Risk Compensation and COVID-19 Vaccines
Authors: Brit Trogen, Arthur Caplan
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (2021)

Ideas and Opinions2 March 2021Risk Compensation and COVID-19 VaccinesFREEBrit Trogen, MD, MS and Arthur Caplan, PhDBrit Trogen, MD, MSNYU Langone Health, New York, New York (B.T., A.C.).Search for more papers by this author and Arthur Caplan, PhDNYU Langone Health, New York, New York (B.T., A.C.).Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/M20-8251 SectionsAboutVisual AbstractPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Throughout the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the world has become intimately familiar with the concept of “risk compensation.” In situations that are perceived as risky, people naturally adjust their behavior, compensating to minimize that risk (1). From the start, those who perceived the novel coronavirus as threatening would, in most cases, wear masks, wash their hands, and avoid large crowds as cases began to surge. But the effects of risk compensation tend to fade over time as the novelty of a threat wears off (1). For COVID-19, this has manifested as “pandemic fatigue,” decreasing adherence to risk reduction strategies in some populations and complicating public health efforts. Now, as COVID-19 vaccines are rolled out across the globe amid messages of optimism and euphoria, public health officials will have to contend with another feature of risk compensation. A vaccine heralded as the panacea to the pandemic risks further weakening adherence to other safety measures like social distancing and masks. This phenomenon, in which individuals respond to safety measures with a compensatory increase in risky behavior, is named the “Peltzman Effect” after University of Chicago economist Sam Peltzman, who first described it in 1975 (1, 2).In the decades since it was described, Peltzman's phenomenon has been inconsistent, identified in some safety interventions but not others (1). The introduction of medications providing HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP), while dramatically lessening risk for HIV transmission, has also been associated with decreased intention to wear condoms, higher numbers of sexual partners, and increased incidence of sexually transmitted infections in some studies (3–5). The magnitude of this effect can be significant: In one survey, more than 35% of PrEP users reported decreased intention to use additional protection (4). On the other hand, the Peltzman Effect has been notably absent in studies of the human papillomavirus vaccine, which did not result in any discernible change in sexual behaviors despite widespread media speculation (6). A key feature of the Peltzman Effect is that any reverse risk compensation cannot counteract a safety measure entirely; users of PrEP still benefit from a dramatically decreased risk for contracting HIV. But the benefit is less than what would be expected due to the compensatory behavior.Will COVID-19 vaccines result in increased risk-taking behavior? A comprehensive review of the Peltzman Effect identified 4 main factors as likely contributors to risk compensation, all of which appear to be present in the COVID-19 pandemic (1). To produce an increase in risky behavior, a measure must first be visible, a criterion that COVID-19 vaccines unquestionably meet. Unlike smoke detectors, which can function in the background, every individual who receives the COVID-19 vaccine will be acutely aware that they have done so. The next 2 points—motivation and control—go hand in hand. Risk compensation is more likely to occur if people are highly motivated to take on the risky behavior and if it is within their control to do so. Both of these apply to the current pandemic, because it is both personally desirable and relatively easy to return to a prepandemic lifestyle free of masks and social distancing. The final factor, the overall effectiveness of the intervention, depends on the vaccine. The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines currently granted emergency use authorization in the United States and other nations are more than 94% effective (7). From a medical standpoint, this is highly desirable, increasing the likelihood of vaccine-acquired immunity. For the Peltzman Effect, however, this high efficacy is likely to further reduce adherence to other precautions. Meanwhile, vaccines with lower efficacy may be less prone to this effect.One of the most alarming features of the Peltzman Effect is that it may have a bystander component. In some studies, drivers were found to pass closer on the road to bicyclists who were wearing helmets, whereas they gave substantially more clearance to bicyclists without helmets (8). This suggests that simply witnessing someone else taking a precaution can potentially increase one's likelihood of taking a risk. Consciously or not, even those who have not received a COVID-19 vaccine may forgo masks and social distancing if they know that others are receiving the vaccine. As the number of people vaccinated increases, this effect may also grow due to a misplaced sense of security in “herd immunity” long before widespread immunity is truly present. Unfortunately, the very optimism that is necessary to encourage widespread acceptance of the vaccine will undoubtedly contribute to the overconfidence that will ultimately worsen this effect.It is important to note that for COVID-19, a Peltzman Effect may manifest in different ways for different patient populations. Widespread misinformation and a highly politicized public health landscape have resulted in a wide spectrum of behaviors in response to COVID-19. Among those who refuse other precautions—the “antimaskers,” or those who reject social distancing guidelines—the Peltzman Effect will be nil. They cannot reduce their preventive behaviors any further and would therefore benefit from the maximum positive effect of vaccination. It is, paradoxically, the population with the highest prevaccine adherence to the recommended preventive measures who are most at risk for the Peltzman Effect and toward whom any attempts to moderate this effect should be directed.With these considerations in mind, what can be done to minimize the potential harms from the Peltzman Effect? First, physicians counseling patients about COVID-19 vaccines should acknowledge the possibility of this response. Telling people to change nothing about their behavior after vaccination is unlikely to be effective. When it comes to easing safety precautions, risk reduction, rather than total abstinence, should be the goal. A clear, realistic set of priorities should be established, laying out the best practices to be followed after vaccination. Prioritizing mask wearing, regardless of vaccination status, may result in the greatest public health benefit. Achieving this, however, may require a compromise on other restrictions (for example, allowing social gatherings with other vaccinated individuals) or heightened messaging and policy focus toward this goal at the expense of other postvaccination precautions. Targeting this message to individuals who abided by mask-wearing guidelines before vaccination is likely to find greater success than attempting to compel mask wearing among those who never followed such guidelines to begin with.Cognitive biases thrive on our ignorance of them. Acknowledging and understanding the Peltzman Effect is therefore critical to counteracting its possible negative effects. We are entering a new phase of the pandemic, defined by both the ongoing vaccination effort as well as the emergence of novel variants of the virus, some of which may increase transmissibility or immune escape (7). An easing back of safety precautions may, unfortunately, coincide with the rise of variants whose risks surpass those of the original strains. And although vaccination is thought to prevent serious illness and death secondary to COVID-19, the effect of vaccination on transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is still unclear—meaning asymptomatic spread may be possible from vaccinated individuals (9). The cognitive biases that drive risk compensation are thus functioning with outdated and faulty information. Without taking steps to combat this trend, increased laxity, combined with increased virulence, may well prolong the devastation of the virus.References1. Hedlund J. Risky business: safety regulations, risks compensation, and individual behavior. Inj Prev. 2000;6:82-90. [PMID: 10875661] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2. Peltzman S. The effects of automobile safety regulation. Journal of Political Economy. 1975;83:677-725. doi:10.1086/260352 Google Scholar3. Traeger MW, Cornelisse VJ, Asselin J, et al; PrEPX Study Team. Association of HIV preexposure prophylaxis with incidence of sexually transmitted infections among individuals at high risk of HIV infection. JAMA. 2019;321:1380-1390. [PMID: 30964528] doi:10.1001./jama.2019.2947 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Golub SA, Kowalczyk W, Weinberger CL, et al. Preexposure prophylaxis and predicted condom use among high-risk men who have sex with men. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2010;54:548-55. [PMID: 20512046] doi:10.1097/QAI.0b013e3181e19a54 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Lakdawalla D, Sood N, Goldman D. HIV breakthroughs and risky sexual behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2006;121:1063-102. Google Scholar6. Kasting ML, Shapiro GK, Rosberger Z, et al. Tempest in a teapot: A systematic review of HPV vaccination and risk compensation research. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2016;12:1435-50. [PMID: 26864126] doi:10.1080/21645515.2016.1141158 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar7. Kim JH, Marks F, Clemens JD. Looking beyond COVID-19 vaccine phase 3 trials. Nat Med. 2021;27:205-211. [PMID: 33469205] doi:10.1038/s41591-021-01230-y CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8. Walker I, Robinson DL. Bicycle helmet wearing is associated with closer overtaking by drivers: A response to Olivier and Walter, 2013. Accid Anal Prev. 2019;123:107-113. [PMID: 30472528] doi:10.1016/j.aap.2018.11.015 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar9. Kim DS, Rowland-Jones S, Gea-Mallorquí E. Will SARS-CoV-2 infection elicit long-lasting protective or sterilising immunity? Implications for vaccine strategies (2020). Front Immunol. 2020;11:571481. [PMID: 33362759] doi:10.3389/fimmu.2020.571481 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Comments 0 Comments Sign In to Submit A Comment Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Brit Trogen, MD, MS; Arthur Caplan, PhDAffiliations: NYU Langone Health, New York, New York (B.T., A.C.).Disclosures: Authors have reported no disclosures of interest. Forms can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M20-8251.Corresponding Author: Brit Trogen, MD, MS, NYU Langone Health, 550 1st Avenue, New York, NY 10029; e-mail, brit.trogen@nyulangone.org.Current Author Addresses: Dr. Trogen: NYU Langone Health, 550 1st Avenue, New York, NY 10029.Dr. Caplan: NYU Langone Medical Center, 227 East 30th Street, 7th Floor, Room 722, New York, NY 10016.Author Contributions: Conception and design: A.L. Caplan, B. Trogen.Analysis and interpretation of the data: A.L. Caplan, B. Trogen.Drafting of the article: A.L. Caplan, B. Trogen.Critical revision for important intellectual content: A.L. Caplan, B. Trogen.Final approval of the article: A.L. Caplan, B. Trogen.Administrative, technical, or logistic support: B. Trogen.Collection and assembly of data: A.L. Caplan, B. Trogen.This article was published at Annals.org on 2 March 2021. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Metrics Cited byHealth Behaviours among Travellers Regarding Risk Compensation Following COVID-19 Vaccination in Taizhou, ChinaLow Response to the COVID-19 Vaccine Among the Arab Population in Israel: Is It a Cultural Background, or a Systemic Failure, or Maybe Both?COVID Vaccine Hesitancy and Risk of a Traffic CrashIntention to maintain and willingness to stop: Applying a dual‐process model to understanding the maintenance of COVID‐19 preventive behaviorsCOVID-19 Vaccination, Peltzman Effect and Possible Increase in Highrisk Behaviors: A Growing Concern Related to Risk Compensation and Reduced Compliance to Public Health Protective Measures after Vaccines RolloutInfluenza vaccination in coronavirus times: Primary Care professionals’ intention to get vaccinated in Central Catalonia (VAGCOVID). A cross sectional studyAssociations between social COVID-19 exposure and psychological functioningFrequent mandatory COVID-19 testing may increase risky behaviorSaliva testing among teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic: Effects on health concerns, well-being, and precautionary behaviorSARS-CoV-2 pre-exposure prophylaxis: A potential COVID-19 preventive strategy for high-risk populations, including healthcare workers, immunodeficient individuals, and poor vaccine respondersVaccination strategy for preventing the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2 in the limited supply condition: A mathematical modeling studySelf-reported health behaviors and risk perceptions following the COVID-19 vaccination rollout in the USA: an online survey studyVaccine Hesitancy During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Latent Class Analysis of Middle-Aged and Older US AdultsReduction of Precautionary Behaviour following Vaccination against COVID-19: A Test on a British CohortRisk factors for reduction in adherence to protective measures following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and vaccine perceptions among healthcare workers, in São Paulo, BrazilEffectiveness of Inactivated COVID-19 Vaccines Against Illness Caused by the B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant During an Outbreak in Guangdong, China A Cohort StudyMin Kang, MMed, Yao Yi, MMed, Yan Li, PhD, Limei Sun, BM, Aiping Deng, MMed, Ting Hu, MMed, Jiayi Zhang, MMed, Jun Liu, MPAM, Mingji Cheng, MMed, Shen Xie, MMed, Min Luo, MMed, Jing Jiang, MMed, Yawen Jiang, PhD, Shixing Tang, PhD, and Jianfeng He, BScMotivation for Vaccination against COVID-19 in Persons Aged between 18 and 60 Years at a Population-Based Vaccination Site in Manresa (Spain)Do people reduce compliance with COVID-19 guidelines following vaccination? A longitudinal analysis of matched UK adultsAssociation between health behaviours and the COVID-19 vaccination: risk compensation among healthcare workers in Taizhou, ChinaFinally Back to Campus? Motivations for Facemask Adoption in the Higher Education SectorFace mask mandates and risk compensation: an analysis of mobility data during the COVID-19 pandemic in BangladeshCOVID-19 incidence, severity, medication use, and vaccination among dentists: survey during the second wave in BrazilApplying the Hierarchy of Controls: What Occupational Safety Can Teach us About Safely Navigating the Next Phase of the Global COVID-19 PandemicEstimating Vaccine Efficacy Against Transmission via Effect on Viral LoadIncreased risk-taking behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic: psychological underpinnings and implicationsPublic health and expert failureEffectiveness of an Inactivated SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine in ChileThe initial impact of a national BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine rolloutProtecting Families: A Qualitative Study on the Implementation of Protective Measures to Prevent COVID-19 TransmissionUnderstanding vaccine hesitancy in COVID-19Use of Leverage, Short Sales, and Options by Mutual Funds June 2021Volume 174, Issue 6 Page: 858-859 ePublished: 2 March 2021 Issue Published: June 2021 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2021 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...