If vaccine mandates are to protect life, why aren’t we making choices that protect *all* human lives?
“Vaccine mandates are for the greater good of the community as it is our individual responsibility as citizens to make choices that protect human life.”
This is the typical sentiment behind most vaccine mandates for COVID-19, including the new national "booster for all" push. (Note: because of the latest updates from the CDC, there are an increasing number of business and places that now consider fully vaccinated to mean two shots plus one booster which we are told is needed against the threat of covid's newest variant, Omicron.) This is odd because this choice contradicts the advice of scientific and medical experts who have warned since the beginning of vaccine rollouts that inequitable distribution could create conditions where new variants could emerge; in the past few months, the World Health Organization has consistently called out the actions of wealthy countries who have stockpiled vaccines to "boost" and "reboost" their entire populations before lower-income countries have had the chance to begin vaccinating their most vulnerable (meaning those that are elderly, immunocompromised, and/or healthcare workers who are constantly exposed to risk) . If this was about public health and the protection of human life, why wasn't equitable vaccine distribution prioritized? Given that we are now almost three years into the pandemic, why is this critical conversation still being ignored? Why aren't companies like Pfizer and Moderna being pressured into sharing their intellectual properties for covid-19 vaccines (particularly Moderna which was largely funded through taxpayer dollars)? How could this truly be about protecting human life when we are actively making choices that are not protecting all human lives?
--
“[Boosters] are a scandal that must stop now… it makes no sense to give boosters to healthy adults, or to vaccinate children [who have minimal risk], when health workers, older people and other high-risk groups around the world are still waiting for their first dose,” says WHO’s Director-General, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus.
—
The call for protection against the Omicron variant within mainstream news in the u.s. has generated a great deal of arguably unreasonable fear and anxiety (it's critical to note here that fear and anxiety inhibit the immune system which is the frontline defense against all COVID-19 and all dis-ease; chronic stress can even have a negative impact on developing antibodies against viruses). Caution and mindfulness is deeply important in these times of unknown, YES, but the absolute fear currently being strategically exacerbated in the news goes against all the current data from places like South Africa, UK, & Scotland which have all marked Omicron as mild in comparison to variants like Delta; according to the CDC's director, Rochelle Walensky, the current cases within the u.s. have also been noted as mild in healthy populations even with unvaccinated patients. (To be clear, i use this language because i deeply believe the high levels of uncontrollable fear, anxiety, confusion, and stress makes us even more vulnerable and i would argue capitalism intentionally employs such methods because it creates a further need for consumerism as we are left to believe we can only turn to Big Pharma and similar corporations. to “fix” everything .) The CDC has used limited studies that demonstrate the benefits and additional protection of “boosters,” particularly in immunocompromised people who may not generate protective antibodies even after vaccination, but so far has offered no explanation or data about why boosters are needed in healthy, immunized populations (particularly for young folks that are already fully vaccinated or have had prior infection--both of which demonstrate a level of protection against severe illness, according to the CDC).
(Recently, the CDC revised its estimates for the Omicron variant in the u.s. from 73% to 23%—a 50% decrease—in the week ending December 18th. For anyone paying close attention to the CDC’s website, this is not the first time they have had issues regarding numbers. It’s fair to ask how an agency of this caliber messes up numbers this bad—particularly an agency that seems fairly pressed on alarming the entire eligible population to get boosters.)
South Africa, which was the first country to ring the alarm on Omicron, seems to have already reached the peak of its latest surge with a steady decline in cases over the last couple of weeks. There were relatively very few hospitalizations and death associated with Omicron, according to African officials that also shared it is significantly milder than variants like Delta. While a number of mainstream news sources continue to use rhetoric that makes us feel as if anyone not “boosted” is at risk of severe illness and death, they conveniently leave out the fact that South Africa is 26.6% vaccinated. Despite the fact that most news stories i've read on this contribute South Africa’s milder experience of covid to their low median age (27.6) as well as the amount of prior infection within the region, somehow this logic does not carry over to the u.s. which is pushing “boosters for ALL.” There is a national push without any hard evidence of why a booster would be needed in younger, healthy, already immunized populations and without any mention of potential risk like myocarditis which has been noted as rare but more common in males under 40, with males 16-24 being at most risk.
Multiple countries including Germany, France, Sweden, Finland, Norway, Iceland, and Denmark have actually banned Moderna for use in young people which caused more cases of myocarditis compared to other vaccines. Countries like Canada have clearly cautioned young folks against using the Moderna vaccine: "I'm not holding any facts back, there is a risk," says Dr Moore, Ontario's chief medical officer. Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) only recommends boosters for certain members of their population, feeling there is no evidence of waning immunity over time against several COVID-19 in the general population. According to Health Canada, "evidence continues to show that being fully vaccinated provides strong protection against serious illness, hospitalization and death from COVID-19, including against the delta variants."
Did you know two of the Food and Drug Administration's senior advisors resigned this fall because they felt pressured to rush a decision on boosters at the expense of scientific data as well as safety? The Biden administration, which promised to follow the science, made an announcement to the general public about the rollout of boosters before the vaccine companies had even sent an application to the FDA to authorize a third dose. Dr. Philip Krause and Marion Gruber, quickly after leaving the FDA, joined a group of international scientists to put together a critique of widespread booster shots which was published in The Lancet. Feeling there was no evidence to support boosters for the general population and recommending against mass "boosting,” they note: "The limited supply of these vaccines will save the most lives if made available to people who are at appreciable risk of serious disease and have not yet received any vaccine. Even if some gain can ultimately be obtained from boosting, it will not outweigh the benefits of providing initial protection to the unvaccinated.”
If vaccine mandates are truly about protecting human life, why isn't there more talk on vaccine equity? Knowing that medical experts have warned since the beginning that the lack of vaccine equity could prolong the pandemic: why do rich nations continue to stockpile vaccines to "boost" and "reboost" their entire populations before lower income countries have even began to vaccinate their most vulnerable? Why was Omicron so mild in a country like South Africa where so little of the population is fully vaccinated and even fewer are boosted—but yet the entire eligible u.s. population needs to be “boosted” to avoid severe illness or death according to the rhetoric expressed in mainstream news? Why would an administration that promised to "follow the science" ignore the critiques and warnings of the World Health Organization and leading scientists? Could $10 billion—which investors for Pfizer and Moderna made at the announcement of Omicron—have anything to do with current public suggestions/policies?
***
Disclaimer: to be super clear, i am not arguing against the noted benefits and additional protection of “boosters,” particularly when it comes to immunocompromised and elderly people in the u.s. who are not always at the forefront of our conversations; they can be at extreme risk even with a milder variant and in these cases, boosters make absolute sense. However, what is the justification with “boosters for all” particularly when experts warn us that inequitable distribution of vaccines could PROLONG the pandemic; particularly with a variant like Omicron which South Africa, UK, and Scotland (as well as current cases in the u.s.) has noted as mild in comparison to the Delta variant; particularly when we know, according to the data, that not everyone is at risk of hospitalization or death—in fact, the World Health Organization stated in 2020 that 80% of cases in are mild (refer back to last blog for more on this); admitting this is not to negate the amount of loss we have collectively experienced, however, within the context of mandating a vaccine (plus boosters) that does not necessarily prevent transmission but is intended to reduce hospitalization and death, this is an important detail.
