Mask mandates save lives

We quantify the effect of statewide mask mandates in the United States in 2020. Our regression discontinuity design exploits county-level variation in COVID-19 outcomes across the border between states with and without mandates. State mask mandates reduced new weekly COVID-19 cases, hospital admissions, and deaths by 55, 11, and 0.7 per 100,000 inhabitants on average. The effect depends on political leaning with larger effects in Democratic-leaning counties. Our results imply that statewide mandates saved 87,000 lives through December 19, 2020, while a nationwide mandate could have saved 57,000 additional lives. This suggests that mask mandates can help counter pandemics, particularly if widely accepted.     

The impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 epidemic growth in the 37 OECD member states

We estimated the impact of a comprehensive set of non-pharmeceutical interventions on the COVID-19 epidemic growth rate across the 37 member states of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic and between October and December 2020. For this task, we conducted a data-driven, longitudinal analysis using a multilevel modelling approach with both maximum likelihood and Bayesian estimation. We found that during the early phase of the epidemic: implementing restrictions on gatherings of more than 100 people, between 11 and 100 people, and 10 people or less was associated with a respective average reduction of 2.58%, 2.78% and 2.81% in the daily growth rate in weekly confirmed cases; requiring closing for some sectors or for all but essential workplaces with an average reduction of 1.51% and 1.78%; requiring closing of some school levels or all school levels with an average reduction of 1.12% or 1.65%; recommending mask wearing with an average reduction of 0.45%, requiring mask wearing country-wide in specific public spaces or in specific geographical areas within the country with an average reduction of 0.44%, requiring mask-wearing country-wide in all public places or all public places where social distancing is not possible with an average reduction of 0.96%; and number of tests per thousand population with an average reduction of 0.02% per unit increase. Between October and December 2020 work closing requirements and testing policy were significant predictors of the epidemic growth rate. These findings provide evidence to support policy decision-making regarding which NPIs to implement to control the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic.

     

The use of face masks during vaccine roll-out in New YorkCity and impact on epidemic control

Face masks were mandated in New York during the first wave in 2020, and in 2021 the first vaccine programs have commenced. We aimed to examine the impact of face mask and other NPIs use with a gradual roll out of vaccines in NYC on the epidemic trajectory.A SEIR mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission was developed for New York City (NYC), which accounted for decreased mobility for lockdown, testing and tracing. Varied mask’s usage and efficacy were tested, along with a gradual increase in vaccine uptake over five months. The model has been calibrated using notification data in NYC from March first to June 29.Masks and other NPIs result in immediate impact on the epidemic, while vaccination has a delayed impact, especially when implemented over a long period of time. A pre-emptive, early mandate for masks is more effective than late mask use, but even late mask mandates will reduce cases and deaths by over 20%. The epidemic curve is suppressed by at least 50% of people wearing a mask from the start of the outbreak but surges when mask wearing drops to 30% or less. With a slow roll out of vaccines over five months at uptake levels of 20–70%, NPIs use will still be needed and has a greater impact on epidemic control.When vaccine roll out is slow or partial in cities experiencing local transmission of COVID-19, masks and other NPIs will be necessary to mitigate transmission until vaccine coverage is high and complete. Vaccine alone cannot rapidly control an epidemic because of the time lag to two-dose immunity. Even after high coverage, the ongoing need for NPIs is unknown and will depend on long-term duration of vaccine efficacy, the use of boosters and optimized dosage scheduling and variants of concern.     

“Any idea how fast ‘It’s just a mask!’ can turn into ‘It’s just a vaccine!’”: From mask mandates to vaccine mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic

Protests starting in the summer of 2020, notedly in the US and UK, have brought together two constituencies: pre-existing anti-vaccine groups and newly formed oppositional COVID-19 groups. The oppositional COVID-19 groups vary in composition and nature, but the central focus is a disagreement about the seriousness and threat of COVID-19 and with the public health measures to control COVID-19. What unites many disparate interests is an aversion to mandates. The compulsion to undertake particular public health activities such as mask-wearing and vaccination is a complex topic of public attitudes and beliefs alongside public health goals and messaging. We aim to analyse social media discussions about facemask wearing and the adoption of potential vaccines for COVID-19.Using media monitoring software Meltwater^TM, we analyse English-language tweets for one year from 1st June 2020 until 1st June 2021. We pay particular attention to connections in conversations between key topics of concern regarding masks and vaccines across social media networks. We track where ideas and activist behaviours towards both health interventions have originated, have similarities, and how they have changed over time.Our aim is to provide an overview of the key trends and themes of discussion concerning attitudes to and adoption of health measures in the control of COVID-19 and how publics react when confronted with mandatory policies. We draw on an already extensive literature about mandatory vaccination policies to inform our assessment, from psychology and behavioural science to ethics, political theory, sociology, and public policy.     

Public Discourse Against Masks in the COVID-19 Era: Infodemiology Study of Twitter Data

BackgroundDespite scientific evidence supporting the importance of wearing masks to curtail the spread of COVID-19, wearing masks has stirred up a significant debate particularly on social media.ObjectiveThis study aimed to investigate the topics associated with the public discourse against wearing masks in the United States. We also studied the relationship between the anti-mask discourse on social media and the number of new COVID-19 cases.MethodsWe collected a total of 51,170 English tweets between January 1, 2020, and October 27, 2020, by searching for hashtags against wearing masks. We used machine learning techniques to analyze the data collected. We investigated the relationship between the volume of tweets against mask-wearing and the daily volume of new COVID-19 cases using a Pearson correlation analysis between the two-time series.ResultsThe results and analysis showed that social media could help identify important insights related to wearing masks. The results of topic mining identified 10 categories or themes of user concerns dominated by (1) constitutional rights and freedom of choice; (2) conspiracy theory, population control, and big pharma; and (3) fake news, fake numbers, and fake pandemic. Altogether, these three categories represent almost 65% of the volume of tweets against wearing masks. The relationship between the volume of tweets against wearing masks and newly reported COVID-19 cases depicted a strong correlation wherein the rise in the volume of negative tweets led the rise in the number of new cases by 9 days.ConclusionsThese findings demonstrated the potential of mining social media for understanding the public discourse about public health issues such as wearing masks during the COVID-19 pandemic. The results emphasized the relationship between the discourse on social media and the potential impact on real events such as changing the course of the pandemic. Policy makers are advised to proactively address public perception and work on shaping this perception through raising awareness, debunking negative sentiments, and prioritizing early policy intervention toward the most prevalent topics.     

Attitude toward a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy and its determinants: Evidence from serial cross-sectional surveys conducted throughout the pandemic in Germany

BackgroundMandating vaccination against COVID-19 is often discussed as a means to counter low vaccine uptake. Beyond the potential legal, ethical, and psychological concerns, a successful implementation also needs to consider citizens’ support for such a policy. Public attitudes toward vaccination mandates and their determinants might differ over time and, hence, should be monitored.MethodsBetween April 2020 and April 2021, we investigated public support for mandatory vaccination policies in Germany and examined individual correlates, such as vaccination intentions, confidence in vaccine safety, and perceived collective responsibility, using a series of cross-sectional, quota-representative surveys (overall N = 27,509).ResultsSupport for a vaccination mandate declined before the approval of the first vaccine against COVID-19 in December 2020 and increased afterwards. However, at the end of April 2021, only half of respondents were in favor of mandatory regulations. In general, mandates were endorsed by those who considered the vaccines to be safe, anticipated practical barriers, and felt responsible for the collective. On the contrary, perceiving vaccination as unnecessary and weighing the benefits and risks of vaccination was related to lower support. Older individuals and males more often endorsed vaccination mandates than did younger participants and females. Interestingly, there was a gap between vaccination intentions and support for mandates, showing that the attitude toward mandatory vaccination was not only determined by vaccination-related factors such as vaccine safety or prosocial considerations.ConclusionsBecause of low public support, mandatory vaccination against COVID-19 should be considered a measure of last resort in Germany. However, if removing barriers to vaccination and educational campaigns about vaccine safety and the societal benefits of high vaccination uptake are not sufficient for increasing vaccination uptake to the required levels, mandates could be introduced. In this case, measures to ensure and increase acceptance and adherence should be taken.     

Reminders of existing vaccine mandates increase support for a COVID-19 vaccine mandate: Evidence from a survey experiment

BackgroundGovernments are trying various strategies to boost COVID-19 vaccination rates, including vaccine mandates. Popular support for such mandates, however, is in flux in many countries, including the United States. The objective of this study is to evaluate if the wording of public health messages could increase popular support for COVID-19 vaccine mandates.MethodsWe conducted a survey experiment on a sample of 573 registered voters in South Dakota, United States. Participants in the control group (n = 271) read a short message about mandatory COVID-19 vaccination. Respondents in the treatment group (n = 278) read the same message but they were reminded that a variety of vaccine mandates for measles, mumps, rubella, and polio have long been required. Afterwards, both groups were asked about their support for COVID-19 vaccine mandate.ResultsA multivariate ordinary least squares regression analysis revealed that the experimental treatment had a positive and statistically significant impact on support for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination (p < 0.001). We also found that COVID-19 vaccination status, religious identity, and political affiliation have a statistically significant effect.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that a simple intervention—reminding the public of the existing vaccine mandates—increases support for COVID-19 vaccine mandate. Public health authorities who seek to boost COVID-19 vaccination rates could utilize this approach.     

Western Australian health care workers’ views on mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for the workplace

BackgroundHealth care workers (HCWs) are at an increased risk of catching and spreading Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) compared with the general community, putting health systems at risk. Several jurisdictions globally have mandated or are looking to mandate COVID-19 vaccines for this cohort, but little is known about the acceptability of this measure, especially in different contexts, and there is little qualitative data to explore nuance, depth, and the reasons behind HCWs’ opinions.MethodsIn-depth semi-structured qualitative interviews were undertaken with 39 HCWs in Western Australia (WA) between February-August 2021, ascertaining their views on the prospective introduction and implementation of mandates for COVID-19 vaccines. Data were thematically analysed using NVivo 20.ResultsThere was broad support for COVID-19 vaccine mandates for HCWs amongst our participants, but also different views about what such a mandate would mean (redeployment versus termination) and how it would impact the rest of the workforce. One vaccine hesitant participant said that mandates would be their prompt to get vaccinated. Other participants invoked an informal code whereby HCWs have an obligation to be seen to support vaccination and to protect public health more broadly. However, they also raised concerns about implementation and procedural and policy fairness.ConclusionPolicymakers should consider how to mobilise the informal code of health promotion and public health support if introducing mandates. They should also consider whether HCWs will bring the same attitudes and approaches to mandates for additional vaccine doses.     

The effect of vaccine mandate announcements on vaccine uptake in Canada: An interrupted time series analysis

IntroductionIn 2021, the ten provinces in Canada enacted COVID-19 vaccine mandates that restricted access to non-essential businesses and services to those that could provide proof of full vaccination to decrease the risk of transmission and provide an incentive for vaccination. This analysis aims to examine the effects of vaccine mandate announcements on vaccine uptake over time by age group and province.MethodsAggregated data from the Canadian COVID-19 Vaccination Coverage Surveillance System (CCVCSS) were used to measure vaccine uptake (defined as the weekly proportion of individuals who received at least one dose) among those 12 years and older following the announcement of vaccination requirements. We performed an interrupted time series analysis using a quasi-binomial autoregressive model adjusted for the weekly number of new COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths to model the effect of mandate announcements on vaccine uptake. Additionally, counterfactuals were produced for each province and age group to estimate vaccine uptake without mandate implementation.ResultsThe times series models demonstrated significant increases in vaccine uptake following mandate announcement in BC, AB, SK, MB, NS, and NL. No trends in the effect of mandate announcements were observed by age group. In AB and SK, counterfactual analysis showed that announcement were followed by 8 % and 7 % (310,890 and 71,711 people, respectively) increases in vaccination coverage over the following 10 weeks. In MB, NS, and NL, there was at least a 5 % (63,936, 44,054, and 29,814 people, respectively) increase in coverage. Lastly, BC announcements were followed by a 4 % (203,300 people) increase in coverage.ConclusionVaccine mandate announcements could have increased vaccine uptake. However, it is difficult to interpret this effect within the larger epidemiological context. Effectiveness of the mandates can be affected by pre-existing levels of uptake, hesitancy, timing of announcements and local COVID-19 activity.     

COVID-19 pandemic in the United States

ObjectivesThe paper highlights US health policy and technology responses to the COVID-19 pandemic from January 1, 2020 – August 9, 2020.MethodsA review of primary data sources in the US was conducted. The data were summarized to describe national and state-level trends in the spread of COVID-19 and in policy and technology solutions.ResultsCOVID-19 cases and deaths initially peaked in late March and April, but after a brief reduction in June cases and deaths began rising again during July and continued to climb into early August. The US policy response is best characterized by its federalist, decentralized nature. The national government has led in terms of economic and fiscal response, increasing funding for scientific research into testing, treatment, and vaccines, and in creating more favorable regulations for the use of telemedicine. State governments have been responsible for many of the containment, testing, and treatment responses, often with little federal government support. Policies that favor economic re-opening are often followed by increases in state-level case numbers, which are then followed by stricter containment measures, such as mask wearing or pausing re-opening plans.ConclusionsWhile all US states have begun to “re-open” economic activities, this trend appears to be largely driven by social tensions and economic motivations rather than an ability to effectively test and surveil populations.     

Consolidating a research agenda for vaccine mandates

A workshop on mandatory vaccination was pitched to the World Public Health Congress in 2019 and the resultant special issue was pitched to Vaccine in 2020. During this project, the COVID-19 pandemic pushed vaccine policy to the forefront of global public health policy, and the imposition of vaccine mandates prompted a new wave of scholarship in the field. This introductory article employs the heuristic of Lasswell’s (1956) policy cycle to synthesise the findings of the articles in the special issue. It considers the temporal lifetime of mandates and highlights findings regarding: the emergence of mandates as a policy option, public support and policy instrument design, what matters in the implementation of mandates, and what we can learn from evaluating them. The second half of the paper categorizes the included papers in terms of what aspects of mandates they study and the methods they employ to do so, in order to formulate a guide for future researchers of vaccine mandates. Scholars study either speculative or existing mandates – research can address several stages of the policy cycle or just one of them, ranging from attitudinal research to implementation studies and impact studies. Historical and contextual studies that take deep dives into a particular mandate are a much needed resource for studying emerging mandates, too, and scoping and framework- building work will undoubtedly be valuable in understanding and appreciating the wealth of knowledge production in this growing field. This special issue can serve as a roadmap for a consolidation of this interdisciplinary research agenda, and provide a helpful resource for decisionmakers at this historical juncture.     

Would COVID-19 vaccination willingness increase if mobile technologies prohibit unvaccinated individuals from public spaces? A nationwide discrete choice experiment from China

BackgroundAchieving COVID-19 community protection (aka, herd immunity) in China may be challenging because many individuals remain unsure or are unwilling to be vaccinated. One potential means to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake is to essentially mandate vaccination by using existing mobile technologies that can prohibit unvaccinated individuals from certain public spaces. The “Health Code” is a ubiquitous mobile phone app in China that regulates freedom of travel based on individuals’ predicted risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Green-colored codes indicate ability to travel unrestricted in low-risk regions; yellow-colored codes indicate prohibition from major public spaces and modes of public transportation. We examined the effects of a “Health Code”-based vaccine mandate on willingness to vaccinate for COVID-19 in China.MethodsIn August 2020, an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted among adults living in China. Participants completed up to six DCE choice sets, each containing two hypothetical COVID-19 vaccination scenario choices and a “do not vaccinate” choice. Half of the choice sets had a “Health Code” attribute that associated the “do not vaccinate” choice with a yellow Health Code implying restricted travel. Weighted, mixed effects multinomial logit regression was used to estimate preference utilities and predicted choice probabilities.ResultsOverall, 873 participants completed 4317 choice sets. Most participants attained at least college-level education (90.9%). 29.8% of participants were identified as vaccine hesitators (defined as being unsure or unwilling to receive a COVID-19 vaccination). With and without the “Health Code”-based vaccine mandate, there was an 8.6% (85% CI: 6.4% ? 10.92%) and 17.3% (85% CI:13.1% ? 21.6%) respective predicted probability that vaccine hesitators would choose “do not vaccinate” over a common vaccination scenario currently in China (i.e., free, domestic vaccine, 80% effectiveness, 10% probability of fever side-effects, administered in a large hospital, two doses). Corresponding predicted probabilities for people who did not express vaccine hesitancy was 0.3% (93% CI: 0.0% ? 14.3%) and 3.5% (93% CI:2.3% ? 4.8%). The “Health Code”-based mandate significantly increased willingness to vaccinate when vaccine efficacy was greater than 60%.ConclusionAmong vaccine hesitators with higher educational attainment, willingness to vaccinate for COVID-19 appears to increase if mobile technology-based vaccine mandates prohibit unvaccinated individuals from public spaces and public transportation. However, such mandates may not increase willingness if perceived vaccine efficacy is low.     

A historical analysis of vaccine mandates in the United States military and its application to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate

The Department of Defense has implemented a mandate that all military personnel be vaccinated against COVID-19. This article reviews the historical precedent of vaccine mandates for United States military personnel dating back to the formation of the continental army, as well as previous controversies about vaccine mandates such as the first influenza vaccine mandate and the Anthrax Vaccine Immunization Program. The historical review discusses precedent for the current COVID-19 vaccine mandate and the reception of these vaccine mandates by military personnel. The review then discusses how these historical lessons can inform the present COVID-19 vaccine mandate.     

COVID-19 Mask Usage and Social Distancing in Social Media Images: Large-scale Deep Learning Analysis

BackgroundThe adoption of nonpharmaceutical interventions and their surveillance are critical for detecting and stopping possible transmission routes of COVID-19. A study of the effects of these interventions can help shape public health decisions. The efficacy of nonpharmaceutical interventions can be affected by public behaviors in events, such as protests. We examined mask use and mask fit in the United States, from social media images, especially during the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests, representing the first large-scale public gatherings in the pandemic.ObjectiveThis study assessed the use and fit of face masks and social distancing in the United States and events of large physical gatherings through public social media images from 6 cities and BLM protests.MethodsWe collected and analyzed 2.04 million public social media images from New York City, Dallas, Seattle, New Orleans, Boston, and Minneapolis between February 1, 2020, and May 31, 2020. We evaluated correlations between online mask usage trends and COVID-19 cases. We looked for significant changes in mask use patterns and group posting around important policy decisions. For BLM protests, we analyzed 195,452 posts from New York and Minneapolis from May 25, 2020, to July 15, 2020. We looked at differences in adopting the preventive measures in the BLM protests through the mask fit score.ResultsThe average percentage of group pictures dropped from 8.05% to 4.65% after the lockdown week. New York City, Dallas, Seattle, New Orleans, Boston, and Minneapolis observed increases of 5.0%, 7.4%, 7.4%, 6.5%, 5.6%, and 7.1%, respectively, in mask use between February 2020 and May 2020. Boston and Minneapolis observed significant increases of 3.0% and 7.4%, respectively, in mask use after the mask mandates. Differences of 6.2% and 8.3% were found in group pictures between BLM posts and non-BLM posts for New York City and Minneapolis, respectively. In contrast, the differences in the percentage of masked faces in group pictures between BLM and non-BLM posts were 29.0% and 20.1% for New York City and Minneapolis, respectively. Across protests, 35% of individuals wore a mask with a fit score greater than 80%.ConclusionsThe study found a significant drop in group posting when the stay-at-home laws were applied and a significant increase in mask use for 2 of 3 cities where masks were mandated. Although a positive trend toward mask use and social distancing was observed, a high percentage of posts showed disregard for the guidelines. BLM-related posts captured the lack of seriousness to safety measures, with a high percentage of group pictures and low mask fit scores. Thus, the methodology provides a directional indication of how government policies can be indirectly monitored through social media.     

Joining the herd? U.S. public opinion and vaccination requirements across educational settings during the COVID-19 pandemic

With effective and safe COVID-19 vaccines beginning to be distributed across the United States, questions about who should receive the vaccine first have been the focus of public discussions. Yet, over the long-term, questions about the order of distribution will be displaced by questions about how to achieve high levels of vaccination rates. Historically, absent incentives or mandates, Americans have shown ambivalence, if not general antipathy, towards vaccinations, and vaccination rates have generally been low for many vaccines. There is evidence that vaccination requirements across educational settings are an effective policy instrument to increase vaccination rates. We administered a large national survey to assess American’s attitudes towards vaccination requirements across three educational settings (daycare, K-12 schools, and universities) in general and for COVID-19 specifically. Partisanship, gender, race, rurality, and perceptions about the appropriate role schools should play in providing health services are substantive predictors of public opinion. While Americans generally support vaccination mandates across all three settings for both types of requirements, support is consistently and significantly lower for COVID19 requirements. The effect of partisanship is accentuated for COVID-19 requirements as compared to general requirements. Drop off in support between general and COVID-19 specific requirements are driven by partisanship, gender, political knowledge, rurality, and having children in the household. Nonetheless, mandates are supported by a majority of Americans. Assessing Americans’ opinions of vaccination requirements in educational settings offers an important opportunity to explore the potential of mandates as policy instrument in the government’s arsenal against COVID-19 and guide public policy on the issues.     

Jobs,Housing, and Mask Wearing: Cross-Sectional Study of Risk Factors for COVID-19

BackgroundMany studies have focused on the characteristics of symptomatic patients with COVID-19 and clinical risk factors. This study reports the prevalence of COVID-19 in an asymptomatic population of a hospital service area (HSA) and identifies factors that affect exposure to the virus.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to measure the prevalence of COVID-19 in an HSA, identify factors that may increase or decrease the risk of infection, and analyze factors that increase the number of daily contacts.MethodsThis study surveyed 1694 patients between April 30 and May 13, 2020, about their work and living situations, income, behavior, sociodemographic characteristics, and prepandemic health characteristics. This data was linked to testing data for 454 of these patients, including polymerase chain reaction test results and two different serologic assays. Positivity rate was used to calculate approximate prevalence, hospitalization rate, and infection fatality rate (IFR). Survey data was used to analyze risk factors, including the number of contacts reported by study participants. The data was also used to identify factors increasing the number of daily contacts, such as mask wearing and living environment.ResultsWe found a positivity rate of 2.2%, a hospitalization rate of 1.2%, and an adjusted IFR of 0.55%. A higher number of daily contacts with adults and older adults increases the probability of becoming infected. Occupation, living in an apartment versus a house, and wearing a face mask outside work increased the number of daily contacts.ConclusionsStudying prevalence in an asymptomatic population revealed estimates of unreported COVID-19 cases. Occupational, living situation, and behavioral data about COVID-19–protective behaviors such as wearing a mask may aid in the identification of nonclinical factors affecting the number of daily contacts, which may increase SARS-CoV-2 exposure.     

Public health policies and health-care workers’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic,Thailand

Since January 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a far-reaching impact on global morbidity and mortality. The effects of varying degrees of implementation of public health and social measures between countries is evident in terms of widely differing disease burdens and levels of disruption to public health systems. Despite Thailand being the first country outside China to report a positive case of COVID-19, the subsequent number of cases and deaths has been much lower than in many other countries. As of 7 January 2021, the number of confirmed COVID-19-positive cases in Thailand was 9636 (138 per million population) and the number of deaths was 67 (1 per million population). We describe the nature of the health workforce and function that facilitated the capacity to respond to this pandemic. We also describe the public health policies (laboratory testing, test-and-trace system and mandatory 14-day quarantine of cases) and social interventions (daily briefings, restriction of mobility and social gatherings, and wearing of face masks) that allowed the virus to be successfully contained. To enhance the capacity of health-care workers to respond to the pandemic, the government (i) mobilized staff to meet the required surge capacity; (ii) developed and implemented policies to protect occupational safety; and (iii) initiated packages to support morale and well-being. The results of the policies that we describe are evident in the data: of the 66 countries with more than 100 COVID-19-positive cases in health-care workers as at 8 May 2020, Thailand ranked 65th.     

Twitter discourse reveals geographical and temporal variation in concerns about COVID-19 vaccines in the United States

The speed at which social media is propagating COVID-19 misinformation and its potential reach and impact is growing, yet little work has focused on the potential applications of these data for informing public health communication about COVID-19 vaccines. We used Twitter to access a random sample of over 78 million vaccine-related tweets posted between December 1, 2020 and February 28, 2021 to describe the geographical and temporal variation in COVID-19 vaccine discourse. Urban suburbs posted about equitable distribution in communities, college towns talked about in-clinic vaccinations near universities, evangelical hubs posted about operation warp speed and thanking God, exurbs posted about the 2020 election, Hispanic centers posted about concerns around food and water, and counties in the ACP African American South posted about issues of trust, hesitancy, and history. The graying America ACP community posted about the federal government’s failures; rural middle American counties posted about news press conferences. Topics related to allergic and adverse reactions, misinformation around Bill Gates and China, and issues of trust among Black Americans in the healthcare system were more prevalent in December, topics related to questions about mask wearing, reaching herd immunity and natural infection, and concerns about nursing home residents and workers increased in January, and themes around access to black communities, waiting for appointments, keeping family safe by vaccinating and fighting online misinformation campaigns were more prevalent in February. Twitter discourse around COVID-19 vaccines in the United States varied significantly across different communities and changed over time; these insights could inform targeted messaging and mitigation strategies.