Despite overall high vaccination rates among the mentally ill, those unmedicated or with substance issues lag behind, pointing to the need for improved health strategies.
In a large multinational study led by researchers at Karolinska Institutet and published today (September 26) in Nature Communications, researchers analyzed data from seven studies in five countries (Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Estonia, and Scotland) as part of the COVIDMENT consortium, totaling just over 325,000 individuals, and registry data from Sweden including over 8 million individuals.
Vaccination Rates Among Individuals With Mental Illness
The pooled analysis from the COVIDMENT cohort showed that 85 percent of individuals were vaccinated with the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (until September 30, 2021). There was no statistically significant difference in vaccination levels in people with or without a mental illness diagnosis, or with or without anxiety or depressive symptoms.
“The high vaccination coverage among most individuals with mental illness shows that the COVID-19 vaccination campaign has been successful,” says lead author Mary Barker, postdoctoral researcher at the Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet.
Challenges in Vaccination Uptake
However, Swedish registry data revealed that individuals diagnosed with a mental illness who did not have any dispensed prescription of medication for their mental illness were 9 percent less likely to receive the first dose of the vaccine. Moreover, individuals with substance use disorder were 16 percent less likely to be vaccinated.
“More research is needed to explore the reasons behind these associations in order to improve current and future vaccination strategies and ultimately ensure equitable protection against infectious diseases,” says Mary Barker. “As individuals with mental illness are at higher risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes, high vaccination coverage is especially important in this group.”
Reference: “Mental illness and COVID-19 vaccination: a multinational investigation of observational & register-based data” by Mary M. Barker, Kadri Kõiv, Ingibjörg Magnúsdóttir, Hannah Milbourn, Bin Wang, Xinkai Du, Gillian Murphy, Eva Herweijer, Elísabet U. Gísladóttir, Huiqi Li, Anikó Lovik, Anna K. Kähler, Archie Campbell, Maria Feychting, Arna Hauksdóttir, Emily E. Joyce, Edda Bjork Thordardottir, Emma M. Frans, Asle Hoffart, Reedik Mägi, Gunnar Tómasson, Kristjana Ásbjörnsdóttir, Jóhanna Jakobsdóttir, Ole A. Andreassen, Patrick F. Sullivan, Sverre Urnes Johnson, Thor Aspelund, Ragnhild Eek Brandlistuen, Helga Ask, Daniel L. McCartney, Omid V. Ebrahimi, Kelli Lehto, Unnur A. Valdimarsdóttir, Fredrik Nyberg and Fang Fang, 26 September 2024, Nature Communications.
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-52342-1
The research was financed by NordForsk, EU’s Horizon 2020 program, the Swedish Research Council for Health, Working Life and Welfare, the Swedish Research Council, the Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning, the Estonian Research Council, and the Research Council of Norway. Some of the authors have listed potential conflicts of interest, including honoraria from and shareholdings in pharmaceutical companies. See the scientific article for more information.
Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
5 Comments
—-Despite overall high vaccination rates among the mentally ill
Suggesting there is a generic “the” mentally ill misleads.
Harold A Maio
“Some of the authors have listed potential conflicts of interest, including honoraria from and shareholdings in pharmaceutical companies.” That’s what’s behind this. They want more money.
No mention of vaccine side-effects, or proof that the unvaccinated people they want to vaccinate had worse outcomes from COVID. Apparently, they survived, despite not being vaccinated. The problem does not seem to be driven by disease caused by their lack of vaccination; the problem seems to simply be that they avoided vaccination. For the vaccine-obsessed medical community, not getting vaccinated or obeying medical orders is the worst outcome of all. It challenges their authority and control.
Challenge authority and control?
So, to benefit greed, vaccinate less, infect more? Mandate vaccinations? Or isolate the infected by mandate? Does man have an inalienable right to take his own life by right to reject protection? If so, does the same person have the right to infect others, potentially killing them also?
The “vaccine” didn’t protect anybody and it didn’t stop the spread. And neither did the lockdowns. So, what’s your point? Fascism for the sake of your paranioa?
How about directing your frustration at the bastards that concocted the virus in the first place, instead of at the ones who got infected, and who were also the victims of it themselves?
In the last two decades, the Pfizer company has paid over 12 billion (!) dollars in penalties for crimes like false advertising and bribing medical professionals. They also worked out a deal with the government that they’ll be immune from any liabilty for side-effects of the COVID “vaccine”.
In light of those verifiable facts, I’d argue that if you take their “vaccine”, just becuase they said it’s “safe and effective”, it’s you who needs to have your head examined.