This is a somewhat satisfying and plausible answer to "Why are people idiots about ___ despite evidence?"
In the piece, sociologist Brooke Harrington argued that vaccine resisters were a classic example of a mark — and legitimate victims of a con. She said that, after realizing they’ve been conned, they double down and act as if they’ve been in on the scheme from the beginning “as a way to save face and avoid the “social death” and the humiliation that would accompany confronting the ways in which their belief system had failed them.”
This essay was about older people who are angry that younger people are not going for the same career system that they bought into, but it refers back to
another one about vaccine hesitancy, which includes this depressing bit:
But the right messenger and the right message could move meaningful numbers of politically-motivated vaccine refusers. Harrington suggested that if pro-Trump politicians and news outlets changed their messaging to equate vaccination with ‘owning the libs,’ it could begin to change some minds.
So, even with an explanation for a behavior, that behavior can still be depressing.