Updated, adapted, and expanded from a public statement submitted to the 01/13/2022 Cook County Board of Commissioners meeting by a WACC member
The Cook County vaccine mandate is designed to coerce people into accepting a medical procedure that they do not want to accept. If people have not gotten vaccinated by now it is likely that they do not want to. From a public health perspective, this coersion is not an appropriate action for at least four reasons.
First, the vaccines are doing little to protect the vaccinated. While vaccination has been shown to decrease disease severity and duration and risk of hospitalization (1, 2), so has Vitamin D (1, 2, 3, 4) and a healthy BMI. Meanwhile, vaccines are not very effective at preventing infection. Furthermore, effectiveness wanes over time and further decreases as new variants arise. Between 06/20/2021 and 07/17/2021, Israeli data showed vaccine effectiveness against infection to be 39%. By 09/28/2021, Department of Defense data revealed mRNA vaccine effectiveness against infection to be 41% among recipients 65 and older. Also see for example:
“In this prospective longitudinal study, we found a significant waning of humoral responses within 6 months after receipt of the second dose of BNT162b2 vaccine in a large cohort of 4868 participants.”
https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2114583?articleTools=true
“Elderly individuals (60+) who received their second dose in March 2021 were 1.6… times more protected against infection and 1.7… times more protected against severe COVID-19 compared to those who received their second dose in January 2021. Similar results were found for different age groups… These results indicate a strong effect of waning immunity in all age groups after six months.”
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262423v1.full.pdf
“…in March, protection against infection was: 88%… for Janssen; 92%… for Moderna; and 91%… for Pfizer-BioNTech. By August, protection against infection had declined to: 3%… for Janssen; 64%… for Moderna; and 50%… for Pfizer-BioNTech.”
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.10.13.21264966v1
“Estimated BNT162b2 effectiveness against any SARS-CoV-2 infection… reached its peak at 77.5%… in the first month after the second dose. Effectiveness declined gradually thereafter, with the decline accelerating after the fourth month to reach approximately 20% in months 5 through 7 after the second dose.”
https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2114114?articleTools=true
“Vaccine effectiveness of BNT162b2 against infection waned progressively from 92%… at day 15-30 to 47%… at day 121-180, and from day 211 and onwards no effectiveness could be detected….”
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3949410
“In July 2021,… 469 COVID-19 cases were identified among Massachusetts residents…; 346 (74%) occurred in fully vaccinated persons…. Cycle threshold values were similar among specimens from patients who were fully vaccinated and those who were not.”
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7031e2-H.pdf
An analysis entitled, “Worldwide Bayesian Causal Impact Analysis of Vaccine Administration on Deaths and Cases Associated with COVID-19: A BigData Analysis of 145 Countries,” which is problematic but should not be ignored, had “Results [that] indicate that the treatment (vaccine administration) has a strong and statistically significant propensity to causally increase the values [deaths and cases]… over and above what would have been expected with no treatment. …89.84% of statistically significant countries showed an increase in total deaths per million associated with COVID-19 due directly to the causal impact of treatment initiation. …86.78% of statistically significant countries showed an increase in total cases per million of COVID-19 due directly to the causal impact of treatment initiation…. with an average causal impact of +463.13% [for deaths and]…. an average causal impact of +260.88% [for cases].” Note that analysis revealed a “+38% Vaccine Causal Impact on Total Cases Per Million” and +31% vaccine causal impact on total deaths per million in the United States.
A study that looked at data from 68 countries found that “…there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days. In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people.” They conclude, “The sole reliance on vaccination as a primary strategy to mitigate COVID-19 and its adverse consequences needs to be re-examined, especially considering the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant and the likelihood of future variants.”
On that note, that the vaccines are doing little to protect the vaccinated is all the more true given the current prevalence of the the Omicron variant. Consider the data. Using early December US data, the CDC found 79% of Omicron cases to be among fully vaccinated people, including 33% of people who had received their boosters. UK data from weeks 51 of 2021 to week 1 of 2022 shows 68% of COVID deaths occurred in those who were fully vaccinated. Denmark data from 11/21/2021-12/25/2021 shows that 72% of Omicron cases are among those who completed their primary vaccination schedule compared to just 8.5% of Omicron cases among the unvaccinated.
Next, consider the science. One study entitled “Omicron Extensively but Incompletely Escapes Pfizer BNT162b2 Neutralization,” found a 22-fold reduction in vaccine neutralization capacity with Omicron. Another paper concludes: “Primary immunisation with two BNT162b2 or ChAdOx1 doses provided no or limited protection against symptomatic disease with the Omicron variant.” Another study found that, “Remarkably, neutralization of Omicron was undetectable in most vaccinated individuals.” Another found a 35.7-39.9-fold lower geometric mean neutralization antibody titer for Omicron, concluding, “Omicron variant escapes neutralizing antibodies elicited by BNT162b2 or CoronaVac.” Another study‘s “findings demonstrate a substantial and unprecedented reduction in plasma neutralizing activity against Omicron versus the ancestral virus, that in several cases may fall below protective titers.” A study out of Denmark found that during the 91-150 day period following vaccination, Moderna vaccine effectiveness against Omicron infection waned to -39.3% and Pfizer vaccines effectiveness waned to -76.5%, meaning vaccination was associated with increased risk of infection with Omicron. While these studies do generally conclude that booster doses are more effective, authors are still finding considerable escape: “Administration of a booster Pfizer dose as well as vaccination of previously infected individuals generated an anti-Omicron neutralizing response, with titers 6 to 23 fold lower against Omicron than against Delta.” Moreover, how long booster induced immunity can be expected to last is highly questionable given the rapidly and severely waning immunity we witnessed following initial doses. Coercive measures to promote vaccination is not indicated as a strategy to protect the vaccinated as it confers minimal benefit.
Second, the vaccines will not protect the unvaccinated. Not only will vaccines not prevent infection, but once someone has become infected, having been vaccinated does not prevent that person from transmitting the virus. Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson and Johnson all acknowledge in their briefing documents to the FDA that they do not have data that enables them to claim the vaccines stop transmission. Multiple studies have since confirmed that they do not. A study out of Vietnam compared median viral load among unvaccinated alpha variant infectees with that of vaccinated delta variant infectees and found that the latter was 251 times that of the former. The authors of a study using data from a SARS-CoV-2 testing center in Wisconsin reports, “We find no difference in viral loads when comparing unvaccinated individuals to those who have vaccine ‘breakthrough’ infections,” and go on to state, “Our results, while preliminary, suggest that if vaccinated individuals become infected with the delta variant, they may be sources of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to others.” One study “found no significant difference in cycle threshold values between vaccinated and unvaccinated… groups infected with SARS-CoV-2 Delta.” Another study determined that “Individuals with vaccine breakthrough cases caused by Delta had a low median PCR cycle threshold (Ct) value (a proxy for high virus load). This value was closely similar to the median Ct value for unvaccinated patients with COVID-19 caused by Delta variants, suggesting that fully vaccinated individuals can transmit SARS-CoV-2 to others.” Yet another study had similar findings, leading to the conclusion “…that vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals infected with the Delta variant might transmit infection.” In fact, the CDC acknowledges that, “Delta variant vaccine breakthrough cases may be as transmissible as unvaccinated cases.” Coercive measures to promote vaccination is not indicated as a strategy to protect the unvaccinated as vaccinated infectees can still transmit the virus.
Third, Omicron may be presenting an opportunity to reach herd immunity and stop this pandemic, while vaccination against Omicron may well perpetuate it. Although antibodies post-vaccination or post-infection from preceding variants do not effectively neutralize Omicron, antibodies following Omicron infection do neutralize preceding variants as has been shown by Khan and colleagues who write, “The increase in Delta variant neutralization in individuals infected with Omicron may result in decreased ability of Delta to re-infect those individuals. Along with emerging data indicating that Omicron, at this time in the pandemic, is less pathogenic than Delta, such an outcome may have positive implications in terms of decreasing the Covid-19 burden of severe disease.” Fortunately, Omicron is well-suited for the role of conferring herd immunity in that it is less dangerous compared to other variants both in terms of risk for hospitalization and disease severity. “Early analyses suggest a reduced risk of hospitalisation among SGTF [Omicron]-infected individuals when compared to non-SGTF infected individuals in the same time period. Once hospitalised, risk of severe disease was similar for SGTF- and non-SGTF infected individuals, while SGTF-infected individuals had a reduced risk of severe disease when compared to earlier Delta-infected individuals.”
Vaccination, on the other hand, appears to be driving immune escape. A study examining viral sequences from samples collected in the Houston Methodist hospital system found that “…Delta caused a significantly higher rate of vaccine breakthrough cases (23.7% for Delta compared to 6.6% for all other variants combined).” Another study “…estimated the relative VE of ChAdOx-1 vaccination in our HCW [healthcare worker] analysis against B.1.617.2 versus other lineages, finding an increased odds of symptomatic infection and disease with B.1.617.2 compared to non- B.1.617.2 following two doses. These data indicate reduced VE against B.1.617.2 and support an immune evasion advantage for B.1.617.2.” A study by Servellita et al. found 78% of vaccine breakthrough cases were a result of infection by antibody resistant strains compared to 48% in the unvaccinated population. The authors concluded: “The predominance of immune-evading variants among breakthrough cases indicates selective pressure for immune-resistant variants locally over time in the vaccinated population concurrent with ongoing viral circulation in the community.” Coercive measures to promote vaccination is not indicated as a strategy to protect the population as it may reduce the potential for reaching herd immunity and drive the evolution of more virulent strains.
Fourth and most significantly, there are grave concerns with regards to COVID vaccine safety. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is imperfect, primarily in that it is well known from healthcare workers’ claims (1, 2) and other sources that most vaccine adverse events do not get reported. In fact, a study posted in October of 2021 estimated that COVID vaccine deaths were underreported to VAERS by a factor of 20. Serious adverse events have been estimated to be underreported by a factor of 30. Another method of calculation yields a VAERS death underreporting factor estimate of 44.64. Regardless, VAERS is the best safety data publicly available in the US. So what does it reveal? 1,033,992 reports of adverse events have been processed between 12/14/2020 and 01/07/2022. Prior to the the COVID vaccine rollout, the highest number of reports of death in a year had been 605. We are now up to 21,745 reports of death following COVID vaccination. “Of the 9,936 U.S. deaths reported as of Jan. 7, [2022,] 19% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 24% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 61% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.” (1, 2, 3) We are often cautioned that a causal relationship has not been established. While this remains true, ignoring 21,745 deaths, especially given their temporal proximity to vaccination and that this is certainly an undercount, would be exceedingly foolish.
Also note that Pfizer itself, in a recently released document, admits to having received 42,086 reports of adverse events between 12/01/2020 and 02/28/2021, 25,379 of which were medically confirmed and 1,223 of which were deaths. Note that these numbers are likely also an undercount and only reflect the consequences of the first two months of vaccine rollout.
Moreover, that these vaccines cause injury and death should be entirely unsuprising given that the scientific literature has demonstrated that injury and death highly are likely to result. While there is an abundance of different health risks that have been studied, consider just three in the interest of brevity.
1) Cancer:
“…the spike protein localizes in the nucleus and inhibits DNA damage repair by impeding key DNA repair protein BRCA1 and 53BP1 recruitment to the damage site. Our findings reveal a potential molecular mechanism by which the spike protein might impede adaptive immunity and underscore the potential side effects of full-length spike-based vaccines.”
https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/10/2056/htm
Note that, “It has been extensively demonstrated that aberrant expression of 53BP1 contributes to tumor occurrence and development. 53BP1 loss of function in tumor tissues is also related to tumor progression and poor prognosis in human malignancies.”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30497961/
2) Fertility:
Pfizer’s report to the Japanese government which presents mRNA containing lipid nanoparticle biodistribution analysis found accumulation in particularly high concentrations in the ovaries. https://www.pmda.go.jp/drugs/2021/P20210212001/672212000_30300AMX00231_I100_1.pdf
Note that nanoparticles (NP’s) “…can pass through the blood–testis barrier, placental barrier, and epithelial barrier, which protect reproductive tissues, and then accumulate in reproductive organs. NP accumulation damages organs (testis, epididymis, ovary, and uterus) by destroying Sertoli cells, Leydig cells, and germ cells, causing reproductive organ dysfunction that adversely affects sperm quality, quantity, morphology, and motility or reduces the number of mature oocytes and disrupts primary and secondary follicular development.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC6294055/
3) Autoimmune Diseases:
One study found that “SARSCoV- 2 antibodies reacted from low to very high with 28 out of 55 tissue antigens. These 28 antigens were a diverse collection of tissue groups that included gut and barrier proteins, gastrointestinal system cells, thyroid, nervous system, heart, joint, skin, muscle, mitochondria and liver tissues….”
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fimmu.2020.617089/full
A review of the literature urges, “As a matter of fact, because of the pathogen–host peptide commonality, a potential consequence of vaccination might consist of a specific autoimmune reactions hitting self-antigens such as the already analyzed alveolar surfactant protein.” The authors continue, describing the body’s reponse to the spike protein: “In order to understand its nature we were able to prove that the infiltrate was dominated by T lymphocytes (CD3+), and the most numerous of them were CD8+ suppressors, observed in the lungs, adrenals, liver, intestine and other organs partly accompanied by tissue lesions. Taking in to consideration that one of the most important mechanisms of autoimmune reactions is CD8+ T Cell mediated cytotoxicity, we assumed that the findings confirm an autoimmune process.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC7289100/
Another study’s findings “…that 21 out of 50 tissue antigens had moderate to strong reactions with the SARS-CoV-2 antibodies are a sufficiently strong indication of cross-reaction between SARS-CoV-2 proteins and a variety of tissue antigens beyond just pulmonary tissue, which could lead to autoimmunity against connective tissue and the cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and nervous systems.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC7246018/
The study author’s fears are apparently well justified as a recent autopsy report following the deaths of 15 vaccinated human subjects concluded: “Histopathologic analysis show clear evidence of vaccine-induced autoimmune-like pathology in multiple organs.”
https://doctors4covidethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/end-covax.pdf
Coercive measures to promote vaccination are not indicated as a strategy to protect the population as it clearly violates the most basic principle of medical ethics: first, do no harm. Where there is risk, there must be choice. These vaccine requirements take away people’s ability to freely choose.
In sum, the vaccines will not protect us from COVID, and will certainly not protect us from Omicron. Omicron results in relatively mild cases and may be our best shot at protecting the population from more severe disease and a prolonged pandemic. There can be no doubt that the vaccines are extremely dangerous and indeed, deadly. Taking coercive measures to force people to accept a dangerous and deadly procedure that will not protect them from a disease that most of them do not need protecting from is non-sensical, immoral, and absolutely unacceptable in a free society.