The Medical Establishment’s Willful Blindness About Vaccines and Children: There’s a huge body of data from reliable sources that the medical establishment, from the CDC on down, seems determined to ignore

In my email on March 19, a Medscape “Perspective” post by William G. Wilkoff, MD titled “Waiting for the Under-5 COVID-19 Vaccine“ caught my attention. He opens by noting that “Pfizer and BioNTech announced that they were delaying the application for their COVID-19 vaccine for children under the age of 5.” He goes on to say that “earlier evidence suggests that two doses may not provide adequate protection in the 2- to 4-year old age group.”

Wilkoff might be forgiven for not knowing that the FDA and CDC have carefully avoided allowing facts to escape their lairs but the English NHS data should have been somewhere in his knowledge base. And that data has consistently shown that, under the age of 55, the risk of death from COVID is statistically indistinguishable from zero. In plain English, it says that a child’s chance of dying from COVID is about the same as expiring from a rattlesnake bite in Antarctica.

The pediatric literature is even more damning. Numerous studies have shown that young children are simply not affected by COVID in a significant way. They don’t get particularly sick. They don’t pass it from one to another easily. And more importantly, they rarely pass it to adults.

But Pfizer played games to avoid showing the harms from the vaccine, so Dr. Wilkoff can be forgiven for not seeing the new literature on that. He’s actually busy treating patients. So he wouldn’t know that the British government reports that “N antibody levels appear to be lower in people who acquire infection following two doses of vaccination.” In other words, your immunity drops after vaccination.

But I thought that vaccines were supposed to make you immune....

So far, we’ve only looked at the risks from COVID. But as a pediatrician, he should be aware of myocarditis…unless he simply accepts the CDC blather that “Most patients with myocarditis or pericarditis who received care responded well to medicine and rest....” After all, he’s a practicing pediatrician and doesn’t have the time to dig into the data. But he does have time to write several books and prepare his op-ed....

When the facts are on the table, we find that the CDC is lying. Myocarditis from the jab is a “disaster of epic proportions.” The incidence in school-age boys appears to be as high as one in a hundred, very different from four in 100,000 reported in Nature. But since Nature is highly respected, its data must be correct. Wilkoff perhaps didn’t have the time to notice the comment toward the end of the article that for younger patients, “their risk of developing myocarditis might be increased more by the vaccine than by the disease, particularly because children rarely develop severe COVID-19.”

As I see it, I agree with what this doctor said.

The real issue here is called the risk/benefit ratio. How many bad things will happen from the vaccine as opposed to how many bad things will happen from Covid? If Covid is a lot worse then, by all means, get the shot. But if they’re about even, there’s no point to the shot. And if the shot is worse.... You get the picture. That’s where the rubber meets the road.

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.