Who are the “Real” Experts? The Debate Surrounding COVID-19 Health Risk Management: An Israeli Case Study

Abstract

Background The uncertainty surrounding the COVID-19 crisis and the different approaches taken to manage it have triggered scientific controversies among experts. This study seeks to examine how the fragile nature of Israeli democracy accommodated differences of opinion between experts during the COVID-19 crisis. Objective To map and analyze the discourse between experts surrounding issues that were the topic of scientific controversy. To examine the viewpoints of the public regarding the positions of the different experts. Methods and Sample A sequential mixed study design. The qualitative research was a discourse analysis of 435 items that entailed mapping the voices of different experts regarding controversial topics. In the quantitative study, a total of 924 participants answered a questionnaire examining topics that engendered differences of opinion between the experts. Results The results showed that there was no dialogue between opposition and coalition experts. Moreover, the coalition experts labeled the experts who criticized them as “coronavirus deniers” and “anti-vaxxers.” The coalition changed its opinion on one issue only—the issue of lockdowns. When we asked the public how they see the scientific controversy between the coalition and the opposition experts, they expressed support for opposition policies on matters related to the implications of the lockdowns and to transparency, while supporting government policy mainly on topics related to vaccinations. The research findings also indicate that personal and socio-demographic variables can influence how the public responds to the debate between experts. The main differentiating variables were the personal attribute of conservatism, locus of control, age, and nationality. Conclusion Controversy must be encouraged to prevent misconceptions. The internal discourse in the committees that advise the government must be transparent, and coalition experts must be consistently exposed to the views of opposition experts, who must be free to voice their views without fear.

How to Make Health and Risk Communication on Social Media More “Social” During COVID-19

“…Furthermore, epidemiological crises are often marked by ego conflicts between experts from the various fields. See, for example, the disagreements among the various experts during the COVID-19 crisis, as exemplified in our research, 150 such that each expert thinks he or she represents “pure science”, which is of course erroneous. Indeed, when science is associated with lifestyle, politics and values assume a central role.…”

Physicians' Perspective on Vaccine-Hesitancy at the Beginning of Israel's COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign and Public's Perceptions of Physicians' Knowledge When Recommending the Vaccine to Their Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study

“…In a study that examined the scientific discourse in Israel at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, we found that there was no dialogue between opposition and coalition experts. Moreover, the coalition experts labeled the experts who criticized them as “coronavirus deniers” and “anti-vaxxers” ( 62 ). During the vaccination campaign in Israel, the health system rejected criticism from opposition experts in several ways: It refused to engage in discourse with opposition experts ( 90 ).…”

“…Each of these groups has an additional explanatory variable. Among those who are conservative, the additional explanatory variable is age, such that those age 45 and above show more support for the government, while those age 44 and younger give more support to the opposition's positions ( 62 ).…”

“…The debate between various experts concerning what public policies should be adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., lockdowns, wearing masks, testing for symptoms and vaccinations) has exposed the depth of the conflict ( 62 ) between experts representing government ministries in Israel and experts who are critical of government policy. Today in Israel we see evidence that the discourse on vaccination policy in the medical community is being silenced, in particular the deliberate silencing of physicians who have spoken out against the establishment ( 63 ).…”

Socio-demographic characteristics and their relation to medical service consumption among elderly in Israel during the COVID-19 lockdown in 2020 compared to the corresponding period in 2019

“…The elderly were instructed not to come into work but to work remotely as much as possible, to use delivery services or family members for food and medication purchases and to avoid any unnecessary meetings. It was shown that this age group strictly adhered to the guidelines compared to the general population [1], [4], [5].…”