A new peer reviewed study published in a high profile medical journal has plainly stated that Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) booster injection mandates targeting college and university students are “expected to cause net harm.”
The science was published Dec. 5 in the British Medical Journal’s Journal of Medical Ethics.
Conducted by a team of nine scientists across the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States, the study made it clear in the opening sentences that it took specific aim at booster mandates for young adult students, “In 2022, students at North American universities with third-dose COVID-19 vaccine mandates risk disenrolment if unvaccinated.”
MORE ON HIGHER EDUCATION DYSTOPIA
- Yale’s COVID Policies Have Turned the Institution Into a Peer-driven ‘Surveillance State’: Report
- Harvard Prof. Charles Lieber Convicted of Lying About China Ties, Receiving Millions in Funding
- ‘Deeply Concerned’ Canadian Province Orders Top Universities to Suspend Projects With China
“To assess the appropriateness of booster mandates in this age group, we combine empirical risk-benefit assessment and ethical analysis,” they added.
The results were anything but pleasing to the ears of those who still believe in mandatory injections, finding that in order to prevent just a single COVID-19 hospitalization every six months, as many as 42,836 young adults need to be injected with a third dose of the novel gene therapy mRNA.
“Booster mandates in young adults are expected to cause a net harm,” the scientists said plainly.
The statement was further backed by analysis which also found that in order to prevent even one COVID-19 hospitalization using the experimental injections, “We anticipate at least 18.5 serious adverse events from mRNA vaccines, including 1.5–4.6 booster-associated myopericarditis cases in males (typically requiring hospitalisation).”
The study picked up some high profile support, namely from Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, who broadcast the emerging science on Twitter on Dec. 6, stating, “Great analysis by outstanding research team showing that mRNA COVID-19 booster mandates likely harm more college students than they help. Remarkably, universities are willfully turning a blind eye. Students, be aware!”
Authors of the study noted the problem of mandatory injection for those seeking higher education is simply viral, “In North America, as of May 2022 at least 1000 colleges and university campuses required COVID-19 vaccination, and over 300 required boosters.”
And yet despite the fact that “more than 50 petitions have been written opposing these vaccine mandates, raising specific legal and ethical complaints,” the authors note that, “To our knowledge, few have changed their vaccine guidance for the 2022–2023 academic year and several have mandated the new bivalent booster.”
“We suggest that general mandates for young people ignore key data, entail wider social harms and/or abuses of power and are arguably undermining rather than contributing to social trust and solidarity,” the team added.
As the researchers put forth their data, they notably found that the case for forcing injections simply doesn’t make sense, “At this scale…boosting young adults with BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] could cause 18.5 times more SAEs [serious adverse reactions] per million (593.5) than COVID-19 hospitalisations averted (32.0).”
The team also estimated that for an average large university campus, forcing the third injection would mathematically cause between 1,429 and 4,625 young adults to suffer from “grade ≥3 reactogenicity disrupting daily activities or requiring medical care.”
The study defines grade 3 or higher reactogenicity as “as local/systemic events that prevent daily routine activities or require use of a pain reliever (grade 3) or resulting in an emergency room visit or hospitalisation (grade 4).”
Moreover, the risk facing males who take the injection of myo/pericarditis is significant. The paper estimated that for men aged 18 to 29, the risk of suffering a serious heart inflammation event was as high as 1 in 7,000. For teenagers aged 16 to 17, the figure ballooned to 1 in 5,000.