Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

‘I Had to Stand up and Try to Do Something:’ Professor of Medicine on Suing School Over Vaccine Mandate (University of California, Irvine)
Epoch Times ^ | 10/28/2021 | Jan Jekielek and Zachary Stieber

Posted on 10/28/2021 8:00:39 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

Dr. Aaron Kheriaty reacted to the COVID-19 pandemic like many other medical experts. He worked long hours as the United States tried to grapple with the new disease. He had too many conversations with family members whose loved ones were dying from it.

But as time wore on, he started noticing a pattern in public health decisions that seemed to diverge from traditional medical ethics, including an insistence that people at little risk from COVID-19 get a vaccine.

Kheriaty is now on suspension from the University of California, Irvine, (UCI) and challenging the school’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate in court.

“I had to stand up and try to do something about it,” the professor of psychiatry and director of the UCI Health’s Medical Ethics Program said on The Epoch Times’ “American Thought Leaders.”

UCI spokespeople declined to comment for this story.

‘Liberating’

Kheriaty contracted COVID-19, the disease caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, in mid-2020. His infection was confirmed by two different tests from two independent labs. His five children and wife also contracted the disease. They all recovered, with none requiring hospital care.

“It was, for me, actually a very liberating experience afterward, because I didn’t have to worry about the illness anymore. I knew the science on natural immunity,” Kheriaty said.

Natural immunity refers to when people contract COVID-19 and recover. Dozens of studies have documented that these individuals enjoy strong immunity against CCP virus re-infection. Some of the studies suggest the immunity is superior to that provided by COVID-19 vaccines, particularly the Johnson & Johnson one.

“I knew that at that point, I was among the safest people to be around, I didn’t have to worry about transmitting the infection to my patients,” Kheriaty said.

He continued taking precautions, wearing personal protective equipment like masks as required at the hospital. But he was confident he didn’t pose a risk to others, which served as a relief.

That relief turned into disbelief when, around a year later, the University of California system, which includes UCI, imposed a COVID-19 vaccine mandate.

Opt-Out is Temporary

The mandate (pdf) included a natural immunity opt-out, but only temporarily. People who recovered from COVID-19 were told they would only be exempt from the mandate for up to 90 days after their diagnosis.

University officials cited the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which alleges that the antibody tests it has authorized “are not validated to evaluate specific immunity or protection from SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

SARS-CoV-2 is another name for the CCP virus.

“For this reason, individuals who have been diagnosed with COVID-19 or had an antibody test are not permanently exempt from vaccination,” officials said.

The mandate violated rights outlined in the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment, including equal protection and substantive due process, Kheriaty’s lawsuit asserts.

“Plaintiff is naturally immune to SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, plaintiff is at least as equally situated as those who are fully vaccinated with a COVID-19 vaccine, yet defendants deny plaintiff equal treatment and seek to burden Plaintiff with an unnecessary violation of bodily integrity to which plaintiff does not consent in order to be allowed to continue to work at UCI,” it states.

The situation creates two classes, vaccinated and unvaccinated, when a more reasonable division would be those who are immune and those who are not, Kheriaty believes.

“What kind of discriminatory policies do we have in place that are excluding someone like me from the workplace when I’m 99.8 percent protected against reinfection whereas someone who got the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, by the company’s own data that they submitted to the FDA, is 67 percent protective against COVID infection?” he said.

Whose Burden?

Kheriaty initially planned to get a COVID-19 vaccine. Now he’s working to change the narrative around mandates.

Some say proposed natural immunity opt-outs for the mandates would be make it much more difficult to ascertain who meets the threshold, versus a vaccine mandate with no lasting provision for post-infection.

Most mandates across the country don’t have alternatives for people who had COVID-19 and recovered.

Kheriaty proposes putting the burden of proof on people who want to opt out.

“Just have them go get the testing on their own time. You don’t have to administer the T-cell test or the antibody test. You don’t have to go dig up their old medical record establishing that they’ve already had COVID,” he said.

“Just ask them to bring that in and sign off on that as a kind of immunity passport.”

Side Effects

The population of those who recovered and still got a vaccine is known as having “hybrid immunity.”

A large part of the medical health establishment, including all federal public health agencies, downplay natural immunity. They say it exists but that hybrid immunity is better.

“I’m not denying at all that people who get infected and recover have a considerable degree of immunity,” Dr. Anthony Fauci, the longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said last month. “We also know—and I think we should not let this pass without saying it—that when you get infected and recover, a) you get a good degree of immunity, but b) when you get vaccinated, you dramatically increase that protection, which is something that’s really quite good.”

A spokesman for Fauci’s agency told The Epoch Times in an email that he sourced from several studies, including one from researchers at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle. They found that a COVID-19 vaccine based on messenger RNA given following COVID-19 infection boosted neutralizing antibodies.

Many studies, however, show the immunity post-infection is already sky-high for many, leading to questions about why the recovered would then go get a vaccine that, like every jab, has side effects.

Kheriaty worries about other research that seems to show vaccine recipients with natural immunity experience side effects at a higher frequency than those who are not immune who get a shot.

“There are now about five independent studies that strongly suggest that individuals that already have natural immunity, when you vaccinate them, the risk of vaccine adverse events or vaccine side effects is higher for that group,” the professor said. “They have higher risk of side effects from the vaccine. It’s not going to help the people around them because natural immunity already is sterilizing, [yet] we don’t yet have any COVID vaccines that offer sterilizing immunity.”



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: lawsuit; ucirvine; vaccinemandate

1 posted on 10/28/2021 8:00:40 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
The push for vaccines is not about protecting people from a virus that has a greater than 99% survival rate.

The vaccines are experimental gene therapies approved under an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). They don't have full FDA Authorization.

2 posted on 10/28/2021 8:10:53 PM PDT by rllngrk33 (It seems the soap box and ballot box have failed, it might be time for the bullet box.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Brave man. Thanks!


3 posted on 10/28/2021 8:11:46 PM PDT by Huskrrrr (Alinsky, you magnificent Bastard, I read your book!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The good doctor thought he was safe and wouldn’t give his patients covid...he can still be a vector because he may have contacted someone with covid and spread it to another though he himself is “safe”
...In decent hospitals, if one is treating a patient (and have close contact) with a patient who has highly infectious disease and one is wearing protective gear...that gear is destroyed or discarded before working with another patient.
Simple infection control procedure.


4 posted on 10/28/2021 9:24:13 PM PDT by Getready (Wisdom is more valuable than gold and diamonds, and harder to find.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Getready

Didn’t actually read the article, did you?

That’s OK, it’s a long standing FReeper tradition.


5 posted on 10/28/2021 10:26:59 PM PDT by moonhawk (Biden: Not my President. Fauci: not my doctor. Me: not their bitch. You:???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Getready

That likely does not happen. Most wear their mask and same white coat all day long. Most don’t clean their stethoscope. Most will wash hands between patients.


6 posted on 10/28/2021 10:41:41 PM PDT by consult
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rllngrk33

7 posted on 10/29/2021 2:55:34 AM PDT by Travis McGee (EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson