Vaccines: Influence, Not Mandate

The vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, the organism that causes COVID-19, are a slam-dunk, whether in terms of their economic impact, a humanistic perspective, or an observed reduction in morbidity and mortality. And the United States as a whole is doing reasonably well in getting people vaccinated (although Sedgwick County is a little behind the national average). As of the writing of this blog post, more than half of US adults have received full vaccination, and a large additional fraction has received at least partial vaccination. And while I’m not particularly interested in the pursuit of a theoretical threshold like “herd immunity,” most everyone agrees that the more people we can get vaccinated before this fall, the better. After all, the virus is still spreading among the unvaccinated population as quickly as it was at its peak.

Some universities are mandating vaccination. I can understand why. But my instincts always trend more toward influencing decisions rather than mandating behaviors. So it was helpful (and, I’ll admit, a little discouraging) to see that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently ruled on using incentives to get employees vaccinated. In short, and to steal from our frequent collaborator Al Lewis:

“If employers set up a system in which they administer the vaccine themselves on a voluntary basis, businesses can also offer employees incentives — be they perks or penalties — so long as they are “not so substantial as to be coercive.”

If the process of setting up vaccine distribution yourself sounds tricky, you’re right. The new mRNA-based vaccines, in particular, while scientific marvels, are pretty delicate and require special handling. So we anticipate most of our members will utilize more traditional routes to vaccination, like clinics and health departments. How can we get our employees to take that leap?

In thinking out loud about this question, I’m cross-tabulating two sources. Source one is the new edition of Influence by Robert Cialdini, a seminal text in the science of persuasion. Source two is a summary by German Lopez, based mainly on Kaiser Family Foundation survey data, on the six overarching reasons some Americans are slow to be vaccinated: lack of access, lack of fear of COVID-19, fear of side effects, lack of trust in vaccines, lack of confidence in institutions, and conspiracy theories.

Let’s discuss how Cialdini’s Seven Keys to Influence might address those six big reasons for slow vaccination and how we can apply them to get more people immunized:

  1. Reciprocity. Pharmaceutical representatives don’t give out medication samples, tchotchkes, and meals to doctors’ offices out of charity or even advertising. They do it to cause a feeling of indebtedness on the part of the clinical staff. Doctors who receive these gifts are far more likely to prescribe medications represented by salespeople than are doctors who don’t receive the gifts. The same goes for people who’ve received free address labels from a charity. We can copy this strategy in our employee populations by pointing out the generosity of our leave policies around COVID-19 infections or exposures. The company is doing this for you. All we ask in return is that you do your part by reducing everyone’s risk by getting vaccinated. And we’ll even help give you time off and help you get to the vaccination distribution center!

  2. Commitment. When a company asks you to sign up for their newsletter, “club,” or punchcard, they’re trying to get a commitment from you, however small it may be. Consider asking your employees to sign up for a newsletter from your wellness department or vendor, and make sure vaccines are mentioned in nearly every edition.

  3. Social proof. Colleges and universities once tried to discourage binge drinking by pointing out how many students were injured or killed by binge drinking behavior. It didn’t work. When those same colleges and universities pivoted to a strategy of showing how many students did not binge drink, they saw results. People do what they see others doing. So once you have an idea that a big chunk of your employees has already been vaccinated, point this out in a campaign and emphasize how proud the company is of its employees’ contribution to safety. Even an employee who doesn’t particularly fear infection may want to be part of a positive culture.

  4. Authority. People trust authority figures. In the vaccine world, people trust their personal physicians most of all. So if you feel your vaccine push is falling short, encourage employees to see their doctor to talk about the minimal risks and potentially huge benefits of vaccination.

  5. Liking. People prefer to be seen positively by their peers. This desire can often override other emotions or beliefs like a lack of trust. If we can make vaccination the norm in our workplace and point out the positive effect of people who’ve received the vaccine, a certain number of people will experience a change of heart.

  6. Scarcity. When Amazon alerts you, “Only two remaining in stock,” they’re taking advantage of our attraction to scarce resources. Gold and platinum would not be expensive and desired if you could dig them out of your backyard with a shovel. So this summer, as we anticipate another rise in COVID-19 cases in the fall, we should point out the scarcity of time to take advantage of vaccination. Only three months left!

  7. Unity. This principle takes advantage of our natural tribal instinct toward “Us versus Them.” When the anti-smoking Truth Initiative debuted, it used this exact trick by casting Big Tobacco as an opponent to be defeated by a unified, righteous group of young nonsmokers. The effect on the youth smoking rate, pre-vaping, was astonishing. By one estimate, it prevented 300,000 kids per year from smoking. The Truth Initiative essentially turned the Big Tobacco companies into conspirators and encouraged kids to rebel. And it worked.

Our goal shouldn’t be to trick anyone into doing something they don’t want to do. But in working to get the largest possible fraction of the population vaccinated, we should use the best, most scientifically sound arguments and strategies we can.

As the Medical Director of the Kansas Business Group on Health, I’m sometimes asked to weigh in on hot topics that might affect employers or employees. This is a reprint of a blog post from KBGH.

Refusing COVID Vaccination Is Morally Indefensible

Imagine for a moment that you are stuck on an island with a few dozen other people. The island has a spring that serves as its only source of fresh drinking water. By some stroke of luck, the island also has a safe, secure, sanitary porta potty that sits a couple hundred feet from the freshwater spring (humor me; you saw Cast Away). You and the other strandees have collectively decided that the porta potty is safe and that it is open and free for everyone on the island to use.

In spite of this astonishingly lucky set of circumstances, a fellow desert-islander named Chuck tells the group that he’s philosophically opposed to using the portable toilet and that the only comfortable place for him to have a bowel movement is on a stump a few feet away from the freshwater spring. Chuck is not differently abled. There are no poisonous plants or insects in the area of the toilet. He has no history of an allergic reaction to the toilet seat in the porta potty. Everyone points out to Chuck that by doing this he will endanger the lives of everyone else through contamination of their drinking water with his feces. An epidemiologist in the group (again, what a stroke of luck!) calculates that by continuing to defecate near the spring, Chuck will give between two and three people a diarrheal illness, and given the tenuous nutritional situation on the island, one of them may die. Chuck is unconvinced, and continues to use the spring as his private latrine.

Now imagine that a vaccine to a virus that is currently the number one cause of death in the United States is available for free. It appears safe. It cannot give you the virus, as it contains no intact virus. By getting the vaccine you will drop your chance of illness by more than 90%. More importantly, you may well save someone else’s life by getting it, just as Chuck might save the health of his island-mates by pooping in the toilet. That vaccine, obviously, is one of the newly available vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.

Given this, we can only conclude that anyone who has access to COVID-19 vaccination and for whom vaccination is not medically contraindicated has a moral obligation to undergo vaccination in order to contribute to herd immunity. The end. It is a classic utilitarian problem: unless the individual cost of being vaccinated is so high that it outweighs the expected negative effect on the aggregate wellbeing of others, we are obligated to be vaccinated. And if you think a possible mild fever for two days outweighs the current death rate of more than 3,000 people per day in the United States, we operate in different moral universes.

This calculation applies not only to the elderly, whose COVID-19 infection fatality rate may be more than 10%, but to the youngest people approved to get the vaccine (sixteen year-olds) who have an infection fatality rate of less than 0.01%. Because the spread of the virus, often asymptomatically, among young people is the single biggest threat to the health and life of the elderly. Fortunately, since SARS-CoV-2 is not as easily transmissible as extremely contagious viruses like measles, and since the vaccines are extremely effective, the number of vaccinated people needed to achieve “herd immunity” is smaller than some other vaccinations: probably around 75-85%. But we’re operating on the razor’s edge right now: our drinking water-contaminating friend Chuck is the 16% of the population who still state they will refuse a COVID-19 vaccine.

If you have a known severe allergic reaction to a prior vaccine, then you should probably wait to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. But true allergic reactions to vaccines are unusual. By my back-of-the envelope count, only three people out of many tens of thousands already vaccinated have reported allergic reactions.

So please get vaccinated as soon as you can. And please encourage your employees to get vaccinated. It is our only path out of the sticky mess we’ve been in since March.

As the Medical Director of the Kansas Business Group on Health I’m sometimes asked to weigh in on hot topics that might affect employers or employees. This is a reprint of a blog post from KBGH.

The COVID-19 vaccine will follow a legacy of remarkably safe vaccines

Trust in vaccines is waning

In addition to social distancing, masking, handwashing, and generally caring about the welfare of our fellow humans, we’re all counting on an effective seasonal vaccine to eventually get us out of the COVID-19 fiasco we’re in now. But survey data shows that a huge chunk of the population is wary of a potential vaccine. This is no surprise; even routine vaccinations are met with skepticism they didn’t receive a couple decades ago, in spite of a scientific literature that overwhelmingly backs up their safety and efficacy.

As you look for data to share with employees to encourage vaccination–not just for COVID-19, but for all vaccine-preventable illnesses–pay attention to work that was just published in the Annals of Internal Medicine (paywall). 

Understanding vaccine labels

Investigators from Sheba Medical Center, Rabin Medical Center, and Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, all in Israel, performed a comprehensive review of “post-marketing surveillance” data over a 20-year period from January 1996 to December 2015. Specifically, they used the FDA’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a portal through which people can report possible medication adverse events, and then looked at the “labels” of vaccines, to see how the labels of 57 vaccines had changed over that period of time. Labels are those folded package inserts that come wrapped around any medicine bottle. Changes to labels are common after a drug hits the market. Invokana (canagliflozin), a diabetes drug that works extremely well for certain patients, for example, carries a “black box warning” on its label stating that it can increase the risk of foot amputation in certain people.  

But back to our study: for each safety-related modification to a vaccine’s label, researchers noted the date of the label change, the type of safety-related label change (like addition of a boxed warning like Invokana’s, a change in reasons to avoid the vaccine, or a change in other warnings and precautions), any safety issues related to the label change, and the source of the data that led to the label change (like post-marketing surveillance, publications in medical journals, or reassessment of data from old studies). 

Why vaccines labels might get changed

The investigators found that initial approval for 93% of the vaccines was supported by randomized controlled trials, the most reliable form of medical research. The studies were large, with a median 4,161 participants. So the vaccines got off to a good start. After approval, there were 58 label modifications over twenty years associated with 25 vaccines: 49 warnings and precautions, eight new contraindications to using the vaccine, and one safety-related withdrawal.

The most common source of safety data was post-marketing surveillance, which resulted in almost half of label changes. Most of that safety data was identified through the FDA’s VAERS, likely an indication of the quality of the FDA’s post-marketing surveillance of vaccines, even in the eyes of the Israeli docs doing the study. The most common safety issue resulting in a label modification was a change in the population to be vaccinated, such as adding or subtracting pregnant women or patients with abnormal immune systems. These made up about a third of label changes. Newly discovered allergies made up about a fifth of label changes, mostly due to changes in latex-containing packaging. 

We should still be encouraging vaccination

In spite of overwhelming evidence of vaccine safety, the researchers write that “Rates of vaccination uptake have been decreasing in recent years, partly driven by reduced public trust and parental concerns over safety. If vaccines are perceived as unsafe, uptake in the population will decrease further, and the prevalence of infectious diseases and their associated morbidity and mortality will increase.” 

It is our job as health and human resource professionals to have vaccination available, including an eventual COVID-19 vaccine, and to help our patients and employees make good decisions around vaccination. If you have had success in promoting vaccination in the past, to influenza, pneumonia, shingles, or other diseases; or if you have plans to launch a novel vaccination campaign around COVID-19 in the future, please share it with us!

As the Medical Director of the Kansas Business Group on Health I’m sometimes asked to weigh in on topics that might affect employers or employees. This was a reprint of a blog post from KBGH.

Links for Tuesday, November 21, 2017: more on the new HTN guideline, Gymnastics coaches throwing robot shade, the last iron lungs, Germany bans smartwatches, and Raymond Chandler hated US healthcare

Thoughtful post on the new HTN guideline by Dr. Allen Brett

Representative quote: "Consider, for example, a healthy white 65-year-old male nonsmoker with a BP of 130/80 mm Hg, total cholesterol level of 160 mg/dL, HDL cholesterol of 60 mg/dL, LDL cholesterol of 80 mg/dL, and fasting blood glucose of 80 mg/dL — all favorable numbers. The calculator estimates his 10-year CV risk to be 10.1%, making him eligible for BP-lowering medication under the new guideline. To my knowledge, no compelling evidence exists to support drug therapy for this person."

A gymnastics coach says the Boston Dynamics robot flip was a 3.5/5.0

'In a back salto, says Mazloum, “you want to be able to go as high as you can, and you want to be able to land as close to where you take off as possible.” To do that, the gymnast has to squat, throw her arms up by her ears so her body is a straight line (in gymnast-speak, opening the shoulder angle and the hip), then contract into a “closed” position again. By these standards, Atlas’ trick is “not the cleanest flip,” explains Mazloum.

Here’s Mazloum’s critique: Atlas didn’t quite get to that open position, “so it didn’t really get the full vertical that we look for. That’s why it went backwards a little bit.”'

The last of the iron lungs

Get your kids vaccinated for polio, folks.

Germany has banned smartwatches for kids

If I understand this correctly, it is not because smartwatches cause kids to be distracted monsters (although I don't doubt that that statement is at least a little bit true). The decision stems from the capability of bad guys to hack in and monitor the location of little Dick and Jane:

You have to wonder who thought attaching a low-cost, internet-enabled microphone and a GPS tracker to a kid would be a good idea in the first place. Almost none of the companies offering these “toys” implement reasonable security standards, nor do they typically promise that the data they collect—from your children—won’t be used be used for marketing purposes. If there ever was a time to actually sit down and read the terms and conditions, this was it.
Get your shit together, parents.

Asking parents to destroy them might be a bit of an overreaction, though.

Raymond Chandler paints a dark picture of American healthcare in a newly-discovered story

The title, "It’s All Right – He Only Died," sounds like the title of a video residencies would show interns to convince them that quality improvement and patient safety are part of their job.

The doctor who turned away the patient, Chandler writes, had “disgrace[d] himself as a person, as a healer, as a saviour of life, as a man required by his profession never to turn aside from anyone his long-acquired skill might help or save”.