This project uses discursive design to examine the tension between medical authority, public trust, and the lived experiences of individuals navigating complex health decisions. Created as an installation for healthcare officials and physicians, the work invites viewers to confront how narratives around risk, responsibility, and human impact are constructed and communicated within contemporary medicine.

    During the COVID-19 pandemic, discussions about vaccine side effects, including public concerns around myocarditis in young men, became a focal point of both media attention and medical debate. Rather than making clinical claims, this project interrogates how these conversations were framed, how evidence was communicated, and how technical language often obscured rather than clarified understanding. The installation reflects on the ways medical jargon, institutional messaging, and rapid policy shifts can create confusion or erode trust.

    By presenting the topic through a human-centered lens, the work aims to remind healthcare leaders that individuals on the receiving end of medical decisions are more than statistics or case numbers. Their fears, hopes, and vulnerabilities are shaped not only by scientific data but also by the clarity, transparency, and empathy present in the systems meant to care for them.

    This project does not attempt to provide definitive answers. Instead, it creates a space for reflection about communication, ethics, and the responsibility of medical institutions to bridge the gap between expertise and public understanding. Ultimately, the installation asks professionals to consider how their language, choices, and power shape the experiences of the people their work is meant to serve.    

    The project began with an exploration of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. Encountering this legislation became a starting point for examining how pharmaceutical accountability, public communication, and regulatory structures intersect. This discovery led me to look more closely at vaccine policy during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in the context of the mandates that shaped public experience.

    As I continued researching, I noticed how complex terminology, statistical framing, and technical language were used in medical and pharmaceutical literature. Much of this communication appeared difficult for the general public to interpret, and I became interested in how wording and presentation can influence the perception of risk. During this process, I encountered studies and reports discussing myocarditis in young men following mRNA vaccination. My focus was not on verifying or challenging the data itself, but on examining how such information was communicated, how it reached the public, and how parts of it seemed difficult to access or interpret.

    A recurring idea that emerged from this research was the phrase “The Veil is Thinning.” This concept became a guiding metaphor for the installation and shaped the spatial and visual decisions that followed. I wanted the physical environment to reflect the contrast between large-scale statistical framing and the individual human experiences embedded within it.

    The installation includes eight stethoscopes positioned beside a projection of one million vaccine vials. This juxtaposition represents the way large numerical framing can minimize the visibility of individual cases within broader datasets. Behind a thin veil hangs a set of research materials along with a single stethoscope and an image representing a larger cohort of young men. The photograph is intentionally distorted to protect identity while still conveying emotional weight and presence.

    Through this process, the project evolved into an exploration of how information is framed, how certain narratives become more visible than others, and how design can make space for critical reflection on the human implications embedded within medical communication.