John Weaver | More on Booster Reluctance

Letters to the Editor
Letters to the Editor

Thomas Oatway (letters, March 3) has commented on my letter (Feb. 6) regarding my granddaughter’s dilemma as whether to succumb while pregnant and get a COVID-19 booster shot or lose her job. The issue, from my granddaughter’s point of view, was possible harm to her unborn child. 

While I appreciate Mr. Oatway’s attention and concern, I think he missed the boat with respect to certain facts. He writes, for example, that my granddaughter had been fully vaccinated when I clearly stated that she had both recovered from a previous COVID infection as well as having been fully vaccinated. Since the “science” has shown that previous infection provides better, longer-lasting protection than the vaccine and since that natural immunity had already been “boosted” by the vaccine, and since she is a healthy young woman with no co-morbidities, my granddaughter is in little danger from COVID. Her baby, however, might be from the booster shot. 

Mr. Oatway explains that one of the reasons people fail to get boosted is misinformation and then goes on to cite Centers for Disease Control recommendations. What Mr. Oatway fails to recognize in this situation is that one of the biggest purveyors of misinformation in this sordid scenario is that very same CDC. From using teacher union demands rather than science to determine classroom policy to giving false information about masks, vaccines, therapeutics, and the efficacy of natural immunity, the CDC has proven itself to be much more political than scientific. Mr. Oatway’s statement that “there is no evidence that the booster causes harm to the pregnant woman, the unborn child, or any long-term effects on fertility” is particularly absurd and galling. Of course, there’s no evidence. In the time since boosters started, the population of such women who have given birth is not large enough to have formed a database upon which any conclusions could be drawn. After all, there was no known problem of myocarditis with young men after taking the vaccine until a large database had been accumulated. Then there was. 

Also, any conclusions about effects on fertility, at this point, are necessarily fallacious. The children must be born and live through their childbearing years before we will know whether there is an effect on fertility. That will require at least 20 years. The same uncertainty applies with respect to the vaccination of young children. There is a reason that many medicines carry the precaution, “If you are pregnant or planning to become pregnant, seek advice from a physician before taking this medicine.” Why is that precaution absent from the COVID vaccines? But then again, it doesn’t matter because doctors are prohibited by unaccountable bureaucrats from saying negative things about the vaccine. 

The most upsetting aspect of my granddaughter’s dilemma, which Mr. Oatway fails to address, is that very fact that both national and state rules regarding personal health care are handed down by bureaucrats, rather than being left to the sound judgement of competent doctors and their informed patients. It’s almost as if the Hippocratic oath has been changed from “First, do no harm” to “First, obey your bureaucrat masters.” 

As I said in the conclusion to my last letter, “How long will we tolerate it?”             

John Weaver


Related To This Story

Latest NEWS