Power, place, and access: Why history is at the center of black D.C. residents of wards 7 and 8 decisions to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.

Vaccines have played an essential role in curbing case and mortality rates due to SARS-CoV-2 in the United Sates. Still, many communities display high rates of unwillingness or inability to get a COVID-19 vaccine, limiting overall vaccination efforts and contributing to viral spread. Black Americans have expressed skepticism towards vaccines because of limited access to the technology, mistrust in its safety and efficacy, and a lack of confidence in the healthcare authorities that distribute it. This article investigates how Black residents of Wards 7 and 8 in Washington, D.C. thought about COVID-19 vaccination and why or why not they decided to vaccinate. These Wards' vaccination rates were markedly lower than those from Wards 1-6, which have substantially higher populations of White residents, affluence, access, and resources. This study involved 31 interviews with Ward 7 and 8 residents recruited through snowball sampling. We found that residents navigated the dual perceived risks of coronavirus infection and vaccination through three key frames: their relationship to their place or location, their desires to maintain autonomy over their health, and their abilities to access COVID-19 vaccines. This case study advances knowledge of vaccine utilization among marginalized communities, and how this phenomenon varies depending on local social, cultural, and political dynamics. Moreover, this research has implications for vaccine rollout efforts and the D.C. health system, as it reveals gaps in confidence and care that undermine health outcomes for Black residents.

Syndemics and clinical science.

The theory of syndemics has received increasing attention in clinical medicine since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, due to the synergistic interactions of the disease with pre-existing political, structural, social and health conditions. In simple terms, syndemics are synergistically interacting epidemics that occur in a particular context with shared drivers. When policymakers ask why some communities have higher death rates from COVID-19 compared with other communities, those working from a syndemics framework argue that multiple factors synergistically work in tandem, and populations with the highest morbidity and mortality experience the greatest impact of these interactions. In this Perspective, we use specific case examples to illustrate these concepts. We discuss the emergence of syndemics, how epidemics interact, and what scientists, clinicians and policymakers can do with this information.

Understanding the "Sometimes Masker": Political Orientation and Trust in the Media During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic in the United States has brought to light the problematic way partisan politics interferes with public health prevention and control measures. This study aims to investigate how Americans responded to the novel coronavirus with respect to their sociopolitical identity and masking habits. STUDY DESIGN: This mixed-methods study incorporated three ethnographic projects and surveys together, from two rural areas (in Iowa and California) and one suburban community in California. METHODS: We interviewed 156 Americans about how masking habits related to six themes: participants' perceived risk level, concern for themselves and others, support for President Trump, trust in scientific organizations, and confidence in major news outlets. We conducted content analysis of qualitative interviews and evaluated survey questions to understand how and why people masked or engaged in public health prevention practices. RESULTS: Greater perceived risk, concern for others, and trust in health and media institutions was correlated with increased masking, while support for Trump was predictive of anti-masking sentiments. Participants who diverged from these trends, specifically those who sometimes wore masks, but not always were called "sometimes maskers". These sometimes maskers often identified as politically moderate and were more likely to mask due to concern for a vulnerable person or group in their lives. CONCLUSIONS: Since one in three Americans are political moderates, understanding what promotes their adherence to public health guidelines is essential for policy makers interested in pandemic containment. Relatedly, the conservative tendency to distrust mainstream media is what separated those who reported sometimes masking from those who reported always masking.

Social risks, economic dynamics and the local politics of COVID-19 prevention in Eldoret town, Kenya.

A steady and consistent national and local government leadership is crucial in times of crisis. The trust in government - which can be so fragile - was strong in Eldoret town, a large municipal in western Kenya widely known for ethnic conflicts. In our interviews with 20 business people and 30 community members from Eldoret town, we found that the trust built early in the pandemic was broken due to individual leaders who eventually dismissed public health promotion and engaged in politics and corruption of funds for COVID-19 relief. When leadership was strong, locals in Eldoret town (and especially business owners) engaged in public health prevention measures for the greater good. But when leadership slipped, people complained and eventually ignored public health prevention measures at home, on the bus, and in businesses around town, causing the intensification of outbreaks. This was most common among those engaged in the formal economy as those in the informal economy were more likely to mistrust the government altogether. We show who falls through the cracks when government policy targets viral threats and suggest how local government and public health agencies might work to control COVID-19 infections while ensuring that all Eldoret residents are cared for.

Flourishing: migration and health in social context.

Health and the capacity to flourish are deeply intertwined. For members of vulnerable migrant groups, systemic inequalities and structural forms of marginalisation and exclusion create health risks, impede access to needed care and interfere with the ability to achieve one's full potential. Migrants often have limited access to healthcare, and they frequently are portrayed as less deserving than others of the resources needed to lead a healthy and flourishing life. Under these circumstances, clinicians, healthcare institutions and global health organisations have a moral and ethical obligation to consider the role they can-and do-play in either advancing or impeding migrants' health and their capacity to flourish. Drawing on case studies from three world regions, we propose concrete steps clinicians and health institutions can take in order to better serve migrant patients. These include recommendations that can help improve understanding of the complex circumstances of migrants' lives, strengthen collaboration between care providers and non-medical partners and transform the social, economic and structural circumstances that impede flourishing and harm health. Developing new strategies to promote the flourishing of precarious migrants can strengthen our collective ability to re-envision and redesign health systems and structures to value the health, dignity and bodily integrity of all patients-especially the most vulnerable-and to promote flourishing for all.

Perceptions, risk and understandings of the COVID-19 pandemic in urban South Africa.

BACKGROUND: How people perceive the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and understand their risk can influence their health, behaviours and overall livelihood. The disease's novelty and severity have elicited a range of attitudes and perspectives countrywide, which consequently influence the public's adherence to public health prevention and treatment guidelines. AIM: To investigate perceptions, experiences and knowledge on COVID-19 in a community-based cohort study. SETTING: Adults living in Soweto in South Africa's Gauteng province during the first six weeks of the national lockdown regulations (i.e. Alert Level 5 lockdown from end of March to beginning of May 2020). METHODS: Participants completed a series of surveys and answered open-ended questions through telephonic interviews (n = 391). We queried their perceptions of the origins of COVID-19, understandings of the disease, personal and communal risks and its relations with the existing disease burden. RESULTS: Findings from our sample of 391 adults show that perceptions and knowledge of COVID-19 vary across several demographic characteristics. We report moderate levels of understanding about COVID-19, prevention methods and risk, as well as exposure to major physical, psychosocial and financial stressors. Depressive symptoms, perceived infection risk and concern about COVID-19 significantly predicted COVID-19 prevention knowledge. CONCLUSION: Public health communication campaigns should focus on continuing to improve knowledge and reduce misinformation associated with the virus. Policymakers should consider the mental health- and non-health-related impact of the pandemic on their citizens in order to curb the pandemic in a manner that maximises well-being.

Evaluating the mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic: perceived risk of COVID-19 infection and childhood trauma predict adult depressive symptoms in urban South Africa.

BACKGROUND: South Africa's national lockdown introduced serious threats to public mental health in a society where one in three individuals develops a psychiatric disorder during their life. We aimed to evaluate the mental health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic using a mixed-methods design. METHODS: This longitudinal study drew from a preexisting sample of 957 adults living in Soweto, a major township near Johannesburg. Psychological assessments were administered across two waves between August 2019 and March 2020 and during the first 6 weeks of the lockdown (late March-early May 2020). Interviews on COVID-19 experiences were administered in the second wave. Multiple regression models examined relationships between perceived COVID-19 risk and depression. RESULTS: Full data on perceived COVID-19 risk, depression, and covariates were available in 221 adults. In total, 14.5% of adults were at risk for depression. Higher perceived COVID-19 risk predicted greater depressive symptoms (p < 0.001), particularly among adults with histories of childhood trauma, though this effect was marginally significant (p = 0.063). Adults were about two times more likely to experience significant depressive symptoms for every one unit increase in perceived COVID-19 risk (p = 0.021; 95% CI 1.10-3.39). Qualitative data identified potent experiences of anxiety, financial insecurity, fear of infection, and rumination. CONCLUSIONS: Higher perceived risk of COVID-19 infection is associated with greater depressive symptoms during the first 6 weeks of quarantine. High rates of severe mental illness and low availability of mental healthcare amidst COVID-19 emphasize the need for immediate and accessible psychological resources.

On symbols and scripts: The politics of the American COVID-19 response.

The COVID-19 crisis emerged during a divisive time in American politics. We argue that to unravel the American COVID-19 crisis-and to craft effective responses-we need a more sophisticated understanding of the political culture of public health crises. We use data from interviews and online media to examine symbolic representation of public health phenomena (masks; public health institutions) within the first months of the US epidemic. We show how political scripts about pandemic responses are shaped by, and align with, deeply-rooted social values and political cultures. Social processes of meaning-making help explain the evolution of increasingly partisan public health discourse regarding topics like masking and institutional trust. We highlight the lack of memorialization of deaths in America-that has not acquired the same polarized political meaning as other issues-to consider how and why certain issues gain political valence, and what opportunities certain acts of politicization provide in shifting public discourse. The coronavirus pandemic challenged the science of public health strategy, and the legitimacy of its institutions, with devastating consequences. Anticipating and understanding the central role of political cultures, cultural scripts, and meanings in positioning public health measures is essential for more effective responses to COVID-19 and future pandemics.

A spectrum of (Dis)Belief: Coronavirus frames in a rural midwestern town in the United States.

Community responses to the SARS-CoV-2, or "coronavirus" outbreaks of 2020 reveal a great deal about society. In the absence of government mandates, debates over issues such as mask mandates and social distancing activated conflicting moral beliefs, dividing communities. Policy scholars argue that such controversies represent fundamental frame conflicts, which arise from incommensurable worldviews, such as contested notions of "liberty" versus "equity". This article investigates frames people constructed to make sense of coronavirus and how this affected social behavior in 2020. We conducted an interpretive framing analysis using ethnographic data from a predominately white, conservative, and rural midwestern tourist town in the United States from June to August 2020. We collected semi-structured interviews with 87 community members, observed meetings, events, and daily life. We identified four frames that individuals constructed to make sense of coronavirus: Concern, Crisis, Constraint, and Conspiracy. Concern frames illustrated how some individuals are uniquely affected and thus protect themselves. Crisis frames recognized coronavirus as a pervasive and profound threat requiring unprecedented action. Constraint frames emphasized the coronavirus response as a threat to financial stability and personal growth that should be resisted. Conspiracy frames denied its biological basis and did not compel action. These four conflicting frames demonstrate how social fragmentation, based on conflicting values, led to an incomplete pandemic response in the absence of government mandates at the national, state, and local levels in rural America. These findings provide a social rationale for public health mandates, such as masking, school/business closures, and social distancing, when contested beliefs impede collective action.