Eddie's Blog List

Informed consent to medical treatment is a right that ensures patients receive information about the recommended treatment so they can make a well-informed decision about their medical care.¹ Medical practitioners are both ethically and legally obligated to ensure their patients have an opportunity for informed consent, which means disclosing both the risks and benefits of potential medical treatments.

In the case of the COVID-19 vaccine, it’s not possible to provide a full list of potential risks, considering the unprecedented speed with which they were developed and released to the public — the long-term effects are completely unknown.

Significant concerns have been raised, however, surrounding antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), and the possibility that COVID-19 vaccines could worsen COVID-19 disease via ADE.²

Anyone receiving this experimental medical procedure would certainly want to be informed of its potential to worsen the very disease they’re trying to avoid, but it’s not included as part of the informed consent disclosure — despite researchers recommending back in October 2020 that it be “prominently and independently disclosed.”³

COVID-19 Vaccine Recipients Should Be Warned About ADE Risk

Writing in the International Journal of Clinical Practice, Timothy Cardozo of NYU Langone Health and Ronald Veazey with the Tulane University School of Medicine, noted, “Patient comprehension is a critical part of meeting medical ethics standards of informed consent in study designs.”⁴

As such, they set out to determine if enough research existed to require clinicians to disclose the specific risk that COVID-19 vaccines could worsen disease if the recipient is exposed to circulating virus. First, they reviewed preclinical and clinical evidence, which revealed that ADE is a significant concern. They noted:⁵

“COVID-19 vaccines designed to elicit neutralizing antibodies may sensitize vaccine recipients to more severe disease than if they were not vaccinated. Vaccines for SARS, MERS and RSV have never been approved, and the data generated in the development and testing of these vaccines suggest a serious mechanistic concern:

that vaccines designed empirically using the traditional approach (consisting of the unmodified or minimally modified coronavirus viral spike to elicit neutralizing antibodies), be they composed of protein, viral vector, DNA or RNA and irrespective of delivery method, may worsen COVID-19 disease via antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE).”

Their next step involved reviewing clinical trial protocols for COVID-19 vaccines to determine if this risk was properly disclosed to research subjects (at the time, the vaccines had not yet been released to the public). It was not, leaving people largely in the dark instead:⁶

“This risk is sufficiently obscured in clinical trial protocols and consent forms for ongoing COVID-19 vaccine trials that adequate patient comprehension of this risk is unlikely to occur, obviating truly informed consent by subjects in these trials.”

The conclusion reached by the study was that, in order to meet medical ethics standards of informed consent, people taking part in COVID-19 vaccine trials, as well as those who have received it after approval, should be clearly warned of the “specific and significant COVID-19 risk of ADE.”⁷

This, however, has not occurred, and most receiving it have likely not even heard of ADE, much less its association with the experimental COVID-19 vaccine.

What Is Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE)?

When your body is exposed to a pathogen, it first ramps up a nonspecific response as part of your innate immune system. Next, your adaptive immune response takes over, generating neutralizing antibodies against the pathogen, which work to bind to the offender so it can’t enter your cells.

While vaccines may generate neutralizing antibodies, they can also induce binding antibodies, sometimes referred to as non-neutralizing antibodies, which increase the ability of a virus to enter your cells and worsen the disease.

Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia explained, “ADE occurs when the antibodies generated during an immune response recognize and bind to a pathogen, but they are unable to prevent infection. Instead, these antibodies act as a ‘Trojan horse,’ allowing the pathogen to get into cells and exacerbate the immune response.”⁸

It’s possible for pathogens to cause ADE, the most well-known being dengue virus, which has four different serotypes. If a person is infected with one serotype, neutralizing antibodies may effectively fight back against the disease.

However, if they’re exposed to a different serotype later, the neutralizing antibodies already circulating in their system can bind to the virus and enhance its entrance into cells, causing a severe form of the disease known as dengue hemorrhagic fever.⁹

Vaccinations are also known to cause ADE. In 1969, attempts to create a vaccination against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) catastrophically failed after it led to increased rates of severe illness in infants. Eighty percent of vaccinated infants ended up hospitalized compared to only 5% of the nonvaccinated infants, and two vaccinated infants died due to enhanced RSV infections caused by the vaccine.¹⁰

RSV is an upper respiratory illness that is very similar to that caused by coronaviruses. In my May 2020 interview with Robert Kennedy Jr., he talked about the failed RSV vaccine:

“At the time, they did not test it on animals. They went right to human testing. They tested it on I think about 35 children, and the same thing happened. The children developed a champion antibody response, robust, durable. It looked perfect, and then the children were exposed to the wild virus and they all became sick. Two of them died. They abandoned the vaccine. It was a big embarrassment to FDA and NIH …”

An early version of the measles vaccine also resulted in ADE (measles belongs to the same family as RSV). Children who were vaccinated with the formalin inactivated measles vaccine were more likely to develop a severe, atypical measles infection, including high fever, unusual rash and pneumonia, leading the vaccine to be withdrawn from the market.¹¹

Coronavirus Vaccines Linked to ADE

As Kennedy further noted, coronavirus vaccines remain notorious for creating ADE, or paradoxical immune enhancement. Coronavirus vaccine development, which began in 2002, followed three consecutive severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreaks. SARS is caused by SARS-associated coronavirus, or SARS-CoV.

By 2012, Chinese, American and European scientists were working on SARS vaccine development and had about 30 candidates. Of those, the four best vaccine candidates were then given to ferrets, which are the closest analogue to humans with lung infections. In the video above, which is a select outtake from my full interview, Kennedy explains what happened next.

While the ferrets displayed robust antibody response, which is the metric used for vaccine licensing, once they were challenged with the wild virus, they all became severely ill and died, mirroring the severe effects that occurred during the failed RSV trials.

At the time, even long-time pro-vaccine advocate Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine and professor of pediatrics and molecular virology and microbiology at Baylor College of Medicine, was shaken. According to a feature published in PNAS:¹²

“When SARS, also a coronavirus, appeared in China and spread globally nearly two decades ago, Hotez was among researchers who began investigating a potential vaccine.

In early tests of his candidate, he witnessed how immune cells of vaccinated animals attacked lung tissue, in much the same way that the RSV vaccine had resulted in immune cells attacking kids’ lungs. ‘I thought, ‘Oh crap,’’ he recalls, noting his initial fear that a safe vaccine may again not be possible.”

According to Kennedy, the same thing happened in 2014 with the dengue vaccine DENVax. “They knew from the clinical trials that there was a problem with paradoxical immune response,” Kennedy says, but they gave it to several hundred thousand Filipino kids anyway.

They got a great immune response from the vaccine, but those exposed to wild dengue got horribly sick and 600 of the children died. “Today, the Philippine government is prosecuting criminally a bunch of the people locally who were involved in that decision,” Kennedy says.

Risk of ADE in COVID-19 Vaccines ‘Compelling’

The International Journal of Clinical Practice researchers called the risk of ADE in COVID-19 vaccines not only nontheoretical but also compelling.¹³ They noted that vaccine-elicited enhancement of disease has been previously found with SARS and Middle East respiratory syndrome-related (MERs) coronaviruses, as well as feline coronavirus, all of which are closely related to SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19.

A 2019 study involving macaques and SARS¹⁴ raises additional concerns. According to the researchers:¹⁵

“Inflammation and tissue damage in the lung in this animal model recapitulated the inflammation and tissue damage in the lungs of SARS-infected patients who succumbed to the disease. The time course was also similar, with the worst damage occurring in delayed fashion in synchrony with ramping up of the immune response.

Remarkably, neutralizing antibodies controlled the virus in the animal, but then would precipitate a severe, tissue-damaging, inflammatory response in the lung. This is a similar profile to immune-complex mediated disease seen with RSV vaccines in the past, wherein vaccinees succumbed to fatal enhanced RSV disease due to the formation of antibody-virus immune complexes that precipitated harmful, inflammatory immune responses.

It is also similar to the clinical course of COVID-19 patients, in whom severe COVID-19 disease is associated with the development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 serum antibodies, with titers correlating directly with the severity of disease. Conversely, subjects who recover quickly may have low or no anti- SARS-CoV-2 serum antibodies.”

The goal of most COVID-19 vaccines is to produce neutralizing antibodies, and they believe that vaccine-elicited ADE is therefore likely to occur “to some degree” with COVID-19 vaccines.

“A finite, nontheoretical risk is evident in the medical literature that vaccine candidates composed of the SARS-CoV-2 viral spike and eliciting anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, be they neutralizing or not, place vaccinees at higher risk for more severe COVID-19 disease when they encounter circulating viruses,” they explained.¹⁶

Current data on COVID-19 vaccines do not reveal a risk of ADE, but data are limited and studies have not been designed to follow what happens when subjects are exposed to circulating virus after vaccination, which is when ADE could occur.

“Thus,” the researchers added, “the absence of ADE evidence in COVID-19 vaccine data so far does not absolve investigators from disclosing the risk of enhanced disease to vaccine trial participants, and it remains a realistic, nontheoretical risk to the subjects.”¹⁷

True Informed Consent Is Required to Weigh Risks and Benefits

It’s often recommended that patients weigh the risks versus the benefits of medical procedures before making a medical decision. But this is only possible if informed consent provides an accurate picture of risk. In the case of COVID-19 vaccines, the researchers believe informed consent has failed:¹⁸

“Based on the published literature, it should have been obvious to any skilled medical practitioner in 2019 that there is a significant risk to vaccine research subjects that they may experience severe disease once vaccinated, while they might only have experienced a mild, self-limited disease if not vaccinated.”

Unfortunately, only minor risks such as injection site reactions, rare risks from the past or risks from unrelated vaccines and viruses are typically disclosed on vaccine trial informed consent forms. Further, generic statements about more severe systemic adverse events and death are the norm.

Given the strong evidence of ADE risk from COVID-19 vaccines, the researchers believe that a separate informed consent form should be given out to those receiving the vaccine, warning them of the specific risk of worsened COVID-19 disease from vaccination, and demonstrating consent that they understand this risk.¹⁹ If you received such a form, would it change your mind about getting the shot?

Will the COVID-19 vaccine become mandatory? That’s a question many are asking these days and, by the looks of it, the answer may well be yes — although as I’ll explain later, I suspect the harms of the vaccine will become so apparent that it’ll kill such efforts before they become widespread.

In a January 1, 2021, Newsweek interview,¹ Dr. Anthony Fauci said he was “sure” some institutions and businesses will require employees to be vaccinated, and that it’s “quite possible” the vaccine will be required for overseas travel.

When asked about the possibility of mandating the vaccine on a local level, such as for children attending school, he stated that “Everything will be on the table for discussion.” That said, he pointed out that since “we almost never mandate things federally” — with regard to health — he doesn’t believe a national vaccine mandate will be enacted.

In related news² December 21, 2020, presidential candidate Joe Biden rolled up his sleeve to get publicly inoculated against COVID-19, stating that the vaccine was “nothing to worry about.” He’s also gone on record saying he will push for a 100-day mask mandate in federal buildings if he wins the presidency.³

Can Experimental Vaccines Be Mandated?

While many vaccines are required by state or local law, the thing that sets the COVID-19 vaccine apart from all others is the fact that it is still an experimental vaccine. While Moderna and Pfizer have been granted emergency use authorization for their respective vaccine candidates, they still haven’t even completed Stage 3 clinical trials yet.

The mRNA technology used in these vaccines is also experimental, and the sheer speed at which the vaccines have been developed and tested precludes us from knowing much about their side effects, especially in the long term.

As of December 18, 2020, the adverse event rate in the U.S. was 2.79%.⁴ This means your risk of harm from the vaccine is far greater than your risk of dying from COVID-19, which has an overall noninstitutionalized infection fatality rate of just 0.26%.⁵ Among those under the age of 40, the infection fatality rate is a mere 0.01%.⁶

If an experimental vaccine were to be mandated, it would set a frightening precedent and pave the way for all sorts of nonconsensual medical experimentation on the general public, going forward.

In a December 29, 2020, article⁷ in JAMA, the authors discuss the legal possibility of mandating COVID-19 vaccines, stating that “SARS-CoV-2 vaccines hold promise to control the pandemic and help restore normal social and economic life.”

However, this is questionable, considering the fact that the effectiveness of the vaccines is only measured by their ability to lessen moderate to severe COVID-19 symptoms such as cough and headache. Presumably, this would lower the risk of hospitalization and death for vaccinated individuals.

However, as explained in “How COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Are Rigged,” the vaccines were not evaluated for their ability to actually prevent infection and transmission of the virus. And, if the vaccine cannot reduce infection, hospitalizations or deaths, then it cannot create the vaccine-acquired herd immunity required to end the pandemic.

What’s more, in a November 26, 2020, BMJ article,⁸ Peter Doshi, associate editor of The BMJ, points out that while Pfizer claims its vaccine is 95% effective, this is the relative risk reduction. The absolute risk reduction is actually less than 1%. He also stresses that severe side effects appear commonplace:

“Moderna’s press release states that 9% experienced grade 3 myalgia and 10% grade 3 fatigue; Pfizer’s statement reported 3.8% experienced grade 3 fatigue and 2% grade 3 headache. Grade 3 adverse events are considered severe, defined as preventing daily activity. Mild and moderate severity reactions are bound to be far more common.”

New York Considers Forced Vaccination Bill

None of these open questions is stopping the New York Senate from considering a forced vaccination bill (A416⁹). As reported by constitutional attorney KrisAnne Hall:¹⁰

“January 6 New York Assemblymen will be asked to vote on a bill that will authorize the Governor and/or health officials to seize custody of New Yorkers, imprison, and force vaccinate them without due process.

This bill is not only a threat to the Constitution of New York, the people of New York, but also everyone in America if you consider the way certain legislation can spread throughout America in the age ‘crisis’ …

If passed this legislation will place in the hands of the Governor, or his designated agent, the full and autonomous authority to ‘order’ the ‘removal’ and ‘detention’ of every person the Governor or his ‘delegee’ determines ‘may pose’ a ‘significant and imminent threat to public health’ …

Once some health department worker thinks a New Yorker is a carrier or contact to a carrier, that person will be seized and held without hearing, trial, due process, or bond for a period of time to be determined by the health department.”

As noted by Hall, this bill violates the U.S. Constitution in several different ways. For starters, it eliminates your right to due process before forcing you into the custody of health officials, as well as your right to trial “as required by Article I sec 1 and Article VI Sec 18a of the New York Constitution.”

It also “arbitrarily reduces the well-established standard of strict scrutiny required for the infringement of these fundamental rights to the lesser standard of ‘clear and convincing evidence’ which will be determined solely by the Governor or some worker in the New York Health Department.” This, in turn, violates the constitutional principle of separation of powers.

Thirdly, “A-416 is a bold violation of Article 1 sec 5 and Article 1 sec 12 of the New York Constitution” as it would deprive you of your “inherent rights to due process related to a search and seizure” of your property and/or your body.

“New Yorkers cannot allow that to happen. Everyone in New York needs to contact their Senator and Assemblyman and DEMAND they vote no on A-416. Everyone in America needs to contact their State and demand that such legislation never be drafted,” Hall writes.¹¹

In her blog post, Hall includes sample letter and phone scripts you can use when contacting your representatives.

Blackmailing the Public to Force Vaccine Uptake

Getting back to the JAMA article¹² discussing the legal possibility of mandating COVID-19 vaccines, the authors point out that mandating a vaccine while it’s still under an emergency use approval is “legally and ethically problematic.”

“Vaccine mandates are unjustified because an EUA requires less safety and efficacy data than full Biologics License Application (BLA) approval. Individuals would also likely distrust vaccine mandates under emergency use, viewing it as ongoing medical research,” the article states.

Once the vaccine is fully licensed, however, vaccine mandates “could be imposed in multiple sectors,” according to the authors. Still, they point out that “Given the rarity of adult mandates, states are unlikely to enact mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations for the adult population, especially in the absence of long-term safety data.”

Private companies, on the other hand, can require vaccination as a condition of employment, and according to a Yale CEO survey, 71% of company executives supported the implementation of COVID-19 vaccine mandates in the workplace.¹³

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has already ruled that businesses can compel their employees to get vaccinated, and that they may fire those who refuse. Employers must, however, allow for medical exemptions and “offer reasonable accommodations based on religion or disability.”¹⁴

Schools may also end up requiring COVID-19 vaccination for students, faculty and staff, and it seems likely the vaccine may simply be added to the ACIP-recommended list of childhood vaccinations. Most troubling, however, is the proposal to require vaccination as a condition of service. According to the JAMA article:¹⁵

“It is foreseeable that businesses in certain high-risk settings could require proof of vaccination as a condition of service, such as in long-distance travel (plane, rail, bus), restaurants, and entertainment (sports, movies, theater).

While states might be constitutionally barred from requiring vaccines to participate in religious worship, it is conceivable that some churches, synagogues, or mosques might consider such conditions for congregants. Local or state governments could also require vaccination as a condition of service.”

To be clear, even if state and federal governments don’t mandate the vaccine, by barring unvaccinated people from traveling, participating in social events and even entering into government buildings, they are essentially mandating it. Unvaccinated people would become second-class citizens that aren’t permitted to work, travel, conduct business or engage socially. What kind of life is that?

Yet this is precisely what we may be facing. As noted by the JAMA authors, “If scientific and logistical challenges can be overcome, linking vaccinations as a condition of providing service could be an effective incentive for vaccination.” They really should call it what it is: blackmail.

Many Front-Line Workers Refuse COVID-19 Vaccine

Distribution of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s vaccines began at the end of December 2020. In the U.S., most states have elected to begin distribution among front-line health care workers and in senior care facilities. However, despite media fanfare, many health care workers are leery of the vaccine.

According to news reports, about half of all front-line workers in Riverside County, California, have refused the vaccine,¹⁶ as have 60% of nursing home staff in Ohio,¹⁷ 40% of staff at Chicago’s Loretto Hospital¹⁸ and 40% of LA’s front-line workers.¹⁹ Similar rates of vaccine refusal are being reported in several European countries.²⁰

Interestingly, a survey by the National Association of Health Care Assistants revealed a whopping 72% of certified nursing assistants plan to refuse the vaccine,²¹ as are 55% of firefighters in New York, according to a December 2020 poll by the Uniformed Firefighters Association.²² The reason for this widespread hesitation is as understandable as it is justifiable. As noted in the Western Journal:²³

“Throughout the coronavirus pandemic, any skepticism about the virulence of the virus or wisdom of draconian shutdowns was met with the mantra ‘follow the science’ to stifle any serious debate.

All along the way, however, officials did anything but as they imposed useless mask mandates, allowed Black Lives Matter protests despite closing businesses and imposing social distancing on everyone else, and even expressed skepticism about any vaccine simply because it was developed at the behest of President Donald Trump.

But worst of all, officials undermined science by suggesting that vaccination distribution begin based on race rather than in the nursing home populations that were actually ravaged by the virus.

In short, governments and the medical community killed any credibility they had at the beginning of the pandemic with their repeated hypocrisy and mixed messages. It’s no wonder these workers are reluctant to follow them now and are instead relying on their gut instincts to mistrust the untested vaccine and COVID-19 agenda.”

Side Effects and Deaths Are Stacking Up

The fact that high rates of side effects and sudden deaths are already being reported will hardly improve matters in coming weeks and months. For example, January 4, 2021, RT reported²⁴ that health authorities in Portugal were “on alert” after the sudden death of a 41-year-old pediatric surgery assistant who had been in good health. She was found dead in her bed just two days after being inoculated with Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.

December 30, 2020, the Daily Star reported²⁵ the death of an elderly resident in Lucerne, Switzerland, five days after receiving the Pfizer vaccine. The man had previously “reacted negatively” to the seasonal influenza vaccine. According to the report, he suffered from dementia but was otherwise in good health.

December 26, 2020, a Boston doctor with severe shellfish allergy suffered a life-threatening anaphylactic reaction to the Moderna vaccine. As reported by RT:²⁶

“Within minutes, Sadrzadeh’s tongue and throat began to tingle and go numb, a reaction that he associated with his shellfish allergy. Even more concerning, his blood pressure then dipped so low that it wasn’t even detectable with a monitor. Luckily, the doctor had brought his own EpiPen, which he administered on himself before hospital staff rushed him to the emergency room …

‘I feel that if I did not have my EpiPen with me, I would be intubated right now, because it was that severe,’ he said, adding that it was the worst allergic reaction he had experienced since he was 11 years old. The physician said he now recommends that people with allergies receive the vaccine in a hospital setting, instead of getting it from a clinic or local provider …

The concerning case is the first of its kind to be linked to the Moderna jab. Officials with the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are investigating at least six cases of severe allergic reactions occurring in people who took the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine.”

A December 21, 2020, article²⁷ in The Defender reported the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is investigating a series of allergic reactions to the Pfizer vaccine. Aside from the Boston doctor, other reports of allergic reactions, including anaphylactic shock, include four health care workers in Illinois and three health care workers in Alaska.²⁸ Cases of anaphylaxis also emerged within days of the rollout of Pfizer’s and Moderna’s vaccines in the U.K.²⁹

Thousands Injured in Mere Days

According to the CDC,³⁰ by December 18, 2020, 112,807 Americans had received their first dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Of those, 3,150 suffered one or more “health impact events,” defined as being “unable to perform normal daily activities, unable to work, required care from doctor or health care professional.”

That’s 2.79%. Extrapolated to the total U.S. population of 328.2 million, we can then expect 9,156,780 Americans to be injured by the vaccine if every single man, woman and child is vaccinated. Is this really reasonable for a virus that has an average survival rate of 99.74%?³¹

In the end, I suspect and predict that widespread mandates for COVID-19 vaccination will not take place. I believe there will simply be too many injuries and deaths from the first and second rounds of vaccinations, and that will destroy any and all vaccine mandate arguments.

Allergy Alert

Many suspect polyethylene glycol (PEG), found in both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s vaccines, might be the culprit causing allergic reactions and anaphylaxis. According to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., “studies show that 1 in 7 Americans may unknowingly be at risk of experiencing an allergic reaction to PEG.”³²

Kennedy believes “everyone should be screened for anti-PEG antibodies before getting the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines,” adding that “It is unconscionable that, instead, the FDA and CDC are encouraging people to go ahead and risk a life-threatening anaphylactic reaction and just assume that someone will be on hand to save them.”³³

It’s worth noting that the CDC has updated its vaccine guidance in response to reports of allergic reactions to the Pfizer vaccine, stating that:³⁴

“If you have had a severe allergic reaction to any ingredient in an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, you should not get either of the currently available mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. If you had a severe allergic reaction after getting the first dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, CDC recommends that you should not get the second dose.

CDC has also learned of reports that some people have experienced non-severe allergic reactions within 4 hours after getting vaccinated (known as immediate allergic reactions), such as hives, swelling, and wheezing (respiratory distress).

If you have had an immediate allergic reaction — even if it was not severe — to any ingredient in an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, CDC recommends that you should not get either of the currently available mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

If you had an immediate allergic reaction after getting the first dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, you should not get the second dose … People who are allergic to PEG or polysorbate should not get an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.”

COVID-19 Outbreaks Occurring Among Vaccinated

Yet another interesting problem that has arisen is that many newly vaccinated individuals are suddenly testing positive for COVID-19. In a San Jose, California, hospital, 51 employees tested positive within 10 days of vaccination, although it’s unclear whether all of them had actually received the vaccine.³⁵

One died from COVID-19 complications. Interestingly, the outbreak is being blamed on an employee who showed up wearing an inflatable Christmas costume. The same pattern has been reported elsewhere.

For example, in Israel, 21 residents of a retirement home tested positive for the virus after receiving the vaccine.³⁶ Authorities pointed out that since two doses are required to provide protection against SARS-CoV-2, you can still catch it after the first dose. The same argument was made in the San Jose hospital case.

A doctor in Philadelphia also tested positive after taking the vaccine,³⁷ as did a nurse in San Diego.³⁸ In each case, health authorities have insisted that it’s not the vaccine causing the problem but, rather, the fact that the shot needs time to work.

Overall, there’s plenty of reason to be cautious and delay COVID-19 vaccination as long as possible. As mentioned earlier, I believe that, in time, the harms will become apparent enough that any talk about mandating these vaccines will simply evaporate.