Cultural values sway public risk perception of HPV vaccine

Publication
Article
Oncology NEWS InternationalOncology NEWS International Vol 19 No 11
Volume 19
Issue 11

Despite being heralded as a major public health breakthrough, the HPV vaccine has seen its fair share of controversy. Most recently, 24 U.S. states tried to pass a bill to make the vaccine mandatory for school-age girls. But the bill did not make it past the introductory stages in all but one state for the reasons, both scientific and cultural, that have plagued the HPV vaccine from the start: The vaccine fails to protect against 30% of the strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer; there is not enough known about possible adverse events; vaccination may lull young women into a false sense of security, leading to risky sexual behavior.Legal researchers, led by Dan Kahan, JD, from Yale Law School in New Haven, Conn., conducted a study to assess the factors that influence the perceptions of the risks and benefits of the HPV vaccine among the general public. They surveyed 1,538 U.S. adults and found that two factors influenced how their respondents viewed the HPV vaccination: biased assimilation and cultural credibility. “Biased assimilation refers to the tendency of individuals selectively to credit and dismiss information in a manner that confirms their prior beliefs,” the authors explained. With regard to cultural credibility, “the results of this [study] suggest that polarization grows where culturally diverse subjects see the argument they are disposed to accept being made by the advocate whose values they share, and the argument they are predisposed to reject being made by the advocate whose values they repudiate”( Law Hum Behav online, January 14, 2010).Individuals who have cultural values that favor authority and individualism perceive the vaccine as risky while individuals with cultural values that favor gender equality and pro-community/government involvement in basic healthcare are more likely to see the vaccine as low risk and high benefit.The authors suggested that policymakers avoid creating the impression that a scientific debate trumps cultural standards, and consider cultural norms and biases. 

Despite being heralded as a major public health breakthrough, the HPV vaccine has seen its fair share of controversy. Most recently, 24 U.S. states tried to pass a bill to make the vaccine mandatory for school-age girls.

But the bill did not make it past the introductory stages in all but one state for the reasons, both scientific and cultural, that have plagued the HPV vaccine from the start: The vaccine fails to protect against 30% of the strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer; there is not enough known about possible adverse events; vaccination may lull young women into a false sense of security, leading to risky sexual behavior.

Legal researchers, led by Dan Kahan, JD, from Yale Law School in New Haven, Conn., conducted a study to assess the factors that influence the perceptions of the risks and benefits of the HPV vaccine among the general public. They surveyed 1,538 U.S. adults and found that two factors influenced how their respondents viewed the HPV vaccination: biased assimilation and cultural credibility.

“Biased assimilation refers to the tendency of individuals selectively to credit and dismiss information in a manner that confirms their prior beliefs,” the authors explained. With regard to cultural credibility, “the results of this [study] suggest that polarization grows where culturally diverse subjects see the argument they are disposed to accept being made by the advocate whose values they share, and the argument they are predisposed to reject being made by the advocate whose values they repudiate”( Law Hum Behav online, January 14, 2010).
Individuals who have cultural values that favor authority and individualism perceive the vaccine as risky while individuals with cultural values that favor gender equality and pro-community/government involvement in basic healthcare are more likely to see the vaccine as low risk and high benefit.

The authors suggested that policymakers avoid creating the impression that a scientific debate trumps cultural standards, and consider cultural norms and biases.

 

Recent Videos
Although high grade adverse effects are infrequent among patients undergoing treatment for SCLC, CRS and ICANS may occur in higher frequencies.
Two experts are featured in this series.
Co-hosts Kristie L. Kahl and Andrew Svonavec highlight what to look forward to at the 67th Annual ASH Meeting in Orlando.
4 experts are featured in this series.
Based on a patient’s SCLC subtype, and Schlafen 11 status, patients will be randomly assigned to receive durvalumab alone or with a targeted therapy in the S2409 PRISM trial.
4 experts are featured in this series.
Daniel Peters, MD, aims to reduce the toxicity associated with AML treatments while also improving therapeutic outcomes.
Numerous clinical trials vindicating the addition of immunotherapy to first-line chemotherapy in SCLC have emerged over the last several years.
Patients with AML will experience different toxicities based on the treatment they receive, whether it is intensive chemotherapy or targeted therapy.
A younger patient with AML who is more fit may be eligible for different treatments than an older patient with chronic medical conditions.
Related Content