Censorship and Suppression of Covid-19 Heterodoxy: Tactics and Counter-Tactics.

The emergence of COVID-19 has led to numerous controversies over COVID-related knowledge and policy. To counter the perceived threat from doctors and scientists who challenge the official position of governmental and intergovernmental health authorities, some supporters of this orthodoxy have moved to censor those who promote dissenting views. The aim of the present study is to explore the experiences and responses of highly accomplished doctors and research scientists from different countries who have been targets of suppression and/or censorship following their publications and statements in relation to COVID-19 that challenge official views.

Suppressing Scientific Discourse on Vaccines? Self-perceptions of researchers and practitioners.

The controversy over vaccines has recently intensified in the wake of the global COVID-19 pandemic, with calls from politicians, health professionals, journalists, and citizens to take harsh measures against so-called "anti-vaxxers," while accusing them of spreading "fake news" and as such, of endangering public health. However, the issue of suppression of vaccine dissenters has rarely been studied from the point of view of those who raise concerns about vaccine safety. The purpose of the present study was to examine the subjective perceptions of professionals (physicians, nurses, researchers) involved with vaccines through practice and/or research and who take a critical view on vaccines, about what they perceive as the suppression of dissent in the field of vaccines, their response to it, and its potential implications on science and medicine.

Despite awareness of recommendations, why do health care workers not immunize pregnant women?

Studies indicate uncertainty surrounding vaccination safety and efficacy for pregnant women, causing a central problem for health authorities. In this study, approximately 26% of participants do not recommend the tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis and influenza vaccines to their patients, although being aware of the health ministry recommendations. We found significant statistical discrepancies between the knowledge about the recommendations and their actual implementation, revealing the concerns of health care workers regarding vaccine safety.

The behind-the-scenes activity of parental decision-making discourse regarding childhood vaccination.

Background: Vaccine compliance has long been a cause for concern for health authorities throughout the world. However very little effort has been made to examine parental discourse during the decision-making process.

Methods: An online survey was conducted (N = 437) to examine predictors of parents' attitudes regarding childhood vaccination.

The "New Public" and the "Good Ol' Press": Evaluating Online News Sources During the 2013 Polio Outbreak in Israel.

The current research focuses on the 2013 polio outbreak in Israel as a case study to analyze the sources of information used in new media platforms, examining whether the new media have changed the ways in which we communicate about health issues. Specifically, we tracked and coded polio-related references on Hebrew news websites, blogs, forums, and Facebook posts. Overall, 24,388 polio-related references constituted our sampling frame.

Outbreak or Epidemic? How Obama's Language Choice Transformed the Ebola Outbreak Into an Epidemic.

Objective: Our aim was to examine in what terms leading newspapers' online sites described the current Ebola crisis.

Methods: We employed a quantitative content analysis of terms attributed to Ebola. We found and analyzed 582 articles published between March 23 and September 30, 2014, on the online websites of 3 newspapers: The New York Times, Daily Mail, and Ynet.

The Public Sphere in Emerging Infectious Disease Communication: Recipient or Active and Vocal Partner?

Objective: Recent years have seen advances in theories and models of risk and crisis communication, with a focus on emerging epidemic infection. Nevertheless, information flow remains unilateral in many countries and does not take into account the public's polyvocality and the fact that its opinions and knowledge often "compete" with those of health authorities. This article addresses the challenges organizations face in communicating with the public sphere.

Voluntary or Mandatory? The Valence Framing Effect of Attitudes Regarding HPV Vaccination.

This study addresses the issue of valence framing effect in the context of immunization, a preventive behavior often addressed by the equation of benefit versus risk. The authors examined how framing (support vs. oppose) the issue of HPV vaccination in Israel's immunization routine affects attitudes regarding vaccine regulations.

What does the public know about Ebola? The public's risk perceptions regarding the current Ebola outbreak in an as-yet unaffected country.

Background: The unexpected developments surrounding the Ebola virus in the United States provide yet another warning that we need to establish communication preparedness. This study examines what the Israeli public knew about Ebola after the initial stages of the outbreak in a country to which Ebola has not spread and assesses the association between knowledge versus worries and concerns about contracting Ebola.

Methods: Online survey using Google Docs (Google, Mountain View, CA) of Israeli health care professionals and the general public (N = 327).