COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters for Young Adults: A Risk-Benefit Assessment and Five Ethical Arguments against Mandates at Universities

[Drop Dead Fred]

Is this a reliable source?

Does it mean that the COVID-19 vaccine hurts young people more than it helps them?

COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters for Young Adults: A Risk-Benefit Assessment and Five Ethical Arguments against Mandates at Universities

Students at North American universities risk disenrollment due to third dose COVID-19 vaccine mandates. We present a risk-benefit assessment of boosters in this

papers.ssrn.com

COVID-19 Vaccine Boosters for Young Adults: A Risk-Benefit Assessment and Five Ethical Arguments against Mandates at Universities

Bardosh, K., Krug, A., Jamrozik, E., Lemmens, T., Keshavjee, S., Prasad, V., … & Høeg, T. B. (2022). COVID-19 vaccine boosters for young adults: a risk benefit assessment and ethical analysis of mandate policies at universities. Journal of Medical Ethics. Available: https://jme.bmj.com/content/ear

50 Pages

Posted: 12 Sep 2022

Last revised: 12 Dec 2022

Kevin Bardosh
University of Washington; University of Edinburgh – Edinburgh Medical School

Allison Krug
Artemis Biomedical Communications LLC

Euzebiusz Jamrozik
University of Oxford

Trudo Lemmens
University of Toronto – Faculty of Law

Salmaan Keshavjee
Harvard University – Harvard Medical School

Vinay Prasad
University of California, San Francisco (UCSF)

Martin A. Makary
Johns Hopkins University – Department of Surgery

Stefan Baral
Johns Hopkins University – Department of Epidemiology

Tracy Beth Høeg

Florida Department of Health; Sierra Nevada Memorial Hospital
Date Written: August 31, 2022

Abstract

Students at North American universities risk disenrollment due to third dose COVID-19 vaccine mandates. We present a risk-benefit assessment of boosters in this age group and provide five ethical arguments against mandates. We estimate that 22,000 – 30,000 previously uninfected adults aged 18-29 must be boosted with an mRNA vaccine to prevent one COVID-19 hospitalisation. Using CDC and sponsor-reported adverse event data, we find that booster mandates may cause a net expected harm: per COVID-19 hospitalisation prevented in previously uninfected young adults, we anticipate 18 to 98 serious adverse events, including 1.7 to 3.0 booster-associated myocarditis cases in males, and 1,373 to 3,234 cases of grade ≥3 reactogenicity which interferes with daily activities. Given the high prevalence of post-infection immunity, this risk-benefit profile is even less favourable. University booster mandates are unethical because: 1) no formal risk-benefit assessment exists for this age group; 2) vaccine mandates may result in a net expected harm to individual young people; 3) mandates are not proportionate: expected harms are not outweighed by public health benefits given the modest and transient effectiveness of vaccines against transmission; 4) US mandates violate the reciprocity principle because rare serious vaccine-related harms will not be reliably compensated due to gaps in current vaccine injury schemes; and 5) mandates create wider social harms. We consider counter-arguments such as a desire for socialisation and safety and show that such arguments lack scientific and/or ethical support. Finally, we discuss the relevance of our analysis for current 2-dose COVID-19 vaccine mandates in North America.

 

[Dekster]

My position is consistently do what works for you. There is a mighty steep learning curve with any pandemic. I had expected early on that the Oxford vaccine was going to be the one to go with but it seems to have killed the most number of patients from the get. But then again, it may just seem that way because they actually held themselves accountable and were held to account as opposed to Pfizer who may or may not have killed at least as many if not more people but never admitted it and have never been held to account.