George W. Bush Couldn’t Convince Americans to Get Vaccinated. Trump May Do Even Worse.

The stakes around vaccine messaging in 2020 are a lot higher than they were in 2002.

Mother Jones illustration; Michal Dolezal/CTK/AP; Evan Vucci/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

The threat of a terrible disease loomed, and the race was on to vaccinate Americans. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infection Diseases, warned that the Republican administration had to act responsibly and credibly. ā€œThe need to be forthcoming is of particular importance,ā€ he cautioned. “Because the population feels powerless, it must rely heavily on the deliberations and decisions of government leaders.”

The year was 2002. The nation was reeling from the 9/11 attacks the year before, and the Bush administration sought to prove its mettle by rooting out the threats around the world. Most of us remember the fruitless search for weapons of mass destruction. Fewer recall another quixotic attempt to protect the nation against terrorism: the campaign to vaccinate Americans against smallpox, a disease that kills 30 percent of people who contract it. Early in 2002, the Bush administration identified a smallpox bioterror attack as a likely threat. Congress sent scientists into overdrive to revive a 40-year-old vaccine. The immunization was far from perfect: It could cause a fever in as many as a third of the people who got the shot and severe complications, like inflammation of the heart, in a much smaller number. One or two out of a million people would die.

Public health officials knew it would be a tough sell. Weighing the relatively small chance of a smallpox bioterror attack against the significant risks of the vaccine itself, an expert panel recommended that the president push to vaccinate only 500,000 frontline medical workers, rather than the entire American population. But the Bush administration defied that advice and aimed bigger: It announced a goal of vaccinating the half a million medical workers first, and eventually at least 10 million Americans from the general public. To reassure the nation about the safety of the vaccine, President George W. Bush took the first dose himself. ā€œThe president feels fine,ā€ a White House spokeswoman triumphantly announced later that day. Administration officials believed that his example would be enough to convince Americans to get vaccinated in droves.

But as soon as the program launched, news of uncomfortable side effects began to spread. Many people who got the shot felt sick enough the next day that they had to miss work. Others had severe arm pain. “I just wanted to go to bed for a day or two there,” one 24-year-old graduate student who received the vaccine told the Washington Post. “I thought, ‘Can you just chop off my arm?'” These reactions came as a shock, the patients said: No one had warned them this could happen. 

By 2004, just 39,213 first responders had been vaccinatedā€”less than 10 percent of the presidentā€™s goalā€”along with a negligible share of the general public. The reasons for the underwhelming turnout, a 2005 report by the Institute of Medicine found, were failures of both leadership and communication. The president had ignored advice from the experts, and the White House never explained its recommendations. Rather, the governmentā€™s messaging around the vaccine was confusing and inconsistent. Officials never provided clear information on who was at greatest risk for severe reactions from the shot, what patients should do if a reaction occurred, or how individuals and families would be compensated if something went seriously wrong.

Whatā€™s more, the report found, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the agency tasked with implementing the vaccination plan and explaining it to the public, “seemed constrained by unknown external influences.ā€ A later report elaborated that it ā€œbecame apparent that security-related constraints were placed on CDC’s ability to communicate with key constituencies.” Some Americans came to believe that the vaccine program was a hasty political stunt performed by a president obsessed with proving to the nation that he had won the war on terror.

Sometime in the next year, when a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available, the government will roll out the largest immunization campaign in history. Public health officials fear that unless the Trump administration learns from those past mistakes, a similar scenario could unfold, but with far more dire consequences.

In July, a group of epidemiologists from the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security published a report finding that Americans already see the COVID-19 vaccine project as a rush-jobā€”part of a last-ditch effort by Trump to turn around his abysmal polling numbers before the election. In June, prominent vaccine scientist Paul Offit and bioethicist Ezekiel Emanuel wrote an op-ed in the New York Times titled ā€œCould Trump Turn a Vaccine Into a Campaign Stunt?ā€ The answer, the authors said, was yes, and they laid out a scenario in which Trump administration officials ā€œbadger the [Food and Drug Administration] to permit use of the vaccineā€ before scientists are certain itā€™s safe. ā€œWe must be on alert to prevent [Trump] from corrupting the rigorous assessment of safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines in order to pull an October vaccine surprise to try to win re-election,ā€ they wrote. (Just this week, Russia hastily approved a new COVID-19 vaccine without proving its safety, raising concerns that President Vladimir Putin was making exactly the sort of political calculation that public health experts fear from Trump.)

But recent months have brought increased public pressure on the FDA to uphold safety standards, giving Offit and other public health experts more confidence that vaccines wonā€™t be compromised. ā€œThe president would have a hard time circumventing those processes,ā€ said Peter Hotez, a vaccinologist at Baylor College of Medicine. ā€œThe scientific community has a much bigger voice now than we’ve had in the past, especially on the cable news networks and in the media.ā€ Last week, Sens. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Mike Braun (R-Ind.), and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) introduced legislation that it would require pharmaceutical companies and the federal government to share more data about vaccinesā€™ safety and efficacy. Saad Omer, a Yale University epidemiologist and expert on vaccine safety, said he found the increasing calls for transparency ā€œreassuring.ā€ 

The American public, however, is a different story. The damage to public trust in the COVID-19 vaccine may already be done. A Gallup poll last week found that Americans are so worried about the safety of the coronavirus vaccine that one in three plan not to get it. In an AP poll in May, half of respondents said they planned to forgo the shot. Offit believes that the language the White House has used to describe the vaccine development process is partly to blame. ā€œThe race for a vaccine, ā€˜Operation Warp Speedā€™ā€”it does feel like it’s being done in a rushed manner that doesn’t allow you to do what you would normally do, which actually isn’t true,ā€ he said. Hotez, who wrote a book about the damaging campaigns mounted by vaccine skeptics, said he has watched in horror as more Americans have expressed doubts about vaccines in recent months. He worries that the anti-vaccination movement could move from the fringe to the mainstream. ā€œRather than it going into retreat with COVID-19, as one might expect, it’s actually been enabled by the lack of communication, or miscommunication, coming out of the White House,ā€ he said.

If public wariness of COVID-19 vaccines persists, it wonā€™t matter how safe and effective the shots areā€”the project of vaccinating Americans could fail as miserably as the smallpox campaign did, only this time on a much grander scale. In order to avoid repeating those missteps, the government will have to level with Americans. The experts I spoke to all agreed that messaging must begin before a COVID-19 vaccine is approved. A first step, said Omer, might be for public health officials to describe exactly how vaccine developers can speed up the process without compromising safety. Americans should know, for example, that COVID-19 vaccine candidates will go through the same, three-phase trial process as any other vaccine.

The messengers of vaccine information may be as important as the message itself. Because evidence suggests that most Americans trust their doctors, physicians will likely play a key role in disseminating vaccine information. In its guidelines for communicating about vaccine safety, the World Health Organization recommends that doctors ā€œbe well informed and confident in their own minds about these issuesā€ so they can clearly explain the risks and benefits to their patients. A recent report on COVID-19 vaccine communication from the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security emphasized that doctors and public health officials will also have to tailor their messages to the communities they serve. For example, while African Americans have suffered disproportionately from COVID-19, the AP poll found that just a quarter of Black Americans would trust a vaccine.

The worst thing the White House could do, Hotez said, would be to overstate the effectiveness of the vaccine. Thatā€™s because, at least at first, it probably wonā€™t be a silver bullet.  ā€œPeople like [White House trade adviser] Peter Navarro always tend to veer towards magical thinkingā€”we’re going to hydroxychloroquine our way out of it, or we’ll vaccinate our way out of itā€”and that’s not the way it works,ā€ said Hotez. Rather, the first vaccines will be more like an additional layer of protection: Weā€™ll likely still have to wear masks and avoid crowds. Offit, who believes the first vaccines probably wonā€™t be more than 75 percent effective, worries that ā€œpeople will get the vaccine and think ā€˜great, I don’t need to wear a mask,ā€™ when they probably still do.ā€ Omer, who is more bullish on the prospect of life returning to normal after a vaccine, warns that even if the vaccine itself is highly effective, distribution will take months, maybe longer. ā€œEven with a solid vaccine, weā€™d have to keep some measures in place during that period,ā€ he said.

In a 2002 commentary on the smallpox vaccination campaign in the New England Journal of Medicine, Fauci wrote, ā€œThe general public must understand the decision-making process as well as the rationale behind decisions that may affect their health and their lives.ā€ Of all the advice that Fauci has offered the White House over the years, this 18-year-old pearl might be the most important. Letā€™s hope that this time around, someone listens. 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate