginaries of science are thus not unique to human medicine. However, the article argues that some of the discourses identified are actually in line with wider social and cultural developments in healthcare. This argument has potential implications for veterinary professionals, as well as scholars interested in animal or human medicine. The article concludes by identifying future research trajectories, focused on further analysis of discursive practice, or the use of ethnographic observation to more fully understand the relationship between humans and non-humans, including animals and vaccine technologies.

Critiquing imaginaries of 'the public' in UK dialogue around animal research: Insights from the Mass Observation Project.

With an established history of controversy in the UK, the use of animals in science continues to generate significant socio-ethical discussion. Here, the figure of 'the public' plays a key role. However, dominant imaginaries of 'the public' have significant methodological and ethical problems. Examining these, this paper critiques three ways in which 'the public' is currently constructed in relation to animal research; namely as un- or mis-informed; homogenous; and holding fixed and extractable views. In considering an alternative to such imaginaries, we turn to the Mass Observation Project (MOP), a national life-writing project in the UK. In its efforts to generate writing which is typically reflexive, its recognition of the plurality and performativity of identity, and embrace of knowledge as situated yet fluid, the MOP offers lessons for approaching views towards animal research and the role of publics in dialogue around the practice. In considering the MOP, we underline the need to acknowledge the role of method in shaping both what publics are able to articulate, and which positions they are able to articulate from. Finally, we stress the need for future dialogue around animal research to involve publics beyond one-way measurements of 'public opinion' and instead work to foster a reciprocity which enables them to act as collaborators in and coproducers of animal research policy, practice, and dialogue.

Assessment of health and welfare in a small sample of dogs owned by people who are homeless.

BACKGROUND: Pet ownership is common among homeless people, with dogs the most frequently reported pets. However, homeless people receive considerable criticism for keeping pets due to public perception of poor care provision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A convenience, cross-sectional sample of 19 homeless people, owning a total of 21 dogs were recruited, and their dogs' health and wellbeing assessed using the PDSA Petwise MOT (P-MOT). RESULTS: The dogs compared favourably with conventionally owned pets in most areas, including exercise and companionship. Problems included being overweight/obese (although at lower prevalence than the general population). Some owners had difficulty in accessing veterinary care. Behavioural concerns were reported for 61.9% of the dogs, most commonly separation-related distress. DISCUSSION: Being unable to safely leave their pets may impair owners' access to services. Provision of accessible veterinary care, behavioural support and pet-friendly services could improve the health of homeless owners and their pets.

"Refugees from practice"? Exploring why some vets move from the clinic to the laboratory.

BACKGROUND: Named veterinary surgeons (NVSs) are a mandated presence in licensed animal research establishments in the UK. Some NVSs come into their laboratory roles having left general veterinary practice, which is currently facing significant recruitment and retention challenges. Understanding the factors that motivate veterinary professionals to move from practice to laboratory roles provides insight into the issues underlying recruitment and retention challenges in veterinary practice. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured interviews with 33 NVSs were conducted in-person or over the telephone. The interviews were transcribed, anonymised and analysed using an inductive approach. RESULTS: Participants' accounts of their career trajectories generally emphasised push factors motivating them to leave practice, rather than pull factors to move into a laboratory role: Indeed, many participants recalled originally having little knowledge of the NVS role upon discovering it. The push factors recounted by interviewees strongly reflect the factors identified in recent research into recruitment and retention in the veterinary profession, such as business concerns and poor work-life balance. CONCLUSION: This study shows that laboratory animal work is often considered by NVSs as more manageable or fulfilling than practice work. To improve retention, the push factors identified by NVSs should be addressed in practice management and veterinary pedagogy.

Telling their own stories: Encouraging veterinary students to ethically reflect.

BACKGROUND: Veterinary practice raises complex and unique professional ethical dilemmas. There is increasing discussion of how best to deliver ethics education to veterinary students, so that they are fully prepared to address ethical conflicts in professional practice. This paper proposes the use of innovative methods to allow students to share and reflect on their own experiences of ethical dilemmas. METHODS: Two innovations are described. The first is formal and compulsory, and involves a small-group facilitated session for final year students, wholly designed around student dilemmas. The second is informal and voluntary, and constitutes a short-story writing competition. RESULTS: The methods described are conducive to student engagement in ethics and ethical reflection. CONCLUSION: Veterinary schools should consider adopting student-led techniques, deliberately designed to allow students to tell their own stories. Similar methods could also be adapted for use in clinical practice, thereby creating opportunities for professional dialogue on ethical dilemmas.

Animal Research beyond the Laboratory: Report from a Workshop on Places Other than Licensed Establishments (POLEs) in the UK.

Research involving animals that occurs outside the laboratory raises an array of unique challenges. With regard to UK legislation, however, it receives only limited attention in terms of official guidelines, support, and statistics, which are unsurprisingly orientated towards the laboratory environment in which the majority of animal research takes place. In September 2019, four social scientists from the Animal Research Nexus program gathered together a group of 13 experts to discuss nonlaboratory research under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act (A(SP)A) of 1986 (mirroring European Union (EU) Directive 2010/63/EU), which is the primary mechanism for regulating animal research in the UK. Such nonlaboratory research under the A(SP)A often occurs at Places Other than Licensed Establishments (POLEs). The primary objective of the workshop was to assemble a diverse group with experience across a variety of POLEs (e.g., wildlife field sites, farms, fisheries, veterinary clinics, zoos) to explore the practical, ethical, and regulatory challenges of conducting research at POLEs. While consensus was not sought, nor reached on every point of discussion, we collectively identified five key areas that we propose require further discussion and attention. These relate to: (1) support and training; (2) ethical review; (3) cultures of care, particularly in nonregulated research outside of the laboratory; (4) the setting of boundaries; and (5) statistics and transparency. The workshop generated robust discussion and thereby highlighted the value of focusing on the unique challenges posed by POLEs, and the need for further opportunities for exchanging experiences and sharing best practice relating to research projects outside of the laboratory in the UK and elsewhere.

Animal research nexus: a new approach to the connections between science, health and animal welfare.

Animals used in biological research and testing have become integrated into the trajectories of modern biomedicine, generating increased expectations for and connections between human and animal health. Animal research also remains controversial and its acceptability is contingent on a complex network of relations and assurances across science and society, which are both formally constituted through law and informal or assumed. In this paper, we propose these entanglements can be studied through an approach that understands animal research as a nexus spanning the domains of science, health and animal welfare. We introduce this argument through, first, outlining some key challenges in UK debates around animal research, and second, reviewing the way nexus concepts have been used to connect issues in environmental research. Third, we explore how existing social sciences and humanities scholarship on animal research tends to focus on different aspects of the connections between scientific research, human health and animal welfare, which we suggest can be combined in a nexus approach. In the fourth section, we introduce our collaborative research on the animal research nexus, indicating how this approach can be used to study the history, governance and changing sensibilities around UK laboratory animal research. We suggest the attention to complex connections in nexus approaches can be enriched through conversations with the social sciences and medical humanities in ways that deepen appreciation of the importance of path-dependency and contingency, inclusion and exclusion in governance and the affective dimension to research. In conclusion, we reflect on the value of nexus thinking for developing research that is interdisciplinary, interactive and reflexive in understanding how accounts of the histories and current relations of animal research have significant implications for how scientific practices, policy debates and broad social contracts around animal research are being remade today.

Animals, veterinarians and the sociology of diagnosis.

While sociologists of medicine have focused their efforts on understanding human health, illness, and medicine, veterinary medical practice has not yet caught their attention in any sustained way. In this critical review article, we use insights from the sociology of diagnosis literature to explore veterinary practice, and aim to demonstrate the importance of animals to sociological understandings of health, illness and disease. As in human medicine, our analysis shows the importance of diagnosis in creating and maintaining the power and authority of the veterinary professional. However, we then explore how diagnosis operates as a kind of dance, where professional authority can be challenged, particularly in light of the complex ethical responsibilities and clinical interactions that result from the triad of professional/owner/animal patient. Finally, we consider diagnosis via the precept of entanglement, and raise the intriguing possibility of interspecies health relations, whereby decision-making in human health care may be influenced by experiences in animal health care and vice-versa. In our conclusion, we argue that this analysis provides opportunities to scholars researching diagnosis in human health care, particularly around the impact of commercial drivers; has implications for veterinary and public health practitioners; and should help animate the emerging sociology of veterinary medicine.

Animal Research, Accountability, Openness and Public Engagement: Report from an International Expert Forum.

In November 2013, a group of international experts in animal research policy (n = 11) gathered in Vancouver, Canada, to discuss openness and accountability in animal research. The primary objective was to bring together participants from various jurisdictions (United States, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Canada and the United Kingdom) to share practices regarding the governance of animals used in research, testing and education, with emphasis on the governance process followed, the methods of community engagement, and the balance of openness versus confidentiality. During the forum, participants came to a broad consensus on the need for: (a) evidence-based metrics to allow a "virtuous feedback" system for evaluation and quality assurance of animal research, (b) the need for increased public access to information, together with opportunities for stakeholder dialogue about animal research, (c) a greater diversity of views to be represented on decision-making committees to allow for greater balance and (d) a standardized and robust ethical decision-making process that incorporates some sort of societal input. These recommendations encourage aspirations beyond merely imparting information and towards a genuine dialogue that represents a shared agenda surrounding laboratory animal use.

Why is the Supervet tour so popular?

Pru Hobson-West reflects on her experience of attending Noel Fitzpatrick's Supervet live tour and what she believes the general public may be gaining from the shows.

Societal Sentience: Constructions of the Public in Animal Research Policy and Practice.

The use of nonhuman animals as models in research and drug testing is a key route through which contemporary scientific knowledge is certified. Given ethical concerns, regulation of animal research promotes the use of less "sentient" animals. This paper draws on a documentary analysis of legal documents and qualitative interviews with Named Veterinary Surgeons and others at a commercial laboratory in the UK. Its key claim is that the concept of animal sentience is entangled with a particular imaginary of how the general public or wider society views animals. We call this imaginary societal sentience. Against a backdrop of increasing ethnographic work on care encounters in the laboratory, this concept helps to stress the wider context within which such encounters take place. We conclude that societal sentience has potential purchase beyond the animal research field, in helping to highlight the affective dimension of public imaginaries and their ethical consequences. Researching and critiquing societal sentience, we argue, may ultimately have more impact on the fate of humans and nonhumans in the laboratory than focusing wholly on ethics as situated practice.

Informed consent in veterinary medicine: Ethical implications for the profession and the animal 'patient'.

Informed consent processes are a vital component of both human and veterinary medicine. Current practice encourages veterinarians to learn from insights in the human medical field about how best to achieve valid consent. However, drawing on published literature in veterinary and medical ethics, this paper identifies considerable differences between the purposes of veterinary and human medical consent. Crucially, it is argued that the legal status of animal patients as 'property' has implications for the ethical role of veterinary informed consent and the protection of the animal 'patient'. It is suggested that veterinary informed consent should be viewed as an ethical pivot point where the multiple responsibilities of a veterinary professional converge. In practice, balancing these responsibilities creates considerable ethical challenges. As an example, the paper discusses the renewed call for UK veterinarians to make animal welfare their first priority; we predict that this imperative may increasingly cause veterinary informed consent to become an ethical pressure point due to tensions caused by the often conflicting interests of animals, owners and the veterinary profession. In conclusion, the paper argues that whilst gaining informed consent can often be presented as a robust ethical justification in human medicine, the same cannot be said in veterinary medicine. If the veterinary profession wish to prioritise animal welfare, there is an urgent need to re-evaluate the nature of authority gained through owner informed consent and to consider whether animal patients might need to be better protected outside the consent process in certain circumstances.

Reconciling Autonomy and Beneficence in Treatment Decision-Making for Companion Animal Patients.

This article explores how the concept of consent to medical treatment applies in the veterinary context, and aims to evaluate normative justifications for owner consent to treatment of animal patients. We trace the evolution of the test for valid consent in human health decision-making, against a backdrop of increased recognition of the importance of patient rights and a gradual judicial espousal of a doctrine of informed consent grounded in a particular understanding of autonomy. We argue that, notwithstanding the adoption of a similar discourse of informed consent in professional veterinary codes, notions of autonomy and informed consent are not easily transferrable to the veterinary medicine context, given inter alia the tripartite relationship between veterinary professional, owner and animal patient. We suggest that a more appropriate, albeit inexact, analogy may be drawn with paediatric practice which is premised on a similarly tripartite relationship and where decisions must be reached in the best interests of the child. However, acknowledging the legal status of animals as property and how consent to veterinary treatment is predicated on the animal owner's willingness and ability to pay, we propose that the appropriate response is for veterinary professionals generally to accept the client's choice, provided this is informed. Yet such client autonomy must be limited where animal welfare concerns exist, so that beneficence continues to play an important role in the veterinary context. We suggest that this 'middle road' should be reflected in professional veterinary guidance.

"She's a dog at the end of the day": Guide dog owners' perspectives on the behaviour of their guide dog.

A guide dog is a domestic dog (Canis familiaris) that is specifically educated to provide mobility support to a blind or visually impaired owner. Current dog suitability assessments focus on behavioural traits, including: trainability, reactivity or attention to environmental stimuli, low aggressiveness, fearfulness and stress behaviour, energy levels, and attachment behaviour. The aim of this study was to find out which aspects of guide dog behaviour are of key importance to guide dog owners themselves. Sixty-three semi-structured interview surveys were carried out with guide dog owners. Topics included the behaviour of their guide dog both within and outside their working role, and also focused on examples of behaviour which might be considered outside a guide dog owner's typical expectations. Both positive and negative examples and situations were covered. This allowed for the discovery of new perspectives and emerging themes on living and working with a guide dog. Thematic analysis of the results reveals that a dog's safe behaviour in the face of traffic was the most important positive aspect of a guide dog's behaviour and pulling or high tension on the lead and /or harness was the most discussed negative aspect. Other aspects of guide dog behaviour were highlighted as particularly pleasing or disappointing by owners including attentiveness to the task, work, environment and owner; confidence in work and decision making (with confident dogs resulting in confident owners) obedience and control; calmness and locating objectives. The results reveal important areas of behaviour that are not currently considered priorities in guide dog assessments; these key areas were consistency of behaviour, the dog's maturity and the dog's behaviour in relation to children. The survey revealed a large range in what owners considered problematic or pleasing behaviours and this highlights the heterogeneity in guide dog owners and the potential multifarious roles of the guide dog. This study contributes to the literature on which behaviour is considered appropriate or inappropriate in dogs and on the nature of human-animal interactions.