Significant studies and scientific findings have come out over the past few weeks, all not getting the appropriate airing that we deserve from news media. They have to do with the possible harmful effects of COVID vaccines.
VACCINES MORE HARMFUL THAN COVIDThe most significant is a study coming from Oxford, Washington, Toronto, Harvard, and John Hopkins Universities, which looked at 18-29-year olds boosted with an mRNA vaccine. And what they found was this: “Using CDC and sponsor-reported adverse event data, we find that booster mandates may cause a net expected harm: per COVID-19 hospitalization prevented in previously uninfected young adults, we anticipate 18 to 98 serious adverse events, including 1.7 to 3.0 booster-associated myocarditis cases in males, and 1,373 to 3,234 cases of grade ≥3 reactogenicity which interferes with daily activities.”
To put it another way: for those below 30 years old, vaccines are more harmful than COVID by a factor of 18-98%.
The study continues: “Given the high prevalence of post-infection immunity, this risk-benefit profile is even less favorable. Universitybooster mandates are unethical because: 1.) no formal risk-benefit assessment exists for this age group; 2.) vaccine mandates may result in a net expected harm to individual young people; 3.) mandates are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given the modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission; 4.) US 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 5.) mandates create wider social harms. We consider counter-arguments such as a desire for socialization and safety and show that such arguments lack scientific and/or ethical support.” (“COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters for Young Adults: A Risk-Benefit Assessment and Five Ethical Arguments against Mandates at Universities,” Bardosh, et. Al., September 2022”; https://bit.ly/EthicalArguments)
Take the foregoing with the context that the United States Center for Disease Control reportedly “has provided false information regarding their tracking of adverse events caused by the vaccines.” At the same time, CDC Director Rochelle Walensky “admits that there is a causal relationship between the mRNA vaccines and myocarditis.” Thus, “VAERS staff conducted assessments showing that causal associations exist between thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome and Janssen’s COVID-19 vaccine and between myocarditis and mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.” Furthermore, Walensky also admitted that “the CDC did not analyze certain types of adverse event reports whatsoever in 2021, despite having previously stated that they did start this tracking in February of that year.” (“Vaccine Narrative Collapses as Harvard Study Shows Jab More Dangerous than COVID,” Jonas Vesterberg, The Florida Standard, Sept. 14, 2022, https://bit.ly/VaccineJabs)
Note that the Danish government is recommending against vaccinating people under the age of 50 years, with the justification that those “under 50 are generally not at particularly higher risk of becoming severely ill from COVID-19.” (Danish Health Authority)
THE FLU IS MORE HARMFUL THAN COVIDThe foregoing are coming amidst news that the flu is now considered more dangerous than COVID. Thus, as Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease specialist at the University of California, San Francisco, rhetorically asked: “When does COVID look like influenza?,” her considered response was: “Yes, we are there.” Gandhi and her fellow researchers “argue that most people today have enough immunity — gained from vaccination, infection or both — to protect them against getting seriously ill from COVID. And this is especially so since the omicron variant doesn’t appear to make people as sick as earlier strains.” (“Scientists debate how lethal COVID is. Some say it’s now less risky than flu,” Rob Stein, NPR, Sept. 16, 2022, https://n.pr/3S2EKbS)
YET THE DOH CONTINUES ITS VACCINE PUSHAll that makes the Department of Health’s (DoH) unconditional insistence to vaccinate Filipinos, specially the younger and healthy ones, ludicrously bizarre. The DoH even went to the ridiculous extent of declaring that the COVID-19 pandemic will be considered ended “only if vaccination targets are achieved” (“DoH: End to pandemic only if vax targets met,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, Sept. 17, 2022, https://bit.ly/VaxTarget).
Which is really disconcerting considering that Filipinos under the age of 30 constitute 57% of the population, those under 50 about 90%. There is simply no justification for the government’s fanatical push to unnecessarily vaccinate the young, healthy, working Philippine population, specially without giving any caveat or caution whatsoever as to possible harmful effects, including even perhaps death, when consistent reports and reasonable questions about the vaccine’s efficacy and safety have been raised for quite some time.
VACCINES, THE PREGNANT MOTHER, AND THE UNBORN CHILDAnd this is not even to mention the possible harm vaccines may cause to pregnant women and the child inside their womb:
“Sufficient reassurance of safe use of the vaccine in pregnant women cannot be provided at the present time: however, use in women of childbearing potential could be supported provided healthcare professionals are advised to rule out known or suspected pregnancy prior to vaccination. Women who are breastfeeding should also not be vaccinated.” (“Summary of the Public Assessment Report for COVID-19 Vaccine Pfizer/BioNTech,” UK Government, Aug. 16, 2022, https://bit.ly/UK-Pfizer)
THE ABUSE OF POWER AND THE RIGHT TO SUEAs this column previously pointed out, it is not true (as was reported in media) that “public officials and employees, contractors, manufacturers, volunteers, and representatives of duly authorized private entities” are free from liability and cannot be sued for actions in relation to the “administration or use of a COVID-19 vaccine.” RA 11525 actually provides that they can be sued and held liable if proven that they acted with “willful misconduct and gross negligence” in using or administering COVID vaccines.
RA 11525 even set aside P500 million as compensation for any person “inoculated through the COVID-19 Vaccination Program” and because of it suffered “severe adverse effects” including “death, permanent disability or hospital confinement.”
This also is reiterated: many of those dogmatically and exclusively pushing for vaccines were the same people that were so tragically wrong on lockdowns and masks, such that loss of livelihood, injury, or even death may have been avoided had they not been so hysterically, willfully, and irresponsibly closed minded against alternative treatments (see, for example, “Regular Use of Ivermectin as Prophylaxis for COVID-19 Led Up to a 92% Reduction in COVID-19 Mortality Rate in a Dose-Response Manner,” Cureus, Aug. 31, 2022, https://bit.ly/Ivermectin-Covid).
Filipinos (or their family members) that suffered serious adverse effects arising from COVID vaccination are strongly encouraged to document their experiences and claim government compensation, or (as provided by law) prosecute and hold accountable those that forced or misled people into taking vaccines.
Jemy Gatdula is a senior fellow of the Philippine Council for Foreign Relations and a Philippine Judicial Academy law lecturer for constitutional philosophy and jurisprudence