It’s often claimed that imposing Covid passports, as many EU countries have done, reduces trust in the health authorities. After all, trying to force someone to doing something isn’t the best way to win their trust. Persuasion usually works better.
However, despite the intuitive plausibility of the idea, good evidence has been hard to come by. A new Danish study changes that. (The study was recently published online, and it hasn’t yet been peer reviewed.)
To examine the effect of Covid passports on trust in the health authorities, Frederik Jørgensen and colleagues analysed data from a repeated daily survey of the Danish population, which has been going since May of 2020.
Crucially, the survey continued throughout November of 2021, during which the Danish government re-introduced Covid passports. Note: the Danish “corona passport” serves as evidence of vaccination or previous infection, so it does at least recognise natural immunity.
On 8th November, the Government held a press conference announcing this decision. During the press conference, Denmark’s Prime Minister explained that life would become “more burdensome” for the unvaccinated, whom he referred to as “a small group that does not play according to the rules”.
The researchers tracked two outcome measures over the weeks before and after the 8th November press conference. The first was simply whether one agreed with the statement, “I trust the political strategy behind the health authorities’ advice.”
The second was based on six statements, including the one above. The other five statements included, “I have been given clear information on the reasons for the health authorities’ advice,” and “The advice of the health authorities are sufficient to prevent the spread of infection.” This composite measure was labelled “collective action motivation”.
The authors main finding is shown in the chart below. It’s important to note that the press conference was held on the first day of week 45.
The interpretation is slightly complicated, so bear with me. Each circle (and associated confidence interval) corresponds to the difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated people relative to the benchmark week, which is week 41.
For example, the black circle for week 44 (which is almost exactly on the red zero line) indicates that the difference in trust between vaccinated and unvaccinated people in week 44 was the same as it was in week 41. Units along the y-axis are percentage points.
The key thing to notice is that the circles for weeks 45 and 46 are all below the red zero line. This indicates that the difference in trust between vaccinated and unvaccinated people became significantly larger after the 8th November press conference, with unvaccinated people becoming even less trusting than they were before.
Jørgensen and colleagues’ finding constitutes particularly strong evidence that Covid passports are bad for trust sinces it combines a between-group comparison (vaccinated versus unvaccinated) with a before-after comparison (pre versus post press conference). The size of the effect is between 7 and 13 percentage points, depending on the measure.
Denmark is known to be one of the world’s most trusting countries. And in those characterised by less social trust, the researchers note, “adverse consequences of pressuring unvaccinated may be even more negative”.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
critique the government and get cancelled, this is respecting democracy how?
Yup it is open for a wide range of interpretation. Just like the (abuse of) Public Health Act 1984.
Those reasons include: “the interests of national security”, furthering the “foreign policy objectives of the Government”, promoting “compliance with international humanitarian law”, promoting “respect for democracy, the rule of law and good governance” and “for the purposes of compliance with a UN obligation”.
Just which of the above have the British government complied with these last two and half years?
Ok, perhaps “compliance with a UN obligation” – no surprise there.
As I keep repeating, switch any government pronouncements completely and you will be closer to the truth.
“respect for democracy and the rule of law?” – oh do ferk off you lying barstewards.
Tyrants throughout the ages use essentially the same language, and they share the same hypocrisy: “national security” means their security; “humanitarian” means anything they like.
But the outright and unabashed lying comes out with “respect for democracy, the rule of law and good governance”. Who, in their right mind, believes this? Are they laughing at us?
Sadly AE I believe the wannabee powers that be are now emboldened by the ease with which they have beaten down and infantilised the Western populations. So yes, they are laughing at us.
Yes – I think that’s the great danger we face.
People were beaten down and infantilised with an ease I think most of us here found shocking, but that tyrants (big and small) found enthralling.
We saw an explosion of self-righteous bullying. There are people who love their new normal, and they serve as the troops on the ground and the thought police.
The tyrants they serve will now push until we resist. We have to have our red line, and fight this – or abandon lives worth living.
Who will ever forget MattHancock laughing at us along with Piers Morgan? The problem with these people is they never learned or understood history.
“compliance with a UN obligation” is perhaps the most disturbing.
If the Paris Climate Accord is a UN obligation is the government now calling for any website that contains anything that could be classed as promoting a climate sceptic view to be blocked?
Somebody should invent and launch “Internet v2”, a place where none of this bollocks ever applies
It’s being done right now.
the Russia situation is being used in the UK as the patriot act is being used in the US, the patriot act was sold as a temp measure in 2001 after 9/11, its still on the books 21 yrs later. Same here, use the current situation to force through vague laws and regulations and then use them however you like.
“And who is a “designated person”? It is simply somebody designated by the Secretary of State as being on the Russia sanctions list”.
imagine how that will work in say “election time” “oh look, this info that we don’t like is coming from erm, russia, better block it”
Russia interfered in the elections, look 49 people from the CIA said Biden’s laptop is Russian misinformation…
Tell me, Boris, is the pandemic treaty a step towards World Government?
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/tell-me-boris-is-the-pandemic-treaty-a-step-towards-world-government/
Dr Deborah Ancell
Stand for freedom with our Yellow Boards By The Road next events
Saturday 28th May 3pm to 5pm
Yellow Boards LONDON
Junction Buckingham Palace Road/Victoria St,
London SW1E 5LB
Stand in the Park Sundays from 10am – make friends & keep sane
Wokingham
Howard Palmer Gardens
Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park, Rear Lawn, RG12 7PA
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
I’m certainly noticing ‘access denied’ on an increasing number of sites.
TCW Conservative Woman is still being blocked by Three 4G, after 2 weeks.
I hope LS stays with this, just at GB News is also exposing this silent insurrection.
Perhaps DS.org could earn money suggesting a VPN supplier to work around state censorship?
just use the Opera browser – it has a built in, free VPN
It’s not a full VPN and records your activity.
I use Private Internet Access (PIA) https://tinyurl.com/y357tyr6
Importantly, it does not hold records of your internet activity as many do, so it can never be compelled to hand them over.
It’s also dead easy to use and almost invisible.
Snap. And I use for the same reasons.
All I’d add is PIA makes it easy to switch locales. If for some reason you need pretend to be in Luxembourg you can do so. Or Ukraine, lol.
Another advantage of Opera is that it was designed with security in mind – so all the defaults are set high…
Surprised GBNews hasn’t got Ofcomcensored for this!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iExn7ogxWrs
Research suggests mRNA all-cause mortality rate is higher: Professor Christine Stabell Benn explains
The same government banning websites on the grounds of national security are welcoming in hoards of foreign nationals whom we know nothing about. Except the origins of those immigrants and the volumes means few will integrate in any meaningful way. A significant threat to national cohesion never mind national security.
Our world is a farce.
we know most of them are lying!
mangled after speelcheque
“Except the origins of those immigrants”
Most migrants are lying about origin, age and status. As soon as they get the paperwork, they often return home. Often the place they claimed they were at risk if they had not left.
I meant in the broader, cultural sense. As in, not like us. There is no greater longterm threat to our ability to hold the nation together.
And not enough return home.
I think some lads should Get together and descend on that Yorkshire village. Democracy is dead. I saw the GB News interview. If the villagers just get ignored in Parliament, well, there needs to be ‘other’ methods.
If you ‘get together’ the military will be called in to suppress a ‘right-wing terrorist plot’,,,,
If there is anyone out there who resents HM “government” censorship.
Yandex. Good luck censoring that.
I’d never heard of it before the delightful Liz Truss caused me to look.
We can expect to see the WWF (World Wildlife Fund) added to this list for torture, murder and gun running can we?
Translation note for Brits: when Tucker talks about “liberals” he means leftists, not anti-authoritarians, and NPR is a bit like the BBC. When he talks about “the American middle class” he’s talking about what we would probably term working and lower middle classes.
Tucker: This should make you nervous
watch Mary Poppins.
The middle classes could afford to employ full time servants…
Using this “formula” How many people are middle class nowadays?
very few.
While the everyone is distracted by daily life, our governments grab power that allows it to act arbitrarily against us.
It’s been happening for a long time. Now it’s just getting very creepy, because there is barely any self restraint any more.
In that sense the government reflects the people. Very little restraint there either.
People are voluntarily distracted. I’ve tried to discuss the basics of covid responses and vaccines with people around me. Total indifference.
Most people hate thinking. They’ll happily outsource it.
Maajid Nawas…Permium meat is Wagyu. The cow is pampered until it is slaughtered. If you see but cannot perceive, step aside so that those that are awake may fight this enemy for you.
That is why right now in the US, despite that horrible shooting, they need to defend their 2nd amendment. Biden would be only too happy to part people with Arms. Then, Canada or Shanghai here we come.
US citizens do need to defend the 2nd amendment, otherwise, if that can be altered then so can the rest of the constitution. You can imagine the politicians like biden going, “well you don’t need the first amendment, whats that? yes I would be quite happy to get rid of the 4th amendment” etc etc.
“…promoting “respect for democracy, the rule of law and good governance”
By that token, the websites and social media of virtually every politician in the country would be blocked
Unlike in WW2, when the British government decided NOT to ban Lord Haw-Haw because doing so would make a mockery of Britain’s commitment to democratic principles. The Nazis, on the other hand, banned Germans from listening to BBC & US broadcasts and penalties were severe. My parents told me the family would just laugh when they tuned into Lord Haw-Haw before retuning to the BBC.
And what about the BBC? This quote from an article in The Conversation (written by the excellent Tim Luckhurst from Durham University): “The solution was not censorship but a determined effort to raise the entertainment value of BBC radio. Lord Haw-Haw played a part in shifting the BBC away from its policy of ignoring popular preferences to an understanding that “the barometer of listeners’ preferences” should help to define its output.”
I fell about laughing. The BBC in its current awful form could learn a lot from history!
Like the main political parties, the BBC has long since been hijacked. They still have to maintain appearances and pretend these institutions are fans of democracy and balance. But not for much longer.
The same kinds of people run the schools and the kids are being conditioned to reject democratic norms like free speech.
Look at the universities for what our future will look like. Fewer statues, less free speech, the condemnation of anyone who challenges orthodoxy. There is an authoritarian generation coming who will embrace slavery for themselves and us all.
I agree that these regulations are excessively censoring and restrictive. On the other hand they are being imposed extremely laxly, it is very easy to stream RT in the UK.
Most importantly they bear no relationship whatsoever to the level of extreme state-enforced silencing which takes place in e.g. Russia itself, including imprisonment for up to fifteen years for even questioning the invasion of Ukraine; and a long and extensive history of both internment and assassinations of any major dissenting political or journalistic figures.
It is vitally important to recognise the benefits of liberal democracy (which includes the right to challenge and ultimately overthrow these current restrictions) rather than let them fall by default.
Well I suppose that’s a “liberal” interpretation of the onslaught of tyranny.
One of the main propagandist tools that genuinely tyrannical ideologies and agendas use to undermine then overthrow multi-party liberal democracy is to claim that the proclaimed benefits are a sham, that there is no genuine freedom, voting is pointless due to actual control by unelected ‘elites’ etc.
So do you believe that there is more or less freedom of speech, democratic control, freedom from oppression (including threat of imprisonment or worse for expressing political views) in the UK or Russia?
If the latter please point me to the equivalent of this site based in the Russian Federation (just by way of example).
They’ll get their comeuppance when we get a Labour government and they block the Tory party for being “far right”.
‘UN Obligation…’
This would be the same UN that has China and Russia as permanent members of the Security Council and threw out founding member Taiwan?
And exactly how are they going to prevent me from logging into my vpn, typing ‘rt.com’ and reading Russia Today? I did just that a few seconds ago and there was no problem at all. Incidentally, I didn’t spend much time on the site but whilst I was there saw nothing that was blatant propaganda or any ‘anti Ukrainian rants’.
it’s a bit annoying that RT aren’t obviously biased … when the Biased Brainwashing Cult is.
Basically my whole conceptual model of a biased USSR media and “impartial honest” BBC, has now been totally turned on its head.
Give it a couple of months and the only thing available online will be the BBC showing Boris’ latest pandemic declaration on loop and youtube kitten videos.
RT is available through Rumble:
https://rumble.com/user/RTnews
However, it’s not exactly the most thrilling read and I am hoping the UK government stop behaving like spoilt children and grow up, so I don’t have to keep watching it … although to be truthful there’s the odd article on some obscure subject that usually grabs my attention.
Quis custodiet diet ipsos custodes?
Stop pussy footing around: our goverment and opposition, entire political/media/ngo/quango class are fascists. This has been evolving since 1997. Go read my old stuff about internet censorship on commentisfree.
So fascistic that you can freely publish unlimited amounts of material calling them fascists…
Have you ever tried doing the same thing in Russia or China?
We should hear the Russian view of what is happening in Ukraine and Russia. We should be making more effort to make our view of those things heard in Russia. The Russian people are not in favour of Putin’s despotic behavior but they only hear about it from his side, so how can we blame them for supporting the way he is indescriminatedly killing people, because they don’t believe it is happening. We should not discriminate against people just because they are Russian. If Russians come here or other western countries, they will have the opportunity to hear both sides of the situation and balance both sides propaganda output.
This is truly shocking. Thanks goodness for VPN connections. Most don’t have them though and will just assume the sites are dead. This is really, really bad.