Twelve reasons why universities need to drop their COVID mandates now
Many universities are still mandating that students get vaccinated and boosted. The scientific evidence is crystal clear on boosters: they are unethical. The colleges don't care.
All universities should drop their COVID vaccine mandates immediately.
Here are 12 reasons why.
Mandates are unethical because the harms clearly outweigh the benefits; it isn’t even a close call. A new paper by top scientists at Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Oxford, and UCSF show that the risks clearly outweigh the benefits. The paper states unequivocally that university booster mandates are unethical and provides five different reasons, each of which is sufficient on its own to halt the mandates.
Kids who get COVID have at best a 1 in a million chance of dying from the disease. So the safety level of the vaccine should be very high… it needs to cause fewer than 1 death in 10 million. How are you going to test that?
The newest booster doesn’t have a single safety study showing a net all-cause mortality or morbidity benefit. The new Pfizer bivalent booster was tested on just 8 mice. It was never tested on humans. We have no idea what the all-cause mortality and morbidity profile of this new combination is. No one at Stanford could possibly know this. This lack of safety vs. efficacy data is why Dr. Paul Offit, one of the most respected vaccinologists in the world, refuses to take the new booster. If Dr. Offit is refusing the booster, why are we forcing Stanford students to take it?
Universities are still claiming that “vaccines help protect our community” when we know this is no longer true. The official narrative has changed to “vaccines will help you avoid hospitalization and death.” That is not a community benefit. It is a personal benefit. It should be a personal choice.
We don’t know the true risk because the CDC has been ignoring the COVID vaccine safety signals since the start of the vaccination program nearly 2 years ago. The CDC isn’t monitoring any of the COVID vaccines for safety signals. For example, the safety signal for “death” was satisfied, but the CDC hasn’t acknowledged this. Why should we trust the CDC if they aren’t doing even the most basic safety monitoring?
The people making the decision to mandate the vaccines refuse to be held accountable. There have not been any public debates on college mandates anywhere. When students and faculty try to question the policy makers, in every instance, the policy makers refuse to provide answers. I believe that the reason for this is that mandating vaccines and boosters is simply indefensible and college administrators do not want to be embarrassed.
The CDC is ignoring credible data showing the vaccines are unsafe. There was very significant safety data discovered by a scientific panel appointed by the Israeli Ministry of Health showing that the COVID vaccines were not nearly as safe as had been claimed by world governments. I asked over 250 people who work in vaccine safety at the CDC and not a single person wanted to see the data. Even Stanford Professor Grace Lee who heads the CDC’s outside vaccine safety committee refused to answer whether she wanted to see the data (she called the police in lieu of answering the question).
Where there is risk, there must be choice. There is no question that the vaccines have risk because there are over 1,200 papers published in the peer-reviewed medical literature on adverse events associated with the COVID vaccines.
The CDC now recognizes natural immunity. Greta Massetti who wrote the most recently updated CDC guidelines stated that 95% of the population has some level of immunity so why are universities still forcing vaccines when new guidelines "represent an increasing focus on individuals making their own decisions about their level of risk and how they want to mitigate that risk”?
The world’s most highly respected doctors are now reversing their position on the vaccine. Doctors Peter McCullough, Paul Marik, and most recently, Aseem Malhotra are all prominent doctors who switched sides to speaking out against the COVID vaccines after carefully studying the data. These top doctors have one thing in common: when they looked at the data directly themselves, they were all appalled at what they found.
University faculty who have expertise in vaccine science are choosing to remain silent when asked for comment. For example, at Stanford, I asked Professors Yvonne Maldonado, David Relman, and Grace Lee to comment on the justification for the Stanford vaccine policy and all declined to respond.
No data transparency. We know for sure that vaccine killed at least one college student. Are colleges disclosing to kids the number of students who died from the vaccine vs. the number of kids who died from COVID? Why is the FDA hiding the autopsy reports on people who died after getting the COVID? Are colleges explaining this lack of transparency to students who they are forcing to take the vaccine?
No transparency about what is in the vaccine vials. It is illegal to get vaccine vials to analyze to assess how intact the mRNA instructions are. This was a major problem during testing and there is no data it was ever solved. We are not permitted to know if the mRNA is degraded because nobody is allowed to analyze the vials. Nobody should be mandated to take an injection of an unknown substance that nobody is allowed to verify.
Stanford has had at least three 'unexpected deaths' this year:
Evan Reed, a very fit 46 year old professor of Material Science. He died at home on March 19, 2022.
Graduate student John Chipman died suddenly on May 3 2022 in Sacramento.
At SLAC, laser engineer Steve Edstrom died suddenly on June 18 2022.
The causes of death were not disclosed in any of these cases. Is Stanford certain none of these deaths were caused by the vaccine? Were the proper stains done in the autopsy investigation to ascertain this? Why not?
How many people died from COVID this year at Stanford? If the answer is none, then why is Stanford taking emergency measures to combat this “problem”?
For more information on the status of college mandates, see “An Update on College Mandates.”
This is just the short list of reasons for dropping the mandates. There is a 72-page justification described in this article How Data Compelled a Columbia U Researcher to Fight Mandates: A Conversation with Dr. Spiro Pantazatos.
Another great post Steve and thank you for highlighting our latest article. Please follow our work at www.nocollegemandates.com. We need more people to join this fight until all of the 1000 colleges that mandate vaccines and the 325 colleges that mandate boosters drop their unscientific and unethical vaccine mandates.
Steve - I wish everyone would drop the argument "harms outweigh the benefits". That is a pro-vax position, and we need to stop using their frames.
For example, let's pretend there is a new vaccine where 1 in 1,000 people die from the vaccine, but 1 in 999 die from the disease. Would the mandate then be justified? Should the vaccine even be approved?
OF COURSE NOT! And the reason is, vaccines are a preventative intervention. There is no guarantee you're going to get the disease, so its apples & oranges. You're comparing a certainty of death with a hypothetical situation. This isn't a cancer drug, this is a drug we're giving to healthy people.
Me, personally, I dont care how dangerous the disease is, I want the preventative intervention to have a fatality rate of 1 in a million MAX. Others, like Robert Kennedy Jr, have even higher standards, saying preventative interventions must be 100% safe (even 99.99% isn't good enough).
So please let's all remember that comparing risks to benefits is for medicine to treat people who are sick, there has always been a completely different standard for medicines given to healthy people.