Populism and health. An evaluation of the effects of right-wing populism on the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil

Populism and medical advocacy: The case of hydroxychloroquine prior the 2020 United States presidential election

Leading up to the 2020 U.S. presidential elections, the scientific consensus on hydroxychloroquine's ineffectiveness in treating COVID-19 was dismissed by Executive branch scientists, who promoted it as both a therapeutic solution and a political tool. This article examines how experimental pharmaceuticals were rationalized even before the pandemic declaration, aligning with medical advocacy groups linked to Donald Trump, who criticized the crisis management capacity of existing health institutions. Framing the emergency as requiring extraordinary measures, White House researchers advocated for executive unilateralism and eventually sought to securitize public health by replacing key health authorities with operational medicine specialists. The most controversial case involved an attempt of planned pharmaceutical intervention aimed at saving lives and restoring public confidence in the administration's pandemic response before the 2020 election. The article draws on confidential documents released by the 2022 House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis.

Investigating the 'Bolsonaro effect' on the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic: An empirical analysis of observational data in Brazil

Brazil counts among the countries the hardest hit by the Covid-19 pandemic. A great deal has been said about the negative role played by President Bolsonaro's denialism, but relatively few studies have attempted to measure precisely what impact it actually had on the pandemic. Our paper conducts econometric estimates based on observational data at municipal level to quantitatively assess the 'Bolsonaro effect' over time from March 2020 to December 2022. To our knowledge, this paper presents the most comprehensive investigation of Bolsonaro's influence in the spread of the pandemic from two angles: considering Covid-19 mortality and two key transmission mitigation channels (social distancing and vaccination); and exploring the full pandemic cycle (2020-2022) and its dynamics over time. Controlling for a rich set of relevant variables, our results find a strong and persistent 'Bolsonaro effect' on the death rate: municipalities that were more pro-Bolsonaro recorded significantly more fatalities. Furthermore, evidence suggests that the president's attitude and decisions negatively influenced the population's behaviour. Firstly, pro-Bolsonaro municipalities presented a lower level of compliance with social distancing measures. Secondly, vaccination was relatively less widespread in places more in favour of the former president. Finally, our analysis points to longer-lasting and damaging repercussions. Regression results are consistent with the hypothesis that the 'Bolsonaro effect' impacted not only on Covid-19 vaccination, but has affected vaccination campaigns in general thereby jeopardizing the historical success of the National Immunization Program in Brazil.

Health emergencies, science contrarianism and populism: A scoping review

Populism has emerged as a central explanation employed by both media outlets and scholars for the mishandling of the COVID-19 crisis. Nonetheless, the relationship between public health and populism extends before and beyond the pandemic. This paper offers a comprehensive overview of existing evidence and theoretical conceptualisations on the intersection of populism, health emergencies, and contrarian scientific positions, drawing from a diverse range of disciplines. I conducted a scoping review of 283 original studies, analysing their analytical framework, geographic focuses, and methodological approaches. Employing quantitative text analysis, I summarised the research field into 18 common topics, organised into five coherent categories: citizen's perspective, political elites, political communication, pandemic consequences, and non-COVID-related issues. While the scholarly interest in this area has surged since the onset of the pandemic, it has predominantly concentrated on specific cases, such as Brazil and the US, often conflating different policy types. The evidence summary elucidates that populism assumes varying roles within distinct contexts, and there is no linear relationship between political populism and specific approaches to health crises and science. I further compare definitions of populism within the context of health and scientific positions. I propose that future research should employ a policy typology for health emergency responses, assessing political positions based on policy arenas. This paper contributes to the understanding of the complex interplay between political populism, contrarian scientific perspectives, and public health.