With COVID vaccine pushers stopping at nothing to promote the narrative, those who refuse to inoculate are being vilified. For that matter, the pro-booster folks are now turning on the citizens formerly known as fully vaccinated. So why do the anti-vaxxers refuse the jab? There’s a lot more to COVID vaccine resistance than mere stubbornness.
It Is About Liberty
(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)
For one thing, Americans simply don’t appreciate being bossed around. For some, it’s a matter of religious liberty. There are those who believe that God will either heal their ailments and let them live or grant the ultimate healing and call them home. It’s a test of faith. Of course, those groups represent a fairly small portion of Christians and Jews, as most adherents to other denominations accept that sometimes God works through others – like doctors. For most who hold a religious objection to vaccination specifically, it’s less about refusing medical treatment in general and more about the ethics of the creation of the drug itself – but more on that in a bit.
For others, it really is just a matter of “I don’t want to, and you can’t make me,” regardless of what President Joe Biden has to say on the matter. And, one may wonder, what’s so bad about that? For those more skeptical of the miraculous vaccines, several questions must be answered: If masks work, why do we need vaccinations and social distancing? If social distancing works, why do we need masks and vaccines? If the vaccines are 100% safe and effective against COVID – or, if you do get it, 100% effective at preventing serious symptoms – why do we need masks and social distancing? Finally, if social distancing, masks, and vaccines really are fully effective, why does any vaccinated person care what the rest of us do? They’re safe, aren’t they?
Well Yes, but Actually No
So far, the CDC has reported that more than 14,000 hospitalized COVID patients – including almost 4,000 who died – were vaccinated. How does one square that with the advertisements on TV and radio harking the vaccines as 100% effective? True, 14,000 – and especially 4,000 – are tiny numbers when compared to the total vaccinated population. Still, 100% means 100%. Here’s the statistical justification for dismissing the concerns of anti-vaxxers: The CDC reports that, as of August 30, more than 170 million people have been fully vaccinated, and that just 0.01% of those have ended up in the hospital or died due to breakthrough COVID cases. So, while 4,000 dead and 14,000 hospitalized certainly seem significant, statistically, one could easily argue, they are not.
(Photo by Paul Hennessy/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Hey, but at least the vaccine itself is safe, right? Well, sure, it seems to be when you look at the minute percentage of adverse reactions compared to the total population. But let’s look at the raw numbers. According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), there have been 595,622 adverse reactions from December 2020 to Aug. 20, 2021. That’s 0.35% of the total vaccinated population, though most of these were temporary effects. Of those, 17,228 (0.01%) resulted in permanent disabilities and another 13,068 (0.008%) caused the death of the recipient. That breaks down to an average of 1,452 people a month killed over those nine months.
Are these numbers statistically significant? Arguably, they are not. But what about humanly significant? Just as with those breakthrough cases – or any negative event that catches folks unaware, for that matter – every one of those 13,068 killed and 17,228 permanently disabled was a person who, if they ever gave thought to vaccine injury to begin with, didn’t think it would happen to them.
Let’s look at another cause of death, one around which the left loves to rally: firearm homicides. According to the CDC’s most recently published report, there were 14,414 people intentionally murdered with firearms in 2018, or an average of 1,201 a month. So, the vaccine itself – not COVID-19 – has killed, on average, over 200 people per month more than the violent use of firearms. And how does it stack up statistically? Of the total U.S. in 2018, those firearm homicides account for 0.004% – about half as much of the respective total as have been killed directly by the COVID vaccines. One might wonder how the miracle vaccines will compare to the evil guns after a full year of data is collected.
Now back to the argument that vaccine injuries are statistically insignificant. If it’s excusable despite being twice the percentage of those murdered with firearms, what does that say for the so-called “gun violence epidemic” as a public health crisis?
From Anti-Abortion to Anti-Vax
The ethics of vaccine refusal isn’t just about the liberty of “my body, my choice,” or the right to refuse for any reason or even no reason at all. There’s also an ethical – and, often, religious – concern over the use of aborted fetal cells.
According to the CDC, only three vaccines are authorized for use in the United States:
- Pfizer-BioNTech – which is also the only one fully approved by the FDA
- Moderna
- Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen
Throughout various stages of the development and manufacturing processes, fetal cell lines from past abortions were used. Those cells came from two sources, as explained in a handout from the North Dakota Department of Health. HEK-293 is a kidney cell line that came from a fetus in 1973 of undisclosed origin, meaning it was either a miscarriage or elective abortion. PER.C6 is a retinal cell line from an aborted fetus in 1985.
Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine requires the use of the PER.C6 cell line for its manufacture. The two mRNA vaccines — Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna – didn’t rely on either cell line for the initial development or continued manufacturing, but they were tested using these cell lines.
Those who either don’t understand the ethical concerns surrounding this issue – or do, but don’t care – are quick to point out that these pharmaceuticals don’t contain aborted fetal cells and that just because cloned cells from aborted children were used doesn’t mean more abortions will be necessary. There are a few issues with these “clarifications.”
The first and most important issue is complicity. Knowingly taking a vaccine developed or tested using cells that originate from abortions isn’t the same as having an abortion – but it’s about as close, ethically speaking, as receiving goods known to be stolen, a crime commonly called theft by receiving, is to stealing the items oneself.
The second issue is that, though these decades-old cell lines are still being used, that hasn’t stopped new cell lines from being acquired for the development of vaccines or the sale of fetal tissue in general for medical research.
Finally, while there are rigorous filtration procedures to remove any of the cells used from the vaccine itself, the process isn’t guaranteed to work 100% of the time. So, while manufacturers do try to remove the actual human cells – and probably succeed more often than not – it’s only unlikely that a dose contains actual fetal cells.
Mind Your Own Business
While getting the jab may seem perfectly reasonable to some, there are legitimate safety and ethical concerns for others. In the end, whatever a person’s reason for resisting – even if it’s as irrational as simply disliking the president who suggests it – preventive medicine is a personal choice. Those who want to get vaccinated and can justify it ethically should do it – then go on about their lives without trying to manage everyone else.
~
Read more from James Fite.
