Why Are Doctors Concerned About the COVID-19 Vaccine

This article is a sleight of hand asking about doctors’ concerns and drawing your attention to side effects so you will forget the original question. I am a physician in support of a vaccine, but point out a fundamental flaw. The public thinks that a successful vaccine keeps you from being infected. Two types of “immunity” are sought from a vaccine: The antibody (immunoglobulins IgG, IgM, IgA) and the cellular immunity (T-cells). After the immunization, however, the attack of this SARS-CoV-2 virus is on the mucous membrane on the cells with the ACE2 receptor. Neither immunity is there waiting to intercept the virus, which has a free path to invade and start replication millions of copies. The IgG and IgM and even IgA are in the blood stream, where they are expected to be effective as the virus is now being disseminated by the circulation. That is, you need to become infected to derive benefit from either the antibodies OR the cellular immunity. Researchers with the vaccines could have looked for IgA in the secretions, as IgA is better known for its presence in the mucous than in the serum. For some reason, they abandoned the basics and either forgot to look for IgA in secretions, or did not consider it important. Fortunately, the IgA might be there after successful immunization, regardless of whether they remembered to look for it or not. This is just one reason for physician concern.
Another reason, just to begin, is that there is concern for bias. With the enthusiasm for a successful result, there may still be hidden study bias and in the way the observations are being presented. Although the study sample group may be in the 50,000 range (with half being sham controls) that seems convincingly large, although the absolute number of patients in either group who did get the disease were still very small. That is fine, since there was a genuine effort to see if the vaccine worked better than control, but it was not like 25,000 controls got COVID and 25,000 vaccinated did not. The results seem promising, and better than what we usually get, but NOT a slam dunk. In time as we use it widely, we may learn more, but for now, it seems like the best possible job has been done in the shortest possible time.
A third reason, and there are more, is the question of “adjuvants” with are helpers molecules to provoke a better response. That sounds logical…except for the fact that an enhanced response, such as the “cytokine storm.” Is the very thing that represents a serious and fatal response to the SARS-CoV-2. In some of the vaccine material there is ethylene-chloride. For some vaccine preparations this is essential to the nanoparticle containment of the viral RNA. Either as an adjuvant of a cause for allergic reaction with IgE antibodies, this innocent component may suddenly become a prime concern. Time may tell.
There are other reasons for caution, but for expediency the vaccine trials seem to hold far greater promise at 90-95% efficacy compared the influenza vaccines which at their best has been 45-50% after 50 years of trying. This new m-RNA vaccine method has never been used on humans before, and may be the extra bonus of Operation Warp Speed to improve our other vaccines.
l

I find that this website is suspicious, lacking verifiable facts; only mentioning a few (2?) incidents for Moderna vaccine and non for for the Pfizer vaccine. I am sure there are to be some problems, but to raise flags of alarm are unwarranted. For those that get this warning, don’t believe everything you read!

The truth is we are all obligated to be a proof subject. Those of us that are older than 50 should not be concerned. However our children and our grand children should be concerned of future side effects…