What Makes People Hesitate to Get Vaccinated? Psychologists Break It Down The psychological theory that best explains these behaviors is "terror management theory". According to this theory, humans are unable to face the stark reality of death, and often engage in various forms of denial. We see ourselves as grander than the animals, immune to many of their problems, and destined for immortality with our gods. As one group of researchers put it, humans could not function with equanimity if they believed that they were not inherently more significant and enduring than apes, lizards, or lima beans. Hundreds of studies in social psychology laboratories have shown that subtle reminders of death (known as "death primes") lead participants to vigorously defend their religious and cultural beliefs and their freedoms. When reminded of death, participants even show aggression towards those with different political or religious ideologies. We cling to our "rightness" and "specialness", to help assuage our terror of death. In the process, we may defy the warnings of modern medicine, convinced of our own superiority. Researchers at the University of Chicago Divinity School reported half of their participants, all of whom indicated some religious affiliation, agreed with the statement "God will protect me from being infected". To cope with our dread of death, we delude ourselves into thinking we are invincible: Death might happen to other people, but not to me. This effect will be magnified even further if the social groups to which we belong also endorse similar views. Reminders of death lead people to fiercely defend the values and beliefs of their group. Wow!
I'm sure there are some that fall into this category, but the vast preponderance of this "research" his pure, grade A, horseshit. My reason (not that you asked) for not getting vaccinated is simple: Risk of vaccine is greater than risk of COVID. End of story. I don't get flu vaccines for the exact same reason. As I get older, if the risk ratio skews the other way, I'll get the vaccine. Also, the more pressure you guys provide (keep your job, can't fly or travel, free french fries, donuts, etc) that makes no sense gets my spidey senses up wondering what the hell you're trying to do. If you just let it alone and said "if you want it, its here", you'd probably get a hell of a lot more people.
More than 125 million people in North America were willing and did, in fact, get fully vaccinated prior to any type of pressure and when borders were closed via their risk analysis that statistics showed most people hospitalized, ICU admitted and Deaths are in fact those not vaccinated here in North America. A majority of them are in relationships or have families and they're obligated to protect the welfare, health, and safety of their loved ones and friends instead of putting one of them in the hospital. wrbtrader
The biggest laugh I had last week was a woman on the local news claiming she didn't want to get vaccinated because she was scared of needles. She had visible tattoos all over her.
In 2005 Fauci knew Hydroxychloroquine was enough to reduce Covid illness. The vaccine mandate is political abuse, therapeutics should be an alternative. https://patrickbyrne.locals.com/post/1210813/fauci-knew-hcq-works-on-sars-since-2005
So you are re-circulating misinformation that was already completely debunked back in 2020. First you need to learn what in vitro means. If you pour enough of anything into a petri dish it kills any virus or bacteria in it. First lets note the study was with Chloroquine, not Hydroxychloroquine. Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1232869/ "Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture" Now let's fact check the information and read some of the text. Fact check: Fauci did not approve hydroxychloroquine as a cure for coronaviruses in 2005 https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...rove-hydroxychloroquine-cure-2005/5559347002/ No clear link between Fauci and the chloroquine study from 2005 — which also didn't show a cure. There's also no reason to believe that Fauci was familiar with the study on chloroquine published in the Virology Journal in 2005. The study notes that it was funded by grants from the Protein Engineering Network of Centres of Excellence and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Its investigators were affiliated with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Clinical Research Institute of Montreal, and it first ran in the Virology Journal, which is published by BioMed Central — not the NIH. None of that is linked to Fauci at NIAID or NIH, and his name is not on the study. The study also did not claim that hydroxychloroquine was a "cure" for COVID-19, which would not be recognized for 14 more years. It simply found that chloroquine — not hydroxychloroquine, which is a less toxic metabolite of the drug — prevented the spread of SARS-CoV in a cell culture. And let's dive more in-depth about the nonsense being pushed in the claim. Blog posts inaccurately claim that a 2005 NIH study demonstrated the effectiveness of chloroquine treatment against coronavirus infection such as COVID-19 https://healthfeedback.org/claimrev...ainst-coronavirus-infection-such-as-covid-19/ Overstates scientific confidence: The claim that chloroquine is a cure against SARS-CoV-2 is based on an in vitro study published in 2005 on SARS-CoV-1. It is impossible to infer that a drug will work as a COVID-19 cure in a living person from an in vitro cell culture study on a different virus, even one as closely related to SARS-CoV-2 as SARS-CoV-1. Factually Inaccurate: There is no indication that the 2005 research paper was requested, conducted, or funded by the NIH. Rather, the authors were affiliated with the U.S. CDC and a Canadian research institute.