BREAKING: DEVASTATING vaccine booster harms in young American adults (university age), study by Høeg & Makary et al.; no formal risk-benefit assessment exists for this age group, net expected harms

by Paul Alexander

22,000 - 30,000 prior uninfected adults aged 18-29 must be boosted with mRNA shot to stop 1 Covid-19 hospitalization; 18 - 98 serious adverse events, 1.7 - 3.0 booster-associated myocarditis in males

Briefly and remember, the SARS-2 virus (COVID virus) is akin to SARS-1 (2003), but the one difference is the furin cleavage site (FCS) at the SI:S2 sub-unit junction (or proteolytic cleavage site of 4 amino acids and you insert the FCS there) that makes it vastly more dangerous as to transmission and lethality. This FCS one difference, is what sets COVID virus apart.

Now to this breaking study by Makary and Hoeg et al. who focused on university aged students (the healthiest and well among us in the US). They utilized the CDC and sponsor-reported held adverse event data, and found that booster mandates may indeed contribute to a net expected harm.

Yes, this study is based on secondarily held data (CDC etc.) and not primary patient level data but the methods is bullet proof and potent and as a purist researcher, I support these findings. The modelling is robust. The writing is elegant and clean. Understandable. The methods (data) does not take into account the ‘protection conferred by prior infection nor a risk-adjustment for comorbidity status’. This should be taken into account by the reader.

Key finding:

‘Our estimate shows that university Covid-19 vaccine mandates are likely to cause net expected harms to young healthy adults—between 18 and 98 serious adverse events requiring hospitalization and 1373 to 3234 disruptions of daily activities—that is not outweighed by a proportionate public health benefit. Serious Covid-19 vaccine-associated harms are not adequately compensated for by current US vaccine injury systems. As such, these severe infringements of individual liberty are ethically unjustifiable.’


Covid-19 vaccine boosters for young adults: A risk-benefit assessment and five ethical arguments against mandates at universities

Students at North American universities risk disenrollment due to third dose Covid-19 vaccine mandates. We present a risk-benefit assessment of boosters in this age group and provide five ethical arguments against mandates. We estimate that 22,000 - 30,000 previously uninfected adults aged 18-29 must be boosted with an mRNA vaccine to prevent one Covid-19 hospitalization.

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. Given the high prevalence of post-infection immunity, this risk-benefit profile is even less favorable.

University booster 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. Finally, we discuss the relevance of our analysis for current 2-dose Covid-19 vaccine mandates in North America.’