Leger is proud to be a part of the Worldwide Independent Network of Market Research (WIN), an organization of different market researchers around the world that develops quality insights around the world. Multiple times a year, all WIN members conduct research on various subjects that interest the global population. World Immunization Week is April 24-30, and WIN, along with Leger, conducted surveys on vaccine acceptance. Leger conducted the study in the United States and Canada.
The summary of the findings is as follows:
- mRNA vaccine acceptance still lags behind traditional vaccines
mRNA is a type of genetic information that everyone has. When used in medicine or vaccines, mRNA delivers instructions to our genes (DNA) to make specific proteins that enable our body to recognise and fight off viruses if it encounters them in the future. On the other side, traditional vaccines use an inactive or weakened virus to build immunity.
Globally, 68% of people are willing to accept new developments of traditional vaccines. However, while still substantial, acceptance for mRNA vaccines drops to 60%, revealing a clear global preference for traditional approaches. While traditional vaccine acceptance remains fairly consistent across age groups, women over 35 show noticeably lower acceptance for both types.
As expected, demographic and regional factors influence attitudes towards mRNA vaccines. Younger people, those over 65, and those with higher education tend to be more open to mRNA innovation. For example, 70% of master’s or PhD graduates would ‘definitely’ take a newly approved mRNA vaccine, whereas only 51% of those with little to no basic education would.
Acceptance also varies significantly by country. The preference for traditional vaccines over mRNA ones is most pronounced in Paraguay at a 20% gap, followed by Croatia (17%), and the Serbia (15%). However, China and India challenge this pattern: mRNA vaccines are preferred – with China leading globally at 86% acceptance.
Professor Heidi J. Larson, PhD.; Founder and Director of the Vaccine Confidence Project, and Professor of Anthropology, Risk and Decision Science at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, says:
“In general, publics tend to hesitate when new vaccines are introduced, especially those made in new ways (i.e. the Covid-19 vaccine was the first vaccine aver to use an mRNA approach). The perceptions of mRNA and future RNA related vaccines and medicines should be monitored over time as people become more familiar with this new approach to making vaccines and medicines, but at the same time, risk seeing more misinformation.”
- Discomfort remains for biomedical innovations, but varies country by country
When asked about their comfort with new biomedical innovations, global responses were moderate: 52% with personalized medicine, 51% felt comfortable with cell-interacting medicines and 47% with DNA-interacting medicines. However, 30% of the global population responded ‘I don’t know’ for each – highlighting a significant gap in public understanding and a clear opportunity for better public education and communication.
More than just public education, the numbers suggest that the language used to describe these innovations impacts comfort levels. This underscores the importance of using clear, accessible, and carefully considered terminology when explaining how new health technologies work.
Regionally, the APAC region leads in comfort levels, followed by the Americas, then Europe and the MENA region expressing most discomfort. Notably, China ranks highest in comfort levels for personalized medicine (76%), DNA-interacting (73%), and cell-interacting (76%) medicines. In contrast, Japan appears amongst the least comfortable countries, with just 37%, 32%, 35% comfort levels for each type, respectively.
Younger people (18-24) are more open to biomedical innovations, while those over 65 show the highest uncertainty, reaching 4 out of 10 individuals. As with mRNA vaccine acceptance, those with higher education correlates with greater comfort, reinforcing the influence of both regional and socioeconomic factors in shaping public trust in biotechnology.
- Traditional vaccination acceptance cannot be assumed
Despite decades of public health success, a notable minority still reject traditional vaccines (23%). Turkey leads with a 61% unwilling to take them, followed by Indonesia (46%), Slovakia (34%), Japan (33%), and Poland (31%). With nearly one-third of people globally either reject or are unsure about traditional vaccines – this is not a marginal group.
The research highlights key patterns: rejection is more likely amongst those with lower education 43%, compared to just 24% of master’s or PhD graduates. Women also show greater hesitancy, with 33% saying they would not or are uncertain. These findings underscore that trust in traditional vaccination cannot be taken for granted – continuous, targeted communication is essential to build and sustain public confidence.
- Moving forwards in a world with cautious optimism
The Worldviews Survey paints a picture of cautious optimism toward biomedical technology. While many are open to innovations like mRNA vaccines, hesitancy – especially around traditional vaccines – remains a pressing concern. These insights offer a clear call to action: rebuild trust in traditional vaccines where it’s eroding, communicate clearly to address uncertainty, and prioritise engagement with women, older adults, and those with less education. Crucially, efforts must also be tailored to the cultural context of each region.
Only by addressing the root causes of vaccine and medicine doubt can we fully realise the global potential of immunisation.
