Unethical Incentives – How vaccine incentives are being used to influence the Moveable Middle

BY SIMONE J. SMITH

“The Government of Canada is planning to use influencers for various campaigns to help connect Health Canada and PHAC messages to specific audiences within the Canadian population.” André Gagnon

How do I start this?

Hmmmm!

Well, I guess I have to just start with the truth; once again my fellow Canadians, we are being duped by our government, and the forces that are standing behind them.

It is actually very frustrating watching this happen to the people in my country and my global community. What is being done around the world goes against every human right that we have as free-minded people, and it is being done without regard. This week I am going to break the psychology down for you, give you some examples, and provide you with proof that the people who we think have our best interest at heart do not.

Do you know why you do what you do? Are you aware of the forces behind your actions? Do you get up and meditate each day because you know it’s good for you, or is it because of some type of external reward? There are many different reasons why people do things: some are motivated to act because of internal desires, but other times external rewards are the true motivators.

Well, there’s a lot of research that’s been done to discover what will motivate those who are now being classed as vaccine hesitant. The entities that are marketing this vaccine are no longer going after those who are adamantly opposed to it, no; they are going for those people who are what they call the movable middle.

It has been admitted that a lot of time was spent last year testing different messages to encourage people to get a vaccine. Some of these messages were tested out during last fall’s flu season. It was discovered that messages that focus on a vaccine being reserved for you or waiting for you did better than others. Exclusivity is always a motivator to have something or do something.

There is a theory that emerged during the 1940’s and 1950’s called the incentive theory. It was built on the earlier drive theories established by psychologists such as Clark Hull. The incentive theory proposes that people are pulled toward behaviours that lead to rewards, and pushed away from actions that might lead to negative consequences. In many cases, external rewards can motivate you to do things that you might otherwise avoid, such as chores, work, and other tasks you find unpleasant.

Let’s take a look around the world, and see how governments, businesses, and organizations have used the incentive theory to convince their citizens to get one of the COVID-19 vaccines. Some of these incentives include: tax breaks, free airline tickets, and even million of dollars in lotteries.

Denmark
On Wednesday, the Denmark government announced it was partnering with a private company to develop a digital passport, which would allow travellers to bypass some restrictions by showing a trusted proof of inoculation. According to the Associated Press report, Acting Finance Minister Morten Boedskov stated that the program would be ready in several months and the government would discuss its use for non-travel reasons at a later point.

Germany
A German discount supermarket chain Lidl has allocated $200 to employees who complete their coronavirus vaccination regimen.

Brazil
According to Bloomberg News, JBS, a Brazilian meatpacking company and its subsidiary, Pilgrim Pride, promised to pay each worker at their U.S. operations $100 to get vaccinated.

Hong Kong
Property developers and philanthropic foundations in Hong Kong have teamed up to offer a one-bedroom apartment worth $1.4 million, as well as 20 cash prizes equal to $12,890, in a lottery open only to vaccinated residents.

$60,000 in airline tickets are being given away to city residents and airport employees who have been fully inoculated by the end of September.

At an HSBC bank in Hong Kong, employees are being offered a day off work per vaccine dose.

Philippines
The Straits Times reported that the mayor of a small town in the Ilocos Sur province is planning to raffle off a plot of land with a house in December, when he expects vaccines to be available for his community. Elsewhere in the country malls serving as vaccination sites are offering free parking and banana fritters.

United States of America
Instacart, Trader Joe’s, Amtrak, Aldi and Dollar General are among grocery and other companies in the United States offering various bonuses for employees who get vaccinated.

Most recently, Instacart stated that they will provide a bonus of $25 to workers who get inoculated. Dollar General, among others, will offer employees up to four hours of paid time to get both shots.

Canada
Canada has taken a two-pronged approach with their incentives. Not only are they offering many of the incentives that you see popping up in the United States (Krispy Kreme giveaways, lotteries, pizza, etc.), they are also finding ways to engage people in promoting the vaccine.

The Government of Canada is putting on one promotional incentive that I found. The application process challenges you to design, develop and carry out a community-driven information campaign to promote:

• Confidence in vaccination against COVID-19
• Continued compliance with public health measures

They want people to reach communities that are underserved or have been more greatly impacted by the pandemic and provide them with messaging that is:

• Targeted
• Informed
• Culturally sensitive

These communities may include, but are not limited to:

• Indigenous peoples
• Low-income Canadians
• People with disabilities
• Black and other racialized Canadians
• People with mental health challenges
• Immigrants and non-permanent residents
• People living in rural or remote communities
• Other underserved or especially hard-hit communities

The campaigns should show an understanding of their target audiences with respect to:

• Vaccine intentions
• Barriers to vaccination
• The effects and impacts of COVID-19
• Approaches and supports needed to reduce or help overcome barriers

A grand prizewinner will be selected and awarded a $100,000 grant to reinvest in support of the health of their community.

There are some ethical issues that come with some of these incentive programs that need to be exposed and explored. These programs do not address “persistent information gaps” that have proved a barrier for inoculation among populations, particularly marginalized groups, that have questions about the science or where to get the doses.

Another huge issue is one that cannot be understated; this goes completely against standard one of the Nuremberg Code of 1947. The war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg laid down the ten standards, and they are considered the ethical way for experiments to be carried out on humans worldwide.

Special Note

Before we go over standard one, I want you to be aware of one very important aspect of this situation; we are all involved in an experiment, and the moment you accept one of the incentives being pushed at you, you then give your consent to be part of this experiment.

On the National Institute of Health’s website, there is a section that goes through the ten standards, but I really want you to have a full understanding of this one.

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.

This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.

This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.

The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility, which may not be delegated to another with impunity.

I want to close by saying this; if this were something that was truly good for us, they would not need to use psychological tricks, incentives, or any other external motivations for us to take it.

Really think about it.