By: Rafael Castillo M.D
(Conclusion)
The report of Dr. Aseem Malhotra, president of the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Public Health Collaboration in England, tries to correct the misinformation about antibodies produced after vaccination. Antibodies are produced by the immune system to detect and ward off the virus when the body’s cells encounter them in real life. But simply testing positive for antibodies is an unreliable marker for immunity or protection against COVID-19 after receiving vaccination.
This is especially true with the emergence of variants which have already developed the capability to evade the antibodies, the formation of which was based on the original Wuhan virus. It’s like using the original cellular phone prototypes, which may still be able to make a call, but lacks all the other essential features of newer cellular phones. As of now, clearly the several generations of SARS-CoV-2 variants that have emerged have fully outgrown the vaccines which we still currently use.
Malhotra attributes the misinformation and possibly mismanagement of the anti-pandemic response to conflict of interest, which health agencies and other vital decision makers may be saddled with. This has been strongly denied by key international health agencies involved in guiding countries to manage their pandemic responses, but as they say, “all roads lead to Rome.” It was quite apparent that the overarching strategy was to get everyone vaccinated, despite its unclear benefits and risks.
‘Regulatory capture’
Malhotra labels this “regulatory capture,” wherein “guardians that are supposed to protect the public are in fact funded by the very corporations that stand to gain from the sale of those medications.” With the failure in public health messaging, resources have been wantonly wasted, with billions of dollars allocated for vaccine procurement instead of other important measures and interventions for controlling the pandemic. There is a “missed opportunity to help individuals lead healthier lives with relatively simple—and low-cost—lifestyle changes” that can boost natural immunity.
Trust in public health governance has been somewhat eroded in many countries, including ours, with haphazard decision-making. Malhotra specifically cites the unprecedented rollout of anti-COVID vaccines, made available only by emergency use authorization (EUA), carelessly neglecting to evaluate the raw data from the drug-company initiated clinical trials.
The continuing tendency to look the other way with increasing evidence of significant harm or side effects, which have been labeled “vaccine injuries,” is inexplicable. As if rubbing salt on the wound, mandatory vaccination has become part of the major health policy in most countries. Malhotra minced no words in decrying that this is “modern medicine’s worst failings on an epic scale, with additional catastrophic harms to trust in public health.”
Even physicians and other healthcare professionals have not been spared in Malhotra’s commentary. He believes that the issue is not only scientific, but ethical and moral. He says that medical and public health professionals must admit they’re part of the problem and should always be conscious not to have any vested interests when making decisions on how to manage patients.
Malhotra enjoins his colleagues worldwide to “eschew the tainted dollar of the medical-industrial complex,” alluding to unethical relationships between health-care professionals and the pharmaceutical industry. “It will take a lot of time and effort to rebuild trust in these institutions, but the health of both humanity and the medical profession depend on it,” he writes.
Global concern
The findings and recommendations in Malhotra’s report is supported by leading doctors that include professor Sherif Sultan, president of the International Vascular Society; Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor of medicine at the University of Stanford; Dr. Campbell Murdoch, clinical advisor to the Royal College of General Practitioners; and Dr. Amir Hannan, chair of the West Pennine Local Medical Committee.
Sultan writes: “Dr. Aseem Malhotra’s literature review and analysis is a cause for global concern. We fully believe that vaccines are one of the great discoveries in medicine that has improved life expectancy dramatically; however, mRNA genetic vaccines are different, as long-term safety evaluation is lacking but (was made) mandatory to ensure public safety. These findings raise concerns regarding vaccine-induced undetected severe cardiovascular side effects and underscore the established causal relationship between vaccines and myocarditis, a frequent cause of unexpected cardiac arrest in young individuals. Surveillance of potential vaccine side effects and COVID-19 outcomes to identify public health trends and promptly investigate potential underlying causes needs immediate attention.”
For his part, Bhattacharya, expert epidemiologist at the University of Stanford, comments: “Dr. Malhotra makes a good case that there is considerable heterogeneity across age groups and other comorbid conditions in the expected benefits and expected side effect profiles of the vaccine. He finds that while there may be a case for older people to take the vaccine because the benefits may outweigh expected harm, that may not be the case for younger people. Dr. Malhotra’s paper calls for a pause in the use of the vaccine in younger people, such as the one recently adopted by Danish public health authorities and the Florida Department of Public Health in the United States.”
Over-reliance
Hannan made this remark: “Drug treatments and vaccinations can be an important part of helping to overcome disease and prevent illness, but we must remain vigilant against over-reliance on the benefits and minimizing or even suppressing the harm. Greater scrutiny of the data is needed, and those overseeing medical practice [must] ensure the public and the profession remain safe. An urgent review is needed of the materials and information provided on the COVID-19 vaccines to help inform the public so that informed consent is gained through a shared decision-making process with education and training in light of the new evidence emerging.”
Murdoch also shares his thoughts: “Provision of safe and effective healthcare sits at the heart of medical services. This is central to every action I take with patients. As Dr. Malhotra describes, to be able to provide safe and effective care, all health-care professionals must practice evidence-based medicine. This is a combination of using the best available scientific evidence, the patient’s preferences, and the healthcare professional’s expertise. The combination of these three factors allows the patient to make an informed choice about what is best for their health.”
Most of the experts express their concerns about the “overstated benefits of vaccination especially in low-risk populations and the under-reporting of adverse events.” Some claim that the true incidence of vaccine side effects or injuries is at least 50 times the actual number reported.
A former health official once told us, “Some medical or health problems resolve naturally even without active intervention or treatment.” All the predecessor coronaviruses of the SARS CoV-2, like the original SARS in 2002, and the MERS-CoV in 2012, were gone in less than two years without vaccination, just by maintaining health protocols and natural supplements for natural immunity.
We may be oversimplifying the problem, but despite multiple vaccinations, COVID-19 is now going on its 33rd month since the first case was reported in Wuhan, and there’s no foreseeable end in the next year or so.
Sometimes, in medicine, the treatment is worse than the disease itself.
