Perspectives on the COVID-19 Vaccination Rollout in 17 Countries: Reflexive Thematic and Frequency Analysis Based on the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) Framework.

BACKGROUND: As the SARS-CoV-2 virus created a global pandemic and rapidly became an imminent threat to the health and lives of people worldwide, the need for a vaccine and its quick distribution among the population was evident. Due to the urgency, and on the back of international collaboration, vaccines were developed rapidly. However, vaccination rollouts showed different success rates in different countries and some also led to increased vaccine hesitancy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to identify the role of information sharing and context sensitivity in various vaccination programs throughout the initial COVID-19 vaccination rollout in different countries. Moreover, we aimed to identify factors in national vaccination programs related to COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, safety, and effectiveness. Toward this end, multidisciplinary and multinational opinions from members of the Navigating Knowledge Landscape (NKL) network were analyzed. METHODS: From May to July 2021, 25 completed questionnaires from 27 NKL network members were collected. These contributors were from 17 different countries. The responses reflected the contributors' subjective viewpoints on the status and details of the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in their countries. Contributors were asked to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (ie, SWOT) of the respective vaccination programs. The responses were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, followed by frequency analysis of identified themes according to the represented countries. RESULTS: The perspectives of NKL network members showed a link between organizational elements of the vaccination rollout and the accompanying societal response, both of which were related to strengths and weaknesses of the process. External sociocultural variables, improved public communication around vaccination-related issues, ethical controversies, and the spread of disinformation were the dominant themes related to opportunities and challenges. In the SWOT 2×2 matrix, Availability and Barriers emerged as internal categories, whereas Transparent communication and promotion and Societal divide emerged as key external categories. CONCLUSIONS: Inventory of themes and categories inspired by elements of the SWOT framework provides an informative multidisciplinary perspective for effective implementation of public health strategies in the battle against COVID-19 or any future pandemics of a similar nature.

Representing life as opposed to being: the bio-objectification process of the HeLa cells and its relation to personalized medicine.

The immortal HeLa cells case is an intriguing example of bio-objectification processes with great scientific, social, and symbolic impacts. These cells generate questions about representation, significance, and value of the exceptional, variety, individuality, and property. Of frightening (a lethal cancer) and emarginated (a black, poor woman) origins, with their ability to "contaminate" cultures and to "spread" into spaces for becoming of extraordinary value for human knowledge, well-being, and economy advancements, HeLa cells have represented humanity, and emphasized the importance of individual as a core concept of the personalized medicine. Starting from the process leading from HeLa "cells" to HeLa "bio-objects," we focus on their importance as high quality bio-specimen. We discuss the tension between phenomenological characteristic of fundamental biological research and the variety of material and methodologies in epidemiology and personalized medicine. The emerging methodologies and societal changes reflect present EU policies and lead toward a new paradigm of science.

Gene myths in public perceptions.

In this article I examine myths in the gene science debate, and their use as a tool in analysis of popular perceptions and public opinion of genetic science and gene technology. In daily language myth means something untrue, though theories of myth present them as carriers of knowledge and truth. I understand myth as a narrative, a cultural construct that aims to describe the world, its origin, and its constituent elements. I compare scholars' usage of myths, considering their implications. I conclude that i) As an analytical tool the concept of myth is too loosely defined, or understood through theories which leave out context, social relations and interaction. This provides limited insight about myths and myth-making in present day society. ii) An updated understanding of myths, including location/context and interaction/process would enrich analysis.

You can use my name; you don't have to steal my story--a critique of anonymity in indigenous studies.

Our claim in this paper is that not being identified as the data source might cause harm to a person or group. Therefore, in some cases the default of anonymisation should be replaced by a careful deliberation, together with research subjects, of how to handle the issues of identification and confidentiality. Our prime example in this article is community participatory research and similar endeavours on indigenous groups. The theme, content and aim of the research, and the question of how to handle property rights and ownership of research results, as well as who should be in charge of the research process, including the process of creating anonymity, should all be answered, before anonymity is accepted.

Comparative analysis of the risk-handling procedures for gene technology applications in medical and plant science.

In this paper we analyse how the risks associated with research on transgenic plants are regulated in Sweden. The paper outlines the way in which pilot projects in the plant sciences are overseen in Sweden, and discusses the international and national background to the current regulatory system. The historical, and hitherto unexplored, reasons for the evolution of current administrative and legislative procedures in plant science are of particular interest. Specifically, we discuss similarities and differences in the regulation of medicine and plant science, and we examine the tendency towards dichotomizing risk--focusing on social/ethical risks in medicine and biological risks in plant science. The context of this article is the Synpraxia research project, an inter-disciplinary program combining expertise in sciences and the humanities.