From monumental as it was at the start of the vaccination campaign, the obstacle narrowed as it intensified;
It must nevertheless be recognized that hostility to the vaccine persists among a marginal but not insignificant fringe of French society.
Admittedly, the intermediary of general practitioners has been able to remove barriers;
of course also, the end of the logistical hiccups has increased confidence and cut the whistle to certain bad tongues on social networks.
The fact remains that two in ten French people still refuse to be vaccinated, and that apart from the threat of an obligation to vaccinate (which perhaps does not help matters), they remain difficult to convince.
How to overcome the last recalcitrant?
Read also: Covid-19: but where have the antivaxes gone?
Among them in reality, the
diehard
"
antivax
" are not legion. "
Hesitation is not always synonymous with refusal or resistance
", argue researchers Anne-Marie Moulin (doctor and philosopher, emeritus research director at the CNRS) and Gaëtan Thomas (historian of medicine and science, postdoctoral fellow at Sciences Po), in an article published in
La vie des idées
. This is confirmed by Laure Millet, head of the Health Program at the Institut Montaigne: “
I situate vaccine hesitancy apart from the movement of mistrust hostile to vaccines. For most of these people, it is not a question of opposing an injection on principle, but rather of a need to take a step back and wait for guarantees.
"
A "
traditional
"
vaccine
However, among the main concerns raised by Internet users hesitating to be vaccinated, and whose comments have been scrutinized for months by the firm Bloom Social Analytics, messenger RNA technology has crystallized a large part of the reluctance.
Consequently, the arrival on the market of a “traditional” vaccine, the one developed by Sanofi and which could be developed from December, offers a reassuring alternative.
Triumphant, the teams of the French giant (world leader in influenza vaccine) do not shy away from their pleasure in finally taking their revenge, after the bad press earned them by the delay in developing the vaccine. By announcing on July 5 an availability from December, the president of Sanofi Olivier Bogillot praised the merits of a
"proven technology
that has been used for a few years
", carefully recalling that it is already present in the vaccine against the flu, which does not crystallize so much mistrust.
Message received five out of five: Commenting on this ad, an Internet user wrote on Twitter that one "
can admit one thing with intellectual honesty, the Sanofi vaccine has two things that mRNA vaccines do not have: hindsight on the technology used since decades, and the vaccine does not come out in a rush which gives a lot more confidence
”. An argument to which Nicolas Kressmann, in charge of media relations within the group, resorts to Le Figaro: "
This technology has been around for a long time and it is normal that it is reassuring, since it offers an alternative to new technologies that have emerged with the pandemic, such as messenger RNA or adenovirus.
The vaccine we are combining is based on recombinant protein technology, its results are promising and above all it is historically known in terms of safety, which will probably reassure patients.
"
Read also: Anti-Covid vaccines: what are the differences between Sanofi's “recombinant proteins” and messenger RNA?
By contrast, the mistrust aroused by mRNA technology among some of the hesitant therefore promotes confidence in a vaccine considered to be more “
traditional
”.
“
I won't get vaccinated with this experimental RNA thing for such a mildly lethal disease.
It's crisp and clear.
I am waiting to see the vaccine developed by Sanofi with recombinant protein which reassures me more.
If it is to be anti-tax, great good for you ...
»comments this other Internet user.
"
The brand effect
"
In addition to the technology, it is paradoxically its delay that further strengthens the confidence of some French people in the Sanofi vaccine: although it followed exactly the same protocol as the other vaccines for the conduct of clinical studies prior to its (possible) marketing authorization, the duration of its development is perceived by some as a guarantee of seriousness. "It reassures me, in this rush, to know that @sanofi does not botch his studies, does not choose his targets for better commercial brochures but better results on our most fragile" tweets a political leader of the Debout la France movement.
For health economist Nathalie Coulet, the “
brand effect
” also plays a big role in the representations of patients. “
It is a laboratory that they know, unlike Pfizer, which really made a name for itself in France with the health crisis; while Sanofi, it is they who produce Doliprane. Moreover, this one is made in China and not in France, so it is not so much the 'made in France' argument as it really is the confidence inspired by the brand that can play a role. All the more so since the Sanofi vaccine offers an honorable way out for those who have so far refused other vaccines, in the event of compulsory vaccination. Finally, on condition of not arriving too late ...
”.
The “
cocorico
”
argument
is not to be neglected either: in the comments of Internet users, it also comes back, as in this publication where one of them explains: “
I am still not vaccinated. , I am impatiently awaiting the Sanofi vaccine, I only trust French vaccines! Pasteur is in France, it is with us, all my confidence in them!
".
