An editor has nominated this article for deletion. You are welcome to participate in the deletion discussion , which will decide whether to keep it. |
This article may incorporate text from a large language model .(November 2025) |
Immunocapitalism describes the ways in which disease outbreaks and the acquisition of immunity are leveraged for economic and political gain. The concept highlights the intersection of health, capitalism, and power, demonstrating how social and economic inequalities are exacerbated by epidemics. In some cases, individuals actively attempt to contract a disease in order to become immune to it, because of resulting benefits to their socioeconomic status. [1]
Santa Clara University anthropologist Mythri Jegathesan states the term was first coined by Stanford historian Kathryn Olivarius. [1] In her paper, "Immunity, Capital, and Power in Antebellum New Orleans," published in The American Historical Review in 2019, Olivarius examined 19th-century New Orleans, where yellow fever outbreaks were rampant. She further explored the concept in her 2022 book, Necropolis: Disease, Power, and Capitalism in the Cotton Kingdom . In both works, Olivarius argues that white New Orleans elites exploited the disease to their advantage, creating a system where immunity, or the lack thereof, became a form of capital. Those who were 'acclimated' to yellow fever, having survived the disease, were granted a form of social and economic capital, while the 'unacclimated', often marginalized groups, were exploited and seen as expendable. This historical context provides a framework for understanding how health inequalities can be exploited for economic and political gain. [2] [3]
It was further used during the COVID-19 pandemic, with assistant director of the Britain-based Nuffield Council on Bioethics Pete Mills declaring in a June 2020 report on the "Ethics of immunity testing" that "Economic incentives invite 'immunocapitalism'". [4] Mills highlights the economic factors that prioritize COVID-19 immunity status explaining that employers might favor workers who are believed to be immune, as these individuals are perceived to be less likely to contract the virus, or transmit it to colleagues or customers. [4]