On Vaccine Mandates

The degree of polarization around the COVID-19 vaccine today is not surprising. One perspective comes from those who are champions of individual rights, bolstered by what they read and hear about the dangers of the vaccine. On the other side are those who accept the reported science and believe vaccinations are the only solution to the pandemic.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at http://spectrummagazine.org/node/11382
4 Likes

in a way, it does seem as if the world is starting to close in on the unvaccinated…my hometown of Calgary, which is in a conservative province, while it won’t be seeing vaccine passports, will be seeing vaccine certificates, which more and more businesses are saying they will require for admittance…these businesses are also starting to say that onsite employees will need to be vaccinated…many of the city’s largest unions are starting to require vaccination in their members…in Vancouver, where I’ve been for awhile, and which is in a liberal province, vaccine passports will be issued soon…these will be required for everything from outdoor patio and indoor dining to attendance at concerts and possibly even outdoor park events, like SeaWorld…in general, Canada is now saying that vaccine passports will soon be required for all air and train travel…

it’s looking like soon, an unvaccinated person, who insists on staying unvaccinated, will be able to sit in his living room at home, and watch TV, but that’s about it…i can totally see why so many people are up in arms…

one thing to note in our adventist context, however, is that many of the people who are now clamouring for freedom of conscience privileges on the vaccines were the same people who denied those privileges to WO supporters when Africa and S. America gave us the No Vote in San Antonio…they were even calling on TW to immediately cut off churches, and even unions, who were practicing WO…

after WO, and now the vaccines, one wonders what will be next in dividing the church so completely…

5 Likes

For one who rightfully advocated so strongly for choice when it came to abortion of fetuses with conditions that are “incompatible with life” including Trisomy 21, at the last GC Executive Session, Dr. Hart seems to have abandoned this freedom of choice that we so long has aspired to when it comes to the vaccine. He is much more anti-choice than I thought he was. Maybe he can explain this discrepancy. Should we soon find him arguing against abortion as a legitimate and honorable choice for birth-capable individuals and their doctors to make?

4 Likes

Abortion is a bioethical issue. The vaccine is a public health issue. Most Seventh-day Adventists do not have the expertise in bioethics requisite to grappling with the issue of abortion. Therefore, these Seventh-day Adventists in their examination of the merits of the vaccine should not analogize to abortion but to simple things, like seatbelts, motorcycle helmets, fluoridation of water supplies, and public smoking, as Dr. Hart does in his excellent essay.

Most Seventh-day Adventists are not smart. They are easily suckered by misinformation and loony conspiracy theories. The crackpots in our faith community, those who refuse to be vaccinated, need guidance. And if they refuse to be guided, then they should be given a little nudge in the form of a vaccine mandate.

16 Likes

Thank you for condescending to reply to a post from a fellow Smartventist(r). I’m sure in your community you are much appreciated, or unfairly maligned.

5 Likes

Not for nothing do some insist that the “A” in SDA stands for arrogance.:rofl:

2 Likes

Apparently you missed the point when you tried to trot out your “experts know best” argument a few days ago.

To repeat, if a majority of experts must be “right” simply because there are more of them, there should be no Adventist or even any Christian churches given that both are in the minority, according to the experts in Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, etc.

There was a time when most scientists agreed that the world was shaped like a frisbee and when preachers taught people to keep their windows closed to keep out the “wild air”. Those experts—and there were lots of them—were wrong. So the question in every situation inevitably comes down to which expert each individual decides for himself is the most reasonable.

If you don’t trust people to make that decision for themselves then, yes, the experts in totalitarianism are correct and everyone needs “a little nudge”, just as you suggest. I only hope you you’re not too disappointed if they decide it’s you who needs a shove, in one direction or another!?!?:flushed::flushed::flushed:

1 Like

[quote=“spectrumbot, post:1, topic:21939”]
Perhaps the most pertinent example is smoking . As long as your smoking was just a danger to you, we were willing to let you pursue your habit
[/quote\

While it may seem illogical to disagree with this, to some extent, very qualified “voice of wisdom” one should not ignore the not-so-subtle sense of entitlement to judge and worse, control others, through his own judgement errors. That is why in this country it used to take a balanced US Congress to legislate public law, which we are now so quick to exchange for “executive orders” from leaders who are either bias, incapable, or even illegally implementing them.

It is not the same to restrict smoking in a restaurant or an airplane as it is to require proof of vaccination in the same places. The first law aims to temporarily modify a potentially damaging public behavior, the second one permanently ignores and removes basic human rights. What happens when we extend the second law to supermarkets or all public transportation, or places of employment, as it is already is being implemented by private business? We have just created a category of people who don’t deserve to exist.

Sadly, this doctor with 50 years of obvious bias wisdom, while saying we need to balance our decisions with data from all sides he purposely diminishes one side by pointing to extreme cases (microchips) at the same time of bolstering the other side (FDA approval) and promoting “blessed” medical delivery mechanisms (mRNA) from which even he doesn’t have enough data or time to confirm they are completely safe to human life. What about the tens of 1000’s who have reportedly died or the millions who have suffered significant negative side-effects? Or the reports that we are not receiving objective full disclosure of these deaths?

2 Likes

@vandieman

Just some interesting facts that may be useful to know:

The first vaccine ever made was developed in 1796 to combat smallpox, an infectious disease that has killed millions over the years. However, while hundreds of thousands where dying of smallpox, the Micmac native Americans of Nova Scotia were successfully treating the disease using a botanical infusion derived from the insectivorous plant Sarracenia purpurea. A study published in 2012 entitled “In Vitro Characterization of a Nineteenth-Century Therapy for Smallpox” (available on the CDC’s website) has confirmed that Sarracenia purpurea does indeed inhibit the replication of the smallpox virus.

The smallpox vaccine had, and still has, a high rate of serious adverse effects, so much so that it is now administered only to people that are really at risk of being exposed to the virus, and to those that will be part of the response team in case of a bio-terror attack.

In other words, millions have suffered or died needlessly from smallpox because they were not informed about a simple, effective and readily available therapy (sarracenia purpurea), others suffered serious side-effects because they were taught that vaccination was the best and only remedy, the panacea against infectious diseases. Are we going to repeat the same mistake and wait 200 years to finally acknowledge the existence of better, simpler, safer and cheaper alternative therapies against covid-19?

Contracting serious illness from covid-19 is strongly correlated with Vitamine D deficiency (amongst other things), and vitamine D is known to be an key regulator of the immune system. The 8 laws of health are key to combat covid-19.

An article entitled “Zn(2+) inhibits coronavirus and arterivirus RNA polymerase activity in vitro and zinc ionophores block the replication of these viruses in cell culture” was published in 2010, and, guess what: “Hydroxychloroquine is a zinc ionophore”, meaning that it facilitates the penetration of Zinc into the cell. Hydroxychloroquine has been shown to be effective against SARS-CoV2 if taken early enough with Zinc (c19early.com). Quercetin is also a zinc ionophore and it is natural and safer than hydroxychloroquine (https://c19quercetin.com/).

Several meta-analysis studies on Ivermectin have proven that it is highly effective against SARS-CoV-2. Ivermectin binds to the cell’s ACE2 receptor, and therefore blocks the coronavirus from entering the cell (see “The mechanisms of action of Ivermectin against SARS-CoV-2: An evidence-based clinical review article”)

Etc … (there are many effective startegies, some of which can be combined for almost 100% success rate)

Both Hydroxycholoroquine and Ivermectin are included in WHO’s list of essential medecines. They have been extensively studied for several decades meaning that safe dosage limits are clearly known.
(However Quercetin may be preferred over Hdroxychloroquine.)

The experimental mRNA therapies (long-term effects are unknown since they are being used on humans for the first time) developed by Pfizer and Moderna enter healthy cells then hack their protein-making machinery to produce the spike protein -a toxin- they would not have naturally produced otherwise (which could lead to auto-immune diseases).

Alternative therapies exist but people are not properly informed nor given the freedom to choose. Yet we know that vaccination against SARS-CoV2 does not prevent viral infection/transmission, especially with the delta variant. Also, the vaccine induced immune response diminishes with time or when facing new variants (hence the need for booster shots) of what is likely to become a seasonal virus, meaning that people relying on vaccine for protection will need to take the shot every year. Not even mentioning concerns over vaccine related deaths that have been (largely under-)reported; increased risk of contracting the extremely rare auto-immune disease Guillain-Barré after Johnson&Johnson vaccine injection; heart inflammation occurring after Moderna and Pfizer vaccine injection; blood clotting caused by AstraZeneca and J&J’s vaccine; concerns over the bio-distribution of the spike proteins produced after Pfizer’s vaccine injection: a Japanese study has revealed that Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine (more specifically the lipid envelope carrying the mRNA vaccine) does not remain located at the site of injection, but enters the bloodstream and accumulates in the ovaries, bone marrow, heart, liver, …, raising concerns about long term consequences in terms of fertility for women for instance.

Finally, the World Economic Forum has published an interesting article entitled: “Bill Gates: How HIV/AIDS prepared us to tackle COVID-19”. It that is true, then I think it is usefull to study how HIV/AIDS crisis was actually handled. There is an excellent and award-winning documentary exposing the hidden truth about the HIV/AIDS crisis, entitled “House of Numbers”. It is truly eye opening…

3 Likes

one phenomenon we’re seeing that cannot be controverted, and that’s driving the momentum towards mandates, is the association between hospital systems overrun with covid patients and low vaccination rates:

Deena Hinshaw, Alberta’s chief medical officer, is describing Alberta’s 4th wave as a “pandemic of the unvaccinated” due to the fact that the overwhelming percentages of hospitalizations from covid now are not from people who are suffering from vaccine after-effects, but from those who continue to refuse the vaccines…we can talk all we want about Mi’kmaq ingenuity, and the fact that common remedies, like baby aspirin, have been showing tremendous promise, and it is conceivable that at some time in the future we’ll have the luxury of time and space to consider alternatives to the vaccines…but at the present moment, particularly during the now universal delta surge, vaccines and boosters really are our best tool…public health agencies, vested with the responsibility to achieve positive health outcomes over broad populations with limited medical infrastructure, would be derelict to overlook their relatively quick and comprehensive efficiency…

here are two additional interesting facts:

  1. egw is said to have taken the smallpox vaccine, and is said to have advised others to do the same for their own and others’ health, which if true, shows a recognition of public responsibility, in addition to a private one…

  2. George Washington, 12 yrs before his presidency, and when the smallpox vaccine was still experimental - not even at the equivalent of an EUA stage - mandated the vaccine to all soldiers in his Continental Army who were fighting against Britain, who hadn’t already recovered from smallpox…this is because smallpox was killing more soldiers than the brits…the Revolutionary War is considered pivotal in America’s historic democracy…mandated vaccines clearly played a role in the development of the concept of civic freedoms that many are now using to fight mandates…

5 Likes

I do not deny the fact that vaccination offers some level of protection against severe covid19 illness.
My point is that better, safer, simpler and cheaper alternatives exist, and that is being censored/obfuscated by the media. People at risk are given two options: vaccination or death. People are not properly informed because of the crazy disinformation campaign going on in the media.
Take smallpox for instance: of course it is deadly, but vaccination was not the only nor the best remedy available. Countless people have died from smallpox who could have been saved using a simple botanical infusion (it is also the case for malaria treatment with Artemisia).
People died from covid because they were not given appropriate treatments at the right time.

In France for instance, many doctors were willing to prescribe hydroxychloroquine because they understood clearly how it would be beneficial for patients, but the French government banned doctors from making hydroxychloroquine prescriptions, after a single dubious and now retracted study about cardiovascular risks. Pfizer’s vaccine is known for causing heart inflammation in healthy children, yet they did not express any concern. This is inconsitsent and dishonest. The french government also restricted ivermectin stocks to drive the crisis further and put the blame on the non-vaccinated. For sure they would have sent non-vaccinated to the lions if we were living a couple centuries back. Yet vaccination does not prevent infection/transmission of the coronavirus, even more so with delta variant.

Quercetin is probably a better choice than hydroxychloroquine, since it is a natural zinc ionophore, and it has no side-effects, even though, as far as I understand, hydroxychloroquine’s side-effect occur only when the safe dosage limit is exceeded or usage is prolonged, which should not be the case for covid19 treatments.

5 Likes

I think EGW did not know about Sarracenia Purpurea, like many at that time, otherwise I am certain that she would have been in favor of the better, safer and natural treatment.

Today we still lack proper information because it is obfuscated by the constant media propaganda noise. I wonder how many know about Sarracenia Purpurea. I learnt about it only a few months ago. We hear a lot about smallpox and smallpox vaccine, but not much about Sarracenia Purpurea.

Jeremy, have you checked your sources of truth? CNN, WBUR, Etc. Every single one with one exception Mississippi Today is left wing

1 Like

Thanks for the link to the “House of Numbers”. Will definitely be watching. I’ve appreciated your comments and agree with your information and observations.

1 Like

Sometimes self righteousness gets it wrong.
Mandates are a prelude to bigger mandates against God’s people.
However the church has already relinquishedk her rights by so quickly shutting down and closing shop during the pandemic. The church has been quick to align herself too closely with the government.

You don’t realize that it’s better for you that one man should die for the people than for the whole nation to be destroyed.”
John 11:50

The vaccine mandate at this time
Is not unto salvation despite some trying to inject the Bible into this. Stop focusing on the obvious and look at the spiritual consequences of this pandemic.
Pastors have been so quick to say that God has nothing to do with Covid 19.

do you really think the medical professionals guiding our governments are hanging on to every word coming out of their TV’s…I think most of them are too busy to watch TV…some of them may in fact be providing the information that the TV reporters are reporting…

do you think it’s possible that the right wing media in these largely Republican areas are silent, because they don’t want to highlight something that could place their governorships in peril…on the other hand, it’s possible that the left wing media is highlighting the situation in these areas because they do want to place Republican governorships in peril…

I think you’ll find that reporting on hospitals and covid in southern states will produce the same story line, whether they’re right or left leaning…facts are facts, whether a democrat or republican is stating it…none of these newspapers are making up the fact that the Republican south is overrun with the virus…

if you’re implying that there’s something wrong with Fauci just because Trump has led the GOP to beat up on him, understand that I am more inclined to favour Fauci specifically because Trump disdains him…Trump has proven to my satisfaction that he’s a centre of disinformation, and that the truth lies exactly where he says and pretends it doesn’t (remember, Trump is known for having told 30, 573 lies while in office)…the reality is that AIDS is now a largely treatable disease…we’d be fortunate if covid were in this boat…

3 Likes

Regarding Hydroxychloroquine, I must admit that over dosage or prolong use (which is not the case for covid19 treatments) may indeed lead to serious side-effects. Quercetin, a natural plant flavonoid, is also a zinc ionophore and a safer alternative to hydroxycloroquine (https://c19quercetin.com/).

1 Like

Apologies for the length of this response, but I wish to provide a scientific refutation of the policies promoted by Dr. Hart and implemented at LLUMC. I am a scientist, but virology, public health, medicine, etc., are not my fields of expertise, so I am simply passing along what I have read. Consider the data and make up your own mind. Better yet, do what I do, and don’t “make up” your mind, but keep it open to change as evidence changes. That is what I respectfully invite Dr. Hart to do.

I’m interested that Dr. Hart used fluoridation as an example. As a chemist, I remember reading several fluoridation articles over the years in the official publication of the American Chemical Society. In 1988, for example, a senior reporter wrote: “Fluoridation of Water: Questions about health risks and benefits remain after more than 40 years” (Bette Hileman, Chem. Eng. News 1988, 66, 31, 26–42; https://doi.org/10.1021/cen-v066n031.p026). Turns out there were (are) serious issues with fluoridation. A key takeaway for our discussion is that the reason these issues remained unaddressed, and the reason debate continued 40+ years later, was that the EPA, Public Health Service, and editors of scientific publications suppressed views and studies submitted by scientists who didn’t support the narrative driven by these agencies that wanted universal fluoridation. Note that this was acknowledged in an official ACS publication, not some “crackpot” conspiracy site. I fear that much the same is happening now, with widespread suppression and deplatforming of scientists and doctors of great experience and expertise, just because they disagree with the prevailing narratives on COVID-19, its prevention and treatment. Or, even if they don’t disagree but merely ask challenging questions. That isn’t science; it is group-(non)think and propagandizing.

Vaccine mandates are being justified with the argument that the nonvaccinated pose a risk to others. For example, a nonvaccinated nurse might infect patients or fellow employees, and therefore hospitals like LLUMC are justified in mandating vaccination of employees. In some cases, those who disagree are terminated. In other cases, they are allowed to continue working but with twice-a-week testing and continuous mask-wearing (possibly at their own expense). Considering that these are often the same employees who courageously faced (and even were infected by) COVID-19 while caring for patients this past year, sometimes with little PPE available to wear, this policy is inexcusable unless the scientific evidence shows that they pose a major risk to others if not vaccinated. But do they? At a time when the Delta variant overwhelmingly prevails throughout the United States, what do the latest scientific findings show?

First, vaccine mandates that don’t allow for religious exemptions, especially in an Adventist hospital, would be surprising considering our stance on religious liberty, and of questionable legality. Likewise, mandates that don’t exempt those with health conditions that make them poor candidates for vaccination are inhumane. Hopefully LLUMC has exempted employees in these categories. But moving on from these cases, what about the general employee population? What does the science say?

Vaccine mandates that make no exception for those who have natural immunity due to previous infection fail to recognize that the latest information from highly vaccinated Israel shows that those with natural immunity have greater resistance than those twice-vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine. (See Gazit et al., “Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections”; https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1.full.pdf ). From their abstract, “SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees had a 13.06-fold (95% CI, 8.08 to 21.11) increased risk for breakthrough infection with the Delta variant compared to those previously infected, when the first event (infection or vaccination) occurred during January and February of 2021. The increased risk was significant (P<0.001) for symptomatic disease as well.” That’s right. THIRTEEN TIMES more risk among the vaccinated. Even for those infected in 2020, the risk was still several times higher for the vaccinated.

But what about transmission? That’s the key issue anyway, right? It is sad if someone chooses not to be vaccinated and then suffers or dies from COVID-19, but that’s their choice. The argument under consideration in employer-employee relations is whether nonvaccinated people pose a higher risk of infecting others.

A recent study from a group in Wisconsin found viral loads in Dane County testing to be the same in vaccinated vs. nonvaccinated people (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.31.21261387v1.full.pdf). More relevant to Dr. Hart and LLUMC, an Oxford-affiliated tertiary hospital in Vietnam found that staff, who had all been uniformly vaccinated twice (this being Vietnam), two months after the second dose were spreading the Delta variant amongst each other at significant rates, with viral loads 251 times higher than the loads the general public had with the original virus months before (https://tinyurl.com/4ur8hxj2). Thus, “science” says that vaccination is not protecting against transmission of the Delta variant, which is the dominant strain in the USA. But it’s worse than that: because many vaccinated individuals have mild symptoms if they are infected, they don’t realize they are shedding virus. Furthermore, many vaccinated individuals feel free to resume normal life without distancing, masking, etc. because they feel protected. Thus, vaccinated individuals can easily be “super-spreaders.” That’s apparently what happened in Barnstable, MA.

So why, exactly, should an employer, including hospitals, require their employees to be vaccinated against COVID? They don’t apparently present a higher risk to patients or fellow employees. For those employers who don’t outright fire their nonvaccinated employees but require twice-weekly testing and fulltime masking if they aren’t vaccinated, why don’t they require the same of their vaccinated employees, since their transmission risk is apparently the same (or higher if they are getting infected off-the-job because they are less careful)? If testing/masking is necessary to protect patients or other employees from nonvaccinated staff, then the same protective measures are needed to protect against vaccinated staff.

If employer policies are about protecting clients, patients, or other employees, then science suggests that vaccinated and nonvaccinated employees should be treated the same, with the same preventive measures required.

If, on the other hand, society or employers feel an obligation to force vaccination on employees to protect those individuals themselves, then we have crossed a line. I would then solicit my friend Phil Brantley to provide a legal explanation for why employers looking after the health of their employees shouldn’t also mandate (both on and off the job) no smoking, no alcohol consumption, regular exercise, 8 hours of sleep, drinking water instead of soda or coffee, a vegan diet, or any of a number of other measures that are associated with better health outcomes (at least by some scientists or employers). After all, diseases like CVD, stroke and diabetes are associated with specific lifestyle choices, and they annually kill more people than COVID-19 has, year after year.

To be perfectly clear, my argument is not about whether vaccines work or not, or whether they are safe or not, or whether one would be wise to take them or not. (Sadly, I have two nonvaccinated friends in the hospital with COVID pneumonia as I write; I pray that they recover). It is about whether science supports employer COVID-19 vaccine mandates, or mandates in other areas such as entry into stores, public gatherings, etc. I believe a good argument can be made that it does not. One then must ask, Why are hospitals risking staff shortages and burn-out by stressing or terminating employees in the midst of a pandemic, if the science doesn’t support mandates?

5 Likes

agreed, and quercetin is found in many foods that average vegetarians eat…

From The New York Times: “Dying in the Name of Vaccine Freedom.”

2 Likes