Issues & Insights

Get The COVID-19 Vaccine — Whichever One Is Available!


During the past year, many thousands of articles and commentaries have been published on almost every imaginable aspect of the SARS-Cov-2 virus and the COVID-19 pandemic it has caused. They have appeared online, in journals, on preprint servers, in newspapers, and on Facebook and Twitter, to say nothing of local electronic bulletin boards. TV news programs continue to feature prominently the latest developments and statistics.

As the rollout of COVID-19 vaccines has progressed throughout the country, a prominent issue is vaccine hesitancy – that is, the uncertainty or unwillingness of a significant fraction of the population to take the vaccine. Recent polling suggests that about 31% of Americans are undecided, while about 20% remain at least somewhat reluctant. However, receptiveness seems to be increasing as frontline health care personnel, essential workers, and older people are vaccinated, and stories circulate about ineligible people devising ways to jump the queue.

Most of the reasons people cite for hesitancy about the COVID-19 vaccines concern the speed at which they were developed or the “novelty” of the first two that were authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for emergency use – namely, the “messenger RNA-derived” vaccines produced by Pfizer and its partner BioNTech and Moderna respectively. The points below will, I hope, dispel some of those reservations, and encourage vaccination and other precautionary measures.

Coronavirus vaccines are not new. Coronavirus infections are common in companion animals and economically important livestock and vaccines to prevent these infections have been widely employed in veterinary medicine for many years. They have been administered to dogs, cattle, pigs, and poultry. (The animal coronaviruses are sufficiently different from SARS-CoV-2 that the veterinary vaccines would not prevent COVID-19 in humans.) The more than a dozen veterinary vaccines licensed in North America have been developed with an array of technologies and platforms, including genetic engineering – but none, as yet, with the messenger RNA technology (mRNA) used for the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines.  However, see the following paragraph.

The “novel,” messenger RNA technology to make the first two approved COVID-19 vaccines isn’t fundamentally new. Many reporters and commentators have dutifully noted that vaccines have traditionally been composed of killed or attenuated (weakened) viruses so that they can elicit an immune response without causing disease. In contrast, the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines are made with a genetic engineering technology called messenger RNA (mRNA), which acts in a novel way. When injected into a person’s muscle, the mRNA is read by the cells’ protein-synthesizing machinery and gives rise to numerous copies of a version of the SARS-CoV-2 virus “spike protein,” which is on the surface of the virus and plays a key role in attaching to the host’s cells. Those proteins elicit an immune response, so that if the person who has been injected later comes into contact with the infectious SARS-CoV-2 virus, the body’s antibodies and immune cells are prepared to neutralize it.

However, there’s a link missing in that narrative about the continuum from traditional vaccine development techniques to mRNA – namely, decades-old availability of “subunit vaccines,” which are conceptually similar to using mRNA for vaccines. A good example is Merck’s hepatitis B vaccine Recombivax, which has been around for more than 30 years. What is injected and stimulates the immune response in that case is a non-infectious viral protein that is synthesized in genetically engineered baker’s yeast grown in huge fermentation vats. The protein, which is analogous to the coronavirus’ spike protein, is then purified and used as the active substance in the vaccine.

A similar example is GlaxoSmithKline’s shingles vaccine Shingrix, which contains a glycoprotein (a protein linked to a carbohydrate) that is a component of the varicella zoster virus, and which is synthesized in genetically engineered Chinese hamster ovary cells.

There is also a COVID-19 vaccine using this technology being developed by Maryland-based Novavax. It contains proteins produced in genetically engineered insect cells that resemble the “spike” proteins found on the surface of the coronavirus, and which elicit an immune response after being injected.

The Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, and Novavax subunit vaccines are something of an intermediate approach between the killed or attenuated vaccines and the mRNA ones because the antigen injected is a protein, whereas the mRNA vaccines cause a protein to be synthesized in the muscles of the vaccine recipient after injection. An understanding of this continuum of approaches to vaccination should help to demystify COVID-19 vaccines for the considerable number of people who may be hesitant about taking a “novel” vaccine that was rapidly developed and approved.

The reported differences in efficacy among the various approved vaccines must be considered in context. We are at a good news-bad news situation with respect to COVID-19 vaccines. The positive news is that on Feb. 27, the FDA granted emergency use authorization to Johnson & Johnson’s single-dose coronavirus vaccine, providing the medical community with a new and more versatile option that requires only a single shot to induce immunity, and that has less stringent storage requirements than those for the other two approved vaccines. 

However, the clinical trial data suggest that the J&J vaccine has lower efficacy, leading some public health experts and government officials to worry that it will be viewed by the public as substandard compared to the other vaccines. The Johnson & Johnson efficacy rate is 66% overall and 72% in the United States in preventing moderate to severe cases of COVID-19, while the two-shot regimens of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines are about 95% effective at preventing symptomatic infections.

However, those numbers are not directly comparable, and context is critical to understanding the significance of these numbers. First, all three of the approved vaccines have been shown to be fully effective in protecting against the most important outcomes of COVID-19 – hospitalizations and death. Also, the two earlier vaccines were tested months before the emergence of “variants of concern,” including one first detected in South Africa that appears to affect the efficacy of the vaccines, so the results are not an “apples to apples” comparison. People should not be hesitant to get the J&J vaccine, and should take whichever vaccine is offered to them.

The appearance of these variants of concern is consequential. As World Health Organization epidemiologist Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove has pointed out, “The more of this virus circulates [because of greater transmissibility], the more opportunity it will have to change” to something worse. She concluded, “We’re playing a very dangerous game here.” Thus, the more safe and effective vaccine that becomes available and can be administered, the better.

When somebody tells you that we shouldn’t worry about an illness “with a survival rate of 99.99%,” or that “herd immunity” from natural infections will stop the pandemic, you’re about to be misled. First of all, a conservative estimate of the death rate is not 0.1% (which would correspond to a survival rate of 99.9%), but probably well above 0.2%. That might not sound like a lot, but when applied to a huge number of cases, it can be catastrophic – as it has been: COVID-19 has killed 515,000 Americans, been diagnosed in about 30 million, and certainly infected more than that number.

Second, deaths and death rates are far from the whole story. In many people, symptoms of COVID-19 persist long after “recovery” from the acute illness, even in those who have experienced only mild illness. A study by researchers at the University of Washington found that about a third of COVID-19 patients who were never sick enough to require hospitalization continue to complain as long as nine months later of symptoms like fatigue, loss of smell or taste and “brain fog.” Similarly, according to the Mayo Clinic, the most common persistent signs and symptoms are fatigue, shortness of breath, cough, joint pain, and chest pain; and “the virus can damage the lungs, heart, and brain, which increases the risk of long-term health problems.” 

Finally, “herd immunity,” the point at which a sufficiently large fraction of the population is immune to infection because of natural infection or vaccination and causes the pandemic to wane, is thought to be upward of 80% in the case of COVID-19. In the absence of vaccines, achieving herd immunity would, in a best case, require natural immunity following infection of more than 260 million Americans, which would result in an unimaginable death toll.

However, herd immunity via that route would likely be unattainable because of the appearance of the “variants of concern” mentioned above, some of which are sufficiently different from the early prevalent strains of SARS-CoV-2 that they can overcome the immunity of people who were infected with an earlier strain and reinfect them. Moreover, echoing Van Kerkhove’s observation above, the greater the number people who are infected with any strain of SARS-CoV-2, the more virus there is circulating, the more virus replication and mutations, and more opportunity for Darwinian evolution to select for variants that are more “fit” – that is, more transmissible, thereby extending or expanding the pandemic.

We have come a long way in understanding COVID-19, but much remains unknown. The scientific and medical communities in the public and private sectors will continue to produce important new products and knowledge so we can lessen the toll of this awful pandemic as much and as rapidly as possible. In the meantime, it is more important than ever to continue to take precautions – including widespread vaccination – to flatten the curve.

Henry I. Miller, a physician and molecular biologist, is a senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute. A co-discoverer of a key enzyme in the influenza virus, he was the founding director of the FDA’s Office of Biotechnology. Follow him on Twitter: @henryimiller

We Could Use Your Help

Issues & Insights was founded by seasoned journalists of the IBD Editorials page. Our mission is to provide timely, fact-based reporting and deeply informed analysis on the news of the day -- without fear or favor.

We’re doing this on a voluntary basis because we believe in a free press, and because we aren't afraid to tell the truth, even if it means being targeted by the left. Revenue from ads on the site help, but your support will truly make a difference in keeping our mission going. If you like what you see, feel free to visit our Donations Page by clicking here. And be sure to tell your friends!

You can also subscribe to I&I: It's free!

Just enter your email address below to get started.



  • No thanks, way to much pressure from a government I no longer trust. That and they still want to have the sheep wear masks, social distance etc. after having the shot. I will wait to see the results of these shots after 5 years. And why do I need a vaccine if I have already had Covid? It sure has been a long two weeks to flatten the curve.

    • First of all, the immune response to the vaccine is more robust than that from infection with SARS-CoV-2. Second, it’s not clear how long immunity persists post-infection. Third, it’s useful to have a robust response, because some of the new “variants of concern” are sufficiently different from the original SARS-CoV-2 that the immune response from early infections doesn’t confer protection. In Manaus, Brazil, for example, 76% of the population have antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, and yet there’s a surge of infections, many of them reinfections.

  • This op-Ed piece is filled with holes. It’s fake news. mRNA technology is new in humans. The writer is comparing animal vaccines to humans. Spike protiens contain synctin homologous protiens which is essential for the formation of the placenta in humans. The covid vaccine attacks spike proteins which has this. This vaccine should not be given to children or women of child baring age. It’s not proven yet that it doesn’t effect fertility. In addition, there are over 20k adverse reactions with over 1,000 deaths from the vaccine so far as reported on cdc vaers website. The write also doesn’t mention that the efficacy rate Pfizer and modera claim is based on a study of exposure after 2 weeks only and was not significantly better than the placebo group. No mention of lipid nanotechnology particles crossing the blood brain barrier either causing problems. It’s absolute joke and so is this article.

    • Wrong on every count, except that there are expected, transient side effects. As to deaths, note this on the CDC VAERS website: “Note: Submitting a report to VAERS does not mean that healthcare personnel or the vaccine caused or contributed to the adverse event (possible side effect).” Fact: After 276 million doses of COVID-19 administered worldwide (more than 80 million in the U.S.), not a single death has been attributed to the vaccines.

      • You get it by injection, and it stimulates an immune response. Yes the intermediate step is different – the antigen is injected directly vs mRNA to let our cells make the antigen. But do we really need a separate word? Most people needing the “vaccine” won’t care about the difference.

  • I am disappointed in this publication for allowing this blatant propaganda piece to be published. There are revered scientists around the world who are shocked at the way in which these experimental vaccines are being peddled as safe. They are not recommended for men or women who want to have a child, are shown to cause swelling of lymph nodes in breasts (a symptom of cancer), and are risky for those with severe autoimmune reactions. The vaccines have not been sufficiently safety tested and are being pushed on the public as part of an emergency use authorization. This means under US federal laws your employer or the government can’t yet mandate it because it is NOT safe. Once this stuff is in your body the damage may be done and there is no way to get it out. There is no legal recourse against the companies that created it. You will be on your own living with the consequences. Personally, not enough proof of safety is available to make me risk my personal health. No thank you.

  • Thanks go to the author’s research. But his diatribe here smacks of “Fauci speak”. Everyone knows that this virus has different outcomes for different age groups. Generalizations that ignore those differences are useless. The author seems to believe that government has the right to dictate decisions about personal risk. It does not.

    • I am genuinely surprised at the attitude here.
      This public health concern is bigger than your politics.
      I got both shots, and had no discomfort at all.
      People should not have the right to give us their Covid.

      • Is George the author of this article or a genuine commentator? The “vaccine” has not been tested adequately and anyone who states with “confidence” that there will be no long term health effects is lying. The side effects are not yet known. People have the right to make decisions about their own health and to access objective DATA. It is not right to shove political ideology under the guise of science down their throats.

  • When the government says I still have to wear a mask, maintain social distancing, not able to enjoy going to a restaurant or theater or gather at a place a worship, keep the economy locked down, etc etc AFTER getting a vax – hard no! This article is nothing more than ‘comply propaganda’ spouted out by another tax payer paid government bureaucrat.

  • No way will I take that vaccine as that is my right. To many have died from the vaccine and a lot have issues so bad they had to be hospitalized. I am not hesitant as that vaccine was developed way to fast. I do not trust our Govt after what is going on around our country. I did not get sick I had two strokes but was very lucky that I had no issues. Am in my 60’s and I truly believe the mainstream media and our lying members of Congress made this up to cause panic and did they ever. To thwart our election and that they did.

      • References are abundantly available on the interwebs. Search it yourself.

      • Sure, “no one” has died “from the vaccine” when every death quickly following its administration is deemed not causally related. You know, cause you can’t prove causation when actual testing/the scientific method has not been followed. Because the vaccine never went through conclusive studies, which is why it is not FDA approved or safe. The unethical/bought and sold liberal media would not dare expose any issues because their communist overlords want to force inoculate us like lab rats. Still, there are cases you can find on the internet of individuals otherwise healthy who dropped dead or became extremely ill shortly after being “vaccinated.” In the law, we would deem this a proximate cause of death. How convenient that these pharmaceutical companies can’t be sued so no families can get justice for the deaths of their loved ones. These deaths are happening in the US and Europe. If certain trolls in the comments aren’t careful I will start posting links to articles with examples of their victims.

      • There is a reference below regarding the epoch times.
        From the NYT:
        The websites illustrate how conservative media organizations that spread misleading information, facing crackdowns by the largest social networks, are casting a wider net to reach online audiences. Epoch Media, which is affiliated with the Chinese spiritual movement Falun Gong, regularly publishes anti-Chinese Communist Party content as well as conspiracy theory-laden articles about QAnon and unfounded allegations of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election.

  • Why are the Pfizer and Monderna mRNA vaccines the first ones approved for use in humans? Because for the last 20 years no mRNA vaccine has made it beyond animal trials. The Covid-19 pandemic allowed both manufacturers to skip animal trials and go straight to human testing. There is no way to know what effect mRNA vaccines will have in humans in one year or five years down the road. And if as Moderna says on their website “mRNA vaccines are like an operating system on a computer”, and they can reprogram it to create any protein cell they want, who’s to say the “programing” won’t be detrimental to your well being?

    • Yes, although you wildly overestimate the chances of that happening. That is why the authorizations are “emergency” exceptions.

      • Let’s assume that it has a 0.4% chance of happening. That’s twice the number dying from COVID-19. Then, let’s just imagine what happens if it turns out that 0.4% becomes the reality and everyone who took the vaccine succumbs to it. The potential risk doesn’t have to be high for it to outweigh the risk of not taking the vaccine.

  • This wasn’t news, nor was itinsights.
    This was just propaganda, repeating the very same fear-based slogans we’ve been hearing all year.

    Bottom line (facts, not phobias):
    – The vaccines have not been fully tested yet. The side effects are not known, yet the manufacturers have been idemnified by our corrupt governements.
    – The vaccines don’t work. Our immune systems have a better performance records than the vaccines. And for old/frail people the vaccines are even deadlier than Covid
    – The vaccines are not needed. When we count diabetes deaths as diabetes deaths and cancer deaths as cancer deaths and flu deaths and pneumonia deaths etc, the actual deaths FROM covid are less than an annual flu. This virus is not as deadly as the government and media are trying to make you think.

    Besides, the author is lying. Covid vaccines sceptics are not a “reluctant” minority, they are a strong and vocal majority.

    I will count this as strike one against I&I. Three strikes and I will unsubscribe from you. Very very disappointed that you would publish such garbage.

    • The vaccines work. All of them, so far.
      Look up “excess deaths” from Covid.
      This is a discussion group open to many opinions.
      And, . . I suggest you read the science.

    • I am a 76 year-old war vet and seasoned engineer who earned long ago to beware the man who tells you what you want to believe. You will fall for your own lies.

    • I’m just going to say robust discussion is far more valuable than censoring and this article is certainly stimulating a lot of very robust discussion, so even though I strongly disagree with the author, I applaud I&I for publishing it, although it would be good if I&I editors stated that the views of the author do not necessarily reflect those of the I&I editorial staff.

  • Respectfully, Dr. Miller knows how these things work: in my opinion he is deliberately glossing over the differences between mRNA treatments and subunit vaccines.

    Yes both use manufactured protiens to serve as immune system targets. The difference is that the mRNA treatments are using the patient’s own tissue to manufacture the protiens…in effect turning the patient into a protien factory.

    That part is certainly novel, and like any new technology or in this case a mass-production and rollout of an existing small scale, essentially custom process.

    The mRNA treatments are certainly effective, but there are valid concerns: how long will the patient be a factory? Are there long term issues if the protein production lasts for a long period of time, is there a risk of long term immune system overreaction (autoimmune issues)? What about mutations or copying errors from lack of temperature stability? None of these are necessarily showstoppers, but are concerns.

    He also casts some aspersions at the J&J vaccine, which is a more conventional Adenovirus vector, which if i understand correctly, are analogous to injecting a short-lived virus factory into the patient, which lasts long enough to establish immune system humeral and systemic response, as opposed to building a factory in the body.

    There’s also at least one conventional dead / attenuated virus vaccine, Covaxin, from India, that is either out, or close to release.

    • Not to mention that repurposed ivermectin has been shown to be very effective for both treating and as a prophylactic for COVID-19. Plus, and you can poo poo this all you want, but HCQ also is effective as both a treatment and a prophylactic. In other words, we don’t need a vaccine, we need honest government leaders and media.

  • 99.995% of everything about this plandemic has been false.
    You take your vaccines.
    Leave me alone. Or else.

  • Here is a balanced and unbiased opinion of a doctor who makes it very clear that potential consequences of the “vaccine” are
    yet unknown (see article below). One of the things he mentions is that there is insufficient data to conclude they are safe for pregnant women. Any doctor who says they know for sure these vaccines are safe and there are no risks for your specific health concern is lying to further the goal of vaccinating people as quickly as possible no matter the individual effect on you as an individual. You have a right to put your health first. You have a right to have concerns and to ask questions. At this point, no one in the US can force you to take it. You are not obligated to get vaccinated just because people are bullying you into submission. No version of the vaccine is FDA approved at this point.

    • Of course people have the right to put their own health first, and to have concerns and ask questions — but not at the expense of others.

      As this applies to the vaccine, I don’t think anyone should be forced to get one. If you are scared and don’t want it, I don’t see how your refusal will affect anyone beyond other anti-vaxxers. I got my first shot yesterday, not because anyone “bullied” me, but because I decided that the risk/reward mix favored getting it.

      As for pregnant women, well, I’m not one of them, and they’ll have to make the decision for themselves.

      • Only a man would sideline the reproductive needs of women (pregnant women) as a small unimportant group that doesn’t need to be properly appraised of potential risks in an article like this one. I am not an “anti-vaxer.” I have taken many traditional vaccines that have been properly vetted. This treatment has not been vetted and is not a vaccine by traditional standards. As a woman I’ve been pressured and bullied into taking this “experimental” treatment. At my work, there are groups of “well meaning” people (liberal activists) who go around telling others that there are no potential risks. They say this even to young women who are trying to start families like myself. If I did not have medical researchers in my own family who truly look out for my personal well being I would not be properly informed. They strongly encouraged me to wait for sufficient testing. The health needs of women are often neglected in medical research and women end up suffering as a result because treatments may not be suitable for their needs. People are being discouraged from making sound and fully informed medical choices (they are just being rushed to take this “vaccine”) and that’s a problem. Articles that gloss over the lack of testing are also a big problem. A balanced article would clearly point out gaps in testing and potential risks.

        Too bad that this publication is only posting a mainstream narrative on the topic of covid vaccines. If the publishers had a spine they would allow the publication of criticism or at least find an author who is putting accuracy above his objective of vaccination. There are doctors with varied views out there. I suggest I&I find a few and allow them to share more information.

      • I don’t regard pregnant women as unimportant. I also don’t think that doubts about the vaccine’s safety in that cohort is a reason for everyone else to avoid it.

        As an aside, I am quite far from being a “liberal activist.” I am also quite far from satisfied by the response to covid. That much said, at a very basic level, there’s inductive reasoning: “That which happened before will happen again.”

        This is, in the end, the argument for the vaccine. Ever since Pasteur invented the smallpox vaccine, the vaccine has accumulated an impressive track record in preventing some real nasties. So, if we have the pharmaceutical companies and the FDA aligned, I’ll put my chips on inductive reasoning.

        It’s a matter of assessing risk and reward under conditions of uncertainty. You should be free to make your choice, as I am free to make mine.

      • Are you saying the FDA or pharmaceutical companies have never been wrong? Not sure I would bet on it, lots of money to be made and my understanding is that the pharmaceutical companies cannot be held accountable if they are wrong.
        I will wait and see.

      • I need to correct my comment above. Pasteur did not develop the smallpox vaccine. He was a pivotal figure in vaccine development, but for other diseases.

  • Props to Henry Miller, not just for the article but for his willingness to jump into the comments. I am highly dissatisfied with the handling of covid, both in the U.S. and elsewhere, but have no problems at all with the vaccines, and welcome his sane, fact-based approach.

    As dissatisfied as I am, I will give credit where credit seems due: Trump’s “warp speed” initiative, which cut development time by two-thirds (from 18 months to 6 months); Israel’s stunning vaccination effort, which appears to be very close to eradicating covid there; and my local rural hospital’s adept and well-organized execution of vaccine delivery.

    Yesterday, we got the first Pfizer shot. I have had mild “flu-like” symptoms, and a sore arm. My other half has had no side effects of any kind. Second shot will be March 24th. On the science side, I’m as confident as it’s possible for a civilian to be. On the psychology and politics side, I think we have zealots on both sides acting like squids and throwing ink into the water.

    In any case, Mr. Miller, and I&I, thanks for a solid, rational approach.

  • I hope Mr. (Dr.?) Miller will read the link I will attach, and patiently reply to the points it makes. I am posting not because I believe it, but because a lot of Americans believe something like it, if not this lengthy or articulate. So please resist the temptation to merely scoff; I had to, especially after reading some of the unhinged articles on other topics there, my favorite being that the CIA invented hippies to distract the youth of the 1960s from the Vietnam War.

    No matter how far off you think (and I suspect) the analysis at the link is, these are precarious times. The shakiest since, um, the late 1960s. The mainstream media are showing themselves to be shallow, partisan, and often blatantly unfactual, and the authorities (Fauci & Co.) have shown themselves to be a mass of unreliability, conjecture, and contradiction,

    We need sane, patient voices, and Mr./Dr. Miller, I think you are one such voice. I am no dummy, but I also lack the specialized knowledge that you have. I would be genuinely grateful if you’d accede to my request. You will be doing a public service. Thanks very much in advance.

    • That diatribe is wrong in every material respect. In fact, the mRNA vaccines ARE vaccines, within the meaning of federal regulations and common sense; and without question, they DO prevent infection, as defined (appropriately) in the clinical trials — namely, a positive swab test for viral RNA and at least one symptom. They are 94-95% effective. And he even cites Judy Mikovits, a(nother) certifiable psychotic, which should give you a hint of where he’s coming from. And on and on and on. . . In short, that “article” is nothing more than a contrived, untruthful screed that makes neither scientific nor legal sense. I urge you to read the FDA briefs prepared for the meetings of their vaccines advisory committee.

      • Even if I could somehow force you to give a responsive answer, I wouldn’t want to. So I will only say that I am disappointed, not by your view but by the shallowness of the expression. To me, it’s an example of how discourse has eroded to nearly the vanishing point.

        I’m not going to repeat my original point about why I was looking for a detailed response. I cannot say it any better than I did, but will only hope that I’m not cast as believing the article I linked. Oh well, all I could do is try, but in this case it would require a joint effort.

  • “As of March 3, the CDC has received reports of 97,458 adverse events with 1,381 deaths in people who have taken at least one dose of the approved COVID-19 vaccines. (Those statistics are constantly changing.) Four of those reported deaths were made in Utah through VAERS either by caregivers or loved ones of those who received at least one dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.”

  • Why is this author pushing an untested mRNA vaccine for a China Flu that has a 97.3% survival rate? We also know the death toll is greatly exaggerated. The companies that are producing this crap have 100% immunity against long term effects. Any why did Dr. Falsie apply for a patent on this “Covid Vaccine” in 2014?

    • Read the article, dimwit — especially the section under the heading,”When somebody tells you that we shouldn’t worry about an illness ‘with a survival rate of 99.99%,’ or that ‘herd immunity’ from natural infections will stop the pandemic, you’re about to be misled.”

  • Or don’t take it. It is still your choice as an American to refuse this unproven mRNA shot. Notice it is called a “shot”, not a Vaccine as this author misleadingly describes.

  • In the past vaccines were used to combat scourges of civilization: diseases that maimed or killed large percentages of the population, often children (smallpox, pertussis, tetanus, measles, mumps, etc). Against this backdrop, it was reasonable and morally compulsive, to vaccinate everyone (except those few who had contraindication).

    Compare this to COVID-19 vaccine: There is a 99+ recovery rate. Treatments are available. The virus is only highly pathogenic to a subset of the population (frail elderly, diabetes type 2, obese). It is essentially innocuous to children and young adults. (Notwithstanding a few unfortunates that have an immune deficiency and cannot handle the virus).

    There is a major unknown about this vaccine. The biggest unknown is whether the immune response raised against the COVID-19 spike protein will also act against the SYNCYTIN-1 protein. There is marked homology in both structure and function between the two. Syncytin-1 is necessary for placentation (formation and function). If this immune response is initiated against the spike protein will it also act against this protein? Unknown but the science suggests a strong possibility. The result: loss of fertility of reproductive age females. Note: This is a separate issue as to whether the vaccine is safe for a pregnant female (and at what trimester). By the time we know it will be too late to do anything.

  • Who trusts the New York Times? They are way to the left and are no more than a piece of Democrat talking points. Speaking of conspiracy theories, how did they make out with Russiagate?

About Issues & Insights

Issues & Insights is run by the seasoned journalists behind the legendary IBD Editorials page. Our goal is to bring our decades of combined journalism experience to help readers understand the top issues of the day. We’re doing this on a voluntary basis, because we believe the nation needs the kind of cogent, rational, data-driven, fact-based commentary that we can provide. 

We Could Use Your Help

Help us fight for honesty in journalism and against the tyranny of the left. Issues & Insights is published by the editors of what once was Investor's Business Daily's award-winning opinion pages. If you like what you see, leave a donation by clicking on donate button above. You can also set up regular donations if you like. Ad revenue helps, but your support will truly make a difference. (Please note that we are not set up as a charitable organization, so donations aren't tax deductible.) Thank you!
%d bloggers like this: