(The Daily Sceptic) – University COVID-19 vaccine mandates are unethical because the vaccines are up to nearly 100 times more likely to cause a person of student age serious injury than prevent him or her from being hospitalized with COVID-19, a new study has concluded.
The study, whose authors include Dr. Kevin Bardosh, a recipient of funding from the pro-vaccination Wellcome Trust led by Sir Jeremy Farrar, and Dr. Tracy Beth Høeg of the Florida Department of Health, presents a risk-benefit assessment of booster vaccines among people of student age and provides five ethical arguments against mandates.
The researchers estimate that 22,000–30,000 previously uninfected adults aged 18–29 must be boosted with an mRNA vaccine to prevent just one COVID-19 hospitalization. In the study, which is currently undergoing peer-review, the authors analyse CDC and reported adverse event data and find that booster mandates are likely to cause a net expected harm.
They estimate that for every COVID-19 hospitalization prevented in previously uninfected young adults, 18 to 98 serious adverse events will occur, including 1.7 to 3.0 booster-associated myocarditis cases in males, and 1,373 to 3,234 cases of serious injury which interferes with daily activities.
The G20 meeting this October will see the most powerful nations in the world - the U.S., Canada, the U.K., the E.U., Australia, India, China, Russia and Brazil among others - discuss climate policies that are already affecting billions of people around the world.
This powerful cadre of international leaders wants the world to run on solar and wind power, forcing an end to the use of gas, oil and nuclear power, as well as crushing beef farmers because of supposed methane emissions.
But the harsh impact of such policies is already being felt, with energy blackouts and soaring inflation hammering people around the world, making it beyond time for all of us to speak out.
SIGN: Tell G20 leaders that their radical climate policies are making basic foods, fuel, heating and electricity increasingly unaffordable for normal citizens.
As western leaders turn off the oil spigots and impose draconian restrictions on farmers, we've all experienced the pain of increased prices, not least at the pump and the grocery store.
This inflation was entirely avoidable if only our politicians prioritized food and energy security over climate theories, but instead they have succumbed to radical environmentalists whose agenda would cripple the livelihoods and living standards of much of the globe.
Communities all around you are feeling the weight of crushing price hikes, which will soon reach your own food isles and gas pumps if it hasn't already.
The effects of inflation are being felt in the developing world most, as fuel and food prices sky rocket, making even worse poverty an inevitabilty for hundreds of millions of people.
Reality will hit home for us soon.
The harshest effects of energy shortages will be felt this winter in the west, when our leaders' decisions to cut oil supplies and reject Russian natural gas will:
- force heating, fuel and electricity prices to sky rocket
- continue to make food more expensive
- risk a global depression as inflation spirals out of control
- prompt more blackouts
- make civil unrest a real possibility
The media are already preparing people for rolling blackouts. States like California and countries like England are warning citizens that they face severe electricity and gas shortages.
Now is the time to speak out and be part of a movement that can prevent this disaster spreading.
SIGN the petition calling on international leaders to abandon their reckless energy agenda and return the world to economic stability.
The entire climate change industry is based on models that have been consistently inaccurate for decades, with Al Gore among the most infamous prophets of doom to be proven wrong.
In 2009 Gore told the COP15 climate change conference in Copenhagen that the North Pole would be ice-free by 2014, a claim that remains wildly off the mark.
Arctic sea ice has increased since 2012 and is now close to the average for 1991-2000 – another inconvenient fact for climate change alarmists, alongside thriving polar bears and more coral on the Great Barrier Reef. https://t.co/3m7jcaj1hV— Toby Young (@toadmeister) September 1, 2022
Al Gore is not alone in getting things wrong however, as this brief timeline of scaremongering headlines proves:
The world needs to wake-up to what's really happening: our lives are being upended on the basis of climate theories and models that have been consistently wrong for decades.
It's time to stop the scaremongering and push back against the radical agenda of international elites.
SIGN & SHARE: Tell G20 leaders that their radical climate policies are making basic foods, fuel, heating and electricity increasingly unaffordable for normal citizens.
The authors add that given the high level of natural immunity following infection now present in the population, the actual risk-benefit profile is even less favourable.
On the basis of this evidence they argue that university booster mandates are unethical because:
- No formal risk-benefit assessment exists for the age group;
- Vaccine mandates may result in a net expected harm to individual young people;
- Mandates are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given the modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission;
- U.S. mandates violate the reciprocity principle because rare serious vaccine-related harms will not be reliably compensated due to gaps in current vaccine injury schemes; and
- Mandates create wider social harms.
They consider counterarguments, such as a desire for socialization and safety, and show that such arguments are weak and lack scientific and ethical support.
The authors include Dr. Vinay Prasad of the University of California and Dr. Martin A. Makary and Dr. Stefan Baral of Johns Hopkins University. A previous intervention in February by many of the same authors, published in BMJ Global Health, took a strong ethical stance against vaccine coercion in the form of mandates and passports.
It’s been clear for some time that the cost-benefit assessment of the vaccines will not be favourable for young people. But with leading scientists, including some funded by pro-vaccination organisations like the Wellcome Trust, now putting the case in top journals, hopefully the message will get through to politicians and administrators, especially in America, who continue to impose vaccine requirements on young adults.
While the present paper is focused on vaccine coercion, its arguments also apply more generally to the offer of vaccination to young adults, and raise questions as to whether vaccine recipients are being fully apprised of the risks and likely benefits before consenting to the inoculation.
Reprinted with permission from The Daily Sceptic.