Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
1.
Rev Med Virol ; 31(6): e2222, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1574478

ABSTRACT

The emergence of a novel human coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has engaged considerable awareness and attention around the world. The associated disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), has now involved virtually all 200 countries. The total number of confirmed cases has been much more than in the two previous outbreaks of human coronaviruses, that is, SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus. In line with the outbreak escalation, false information about SARS-CoV-2 and its associated disease disseminated globally, particularly through online and social media. Believers in conspiracy theories promote misinformation that the virus is not contagious, is the result of laboratory manipulation or is created to gain profit by distributing new vaccines. The most dangerous effect of this widely disseminated misinformation is it will negatively influence the attitudes and behaviours for preventive measures to contain the outbreak. In this review, I discuss common conspiracy theories associated with SARS-CoV-2 and Covid-19 and consider how we can address and counterbalance these issues based on scientific information and studies.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/administration & dosage , COVID-19/epidemiology , Mass Vaccination/psychology , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Vaccination Refusal/psychology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Humans , Politics , Prejudice/psychology , SARS-CoV-2/physiology , Scientific Misconduct/ethics , Social Media/ethics
2.
Drug Saf ; 43(8): 699-709, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1482336

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic that hit the world in 2020 triggered a massive dissemination of information (an "infodemic") about the disease that was channeled through the print, broadcast, web, and social media. This infodemic also included sensational and distorted information about drugs that likely first influenced opinion leaders and people particularly active on social media and then other people, thus affecting choices by individual patients everywhere. In particular, information has spread about some drugs approved for other indications (chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, favipiravir, and umifenovir) that could have led to inappropriate and therefore hazardous use. In this article, we analyze the rationale behind the claims for use of these drugs in COVID-19, the communication about their effects on the disease, the consequences of this communication on people's behavior, and the responses of some influential regulatory authorities in an attempt to minimize the actual or potential risks arising from this behavior. Finally, we discuss the role of pharmacovigilance stakeholders in emergency management and possible strategies to deal with other similar crises in the future.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections , Drug Utilization/trends , Information Dissemination , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Public Health , Attitude to Health , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/classification , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/psychology , Humans , Information Dissemination/ethics , Information Dissemination/methods , Medication Therapy Management/ethics , Medication Therapy Management/standards , Pharmacovigilance , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/psychology , Public Health/methods , Public Health/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Media/ethics , Social Media/standards , Social Medicine/ethics , Social Medicine/standards
4.
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci ; 76(9): 1904-1912, 2021 10 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1258772

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: Media sources have consistently described older adults as a medically vulnerable population during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, yet a lack of concern over their health and safety has resulted in dismissal and devaluation. This unprecedented situation highlights ongoing societal ageism and its manifestations in public discourse. This analysis asks how national news sources performed explicit and implicit ageism during the first month of the pandemic. METHOD: Using content and critical discourse analysis methods, we analyzed 287 articles concerning older adults and COVID-19 published between March 11 and April 10, 2020, in 4 major U.S.-based newspapers. RESULTS: Findings indicate that while ageism was rarely discussed explicitly, ageist bias was evident in implicit reporting patterns (e.g., frequent use of the term "elderly," portrayals of older adults as "vulnerable"). Infection and death rates and institutionalized care were among the most commonly reported topics, providing a limited portrait of aging during the pandemic. The older "survivor" narrative offers a positive alternative by suggesting exceptional examples of resilience and grit. However, the survivor narrative may also implicitly place blame on those unable to survive or thrive in later life. DISCUSSION: This study provides insight for policy makers, researchers, and practitioners exploring societal perceptions of older adults and how these perceptions are disseminated and maintained by the media.


Subject(s)
Ageism , Aging , COVID-19 , Information Dissemination/ethics , Social Media , Social Perception , Aged , Ageism/ethics , Ageism/legislation & jurisprudence , Ageism/prevention & control , Ageism/psychology , Aging/ethics , Aging/physiology , Aging/psychology , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/psychology , Data Mining/ethics , Data Mining/statistics & numerical data , Geriatrics/trends , Humans , Newspapers as Topic , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Environment , Social Media/ethics , Social Media/trends , Social Perception/ethics , Social Perception/psychology , United States , Vulnerable Populations/psychology
5.
Nat Hum Behav ; 5(6): 706-715, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1207141

ABSTRACT

Anti-intellectualism (the generalized distrust of experts and intellectuals) is an important concept in explaining the public's engagement with advice from scientists and experts. We ask whether it has shaped the mass public's response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We provide evidence of a consistent connection between anti-intellectualism and COVID-19 risk perceptions, social distancing, mask usage, misperceptions and information acquisition using a representative survey of 27,615 Canadians conducted from March to July 2020. We exploit a panel component of our design (N = 4,910) to strongly link anti-intellectualism and within-respondent change in mask usage. Finally, we provide experimental evidence of anti-intellectualism's importance in information search behaviour with two conjoint studies (N ~ 2,500) that show that preferences for COVID-19 news and COVID-19 information from experts dissipate among respondents with higher levels of anti-intellectual sentiment. Anti-intellectualism poses a fundamental challenge in maintaining and increasing public compliance with expert-guided COVID-19 health directives.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control , Health Communication , Masks/statistics & numerical data , Social Perception , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Canada/epidemiology , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Health Communication/methods , Health Communication/standards , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Information Seeking Behavior/ethics , Mass Behavior , Public Health/methods , Public Opinion , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Media/ethics , Social Participation , Social Perception/ethics , Social Perception/psychology , Trust
9.
Am J Trop Med Hyg ; 102(6): 1172-1174, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-601671

ABSTRACT

The first case of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) in the Dominican Republic coincided with a period of political crisis. Distrust in governmental institutions shaped the critical phase of early response. Having a weak public health infrastructure and a lack of public trust, the Ministry of Health (MoH) began the fight against COVID-19 with a losing streak. Within 45 days of the first reported case, the political crisis and turmoil caused by "fake news" are limiting the capacity and success of the MoH response to the pandemic.


Subject(s)
Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/pathogenicity , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Social Media/ethics , Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antiviral Agents/supply & distribution , Azithromycin/supply & distribution , Azithromycin/therapeutic use , Betacoronavirus/drug effects , COVID-19 , Civil Disorders , Coronavirus Infections/drug therapy , Coronavirus Infections/economics , Dissent and Disputes , Dominican Republic/epidemiology , Drug Repositioning , Humans , Hydroxychloroquine/supply & distribution , Hydroxychloroquine/therapeutic use , Ivermectin/supply & distribution , Ivermectin/therapeutic use , Pandemics/economics , Pneumonia, Viral/drug therapy , Pneumonia, Viral/economics , Politics , Public Health/economics , Public Health/trends , SARS-CoV-2 , Trust/psychology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL