287 Comments
Removed (Banned)Sep 21, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
RemovedSep 12, 2023·edited Sep 12, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment

I don’t understand how any religion would advocate against vaccines. I can appreciate that certain products are against certain religious beliefs.

Expand full comment

I just wish we actually knew if vaccines caused autism, developmental delays, and immune compromise. I looked back at my daughter’s childhood vaccinations, and the years of multiple vaccinations she had trouble with her lymph nodes and strep like infections. No medical intervention is without harm. I just wish we knew the harms of vaccination instead of hiding them and pretending they don’t exist.

Expand full comment

It defies logic that a religious group would be opposed to life-saving vaccinations. Taken to the extreme those advocates would avoid antibiotics for infections, statins for CVD, insulin for type 1 diabetes. However, the latter examples impact only that individual, while vaccination impacts the community, protecting others from transmission of the communicable disease.

Expand full comment

"The lawyer who headed the Mississippi effort will now introduce litigation to allow religious exemptions in West Virginia, New York, Maine, California, and Connecticut." I live in Connecticut and this lawyer is wasting his time if he thinks he will get the same result he did in Mississippi. Thanks for the update Dr. Offit.

Expand full comment

Let's see if the comments are mobbed again like Offit's last post. 😅

Expand full comment

Genuine medical exemptions? …Fine, no problem.

These supposedly “religious” exemptions? …throw them out. They are a cop out plea by those who want an ideological/philosophical exemption but who can’t get it. Anyway, all the major religions support vaccination.

If a child gets some specious religious exemption because their fake religion supposedly forbids it, then I’d say “OK”, but unless you demonstrate clear and regular commitment to worship within that religion (eg proof of attendance at meetings/whatever) after a 24 month deadline, then you will be fined $10,000.

Expand full comment

4 years ago, I would have agreed with this piece.

But now we have all seen that hysteria can infect government, the scientific community, and otherwise rational people.

Some vaccines are good (smallpox is a low-hanging fruit), some vaccines are bad (RotaShield), and some vaccines we think are good may later turn out to have caused problems (e.g., debate on the varicella vaccine causing the rise in shingles).

Had there been a Rotavirus panic in 1998 which gripped the media, fearful mothers, and compelled the government to "act", we might have seen the flawed RotaShield vaccine mandated and derision at anyone trying to search for the safety signal that slow, careful scientists wound up finding in the absense of panic.

In 2021 we had California trying to mandate the Covid vaccine in children while other countries around the world were pulling back the shots for anyone under 30. Who was right?

We shouldn't need to compel anyone to do anything. We should make our arguments, express humility, and hope people make the logical choice. If someone can't be reasoned with, firm up your arguments, but you will never convince 100% of people of anything, and that too is OK.

You express concern that people now have the right to use the shield of "religious exemption" - yet look around at the voices of otherwise intelligent people, still caught up in this hysteria, disappointed that a man "they greatly respect" is not wanting the entire population to get the next booster.

(hint, that man is you)

If these types of people were in charge, they would want shot #6 , #7, and every single shot thereafter, mandated across the globe, for all age groups. Do you agree with them? Might it be a good to have protections from fanatics like this? Because I want protection from *their* religion.

https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/state-of-affairs-parent-edition/comment/39700265

Expand full comment

instead of using this space to demonize those who abstain from experimental medical interventions - why not use it as a space to articulate your nuanced rationale for why you didnt take the bivalent covid shot and wont take the updated covid vaccine?

you have many devout readers here, doctor. the dissenters are also curious to this reasoning.

dr offit was quoted in the following artile:

https://www.science.org/content/article/should-i-get-covid-19-booster

"Offit, who is 72, already had COVID-19 once and is in good health, did not receive the bivalent booster himself and doesn’t plan to get the new one. “I think I have hybrid immunity and clearly hybrid immunity is best.” He says it comes down to the data. “If [CDC is] going to make that broad recommendation, show me why that is,” he says. “Take healthy 12- to 17-year-olds who have already gotten three doses of vaccine or two doses and natural infection. Are they getting hospitalized?”

He notes that the mRNA vaccines made by the Pfizer/BioNTech collaboration and Moderna also have a risk of causing a heart condition called myocarditis. It is rare and often quickly resolves itself, but, he says, “this is a real side effect.” There are also even rarer vaccine side effects that scientists are still trying to understand."

additional commentary for the curious:

https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/paul-offit-72-is-not-getting-a-booster?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=231792&post_id=136888600&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=5ah2c&utm_medium=email

perhaps you can also address the glaring omission in your opening comments about not all vaccines being 100% effective...in addition all interventions have tradeoffs.

might this be your reasoning for your vote against the recently approved RSV vaccine which caused a significant increase in pre-term births among vaccinated mothers in the dose group of pfizer's clinical trial?

https://www.bmj.com/content/381/bmj.p1021

Expand full comment
Sep 11, 2023·edited Sep 11, 2023

The closest religion in America that would be vaccine hesitant is Christian Science. My grandmother was a devout Christian Scientist and had her entire family vaccinated.

"For more than a century, our denomination has counseled respect for public health authorities and conscientious obedience to the laws of the land, including those requiring vaccination."

https://www.christianscience.com/press-room/a-christian-science-perspective-on-vaccination-and-public-health

Expand full comment

Is there any available data on the 9 million immunocompromised individuals acquiring vaccine preventable disease’s?

Is herd immunity through vaccination the only countermeasure available for these people?

Expand full comment

A very tragic development; from my point of view, the backlash seems to be a mirror reflection of the un-nuanced approach regarding covid vaccines...

Expand full comment

Excellent piece! I enjoy the sanity you bring to health topics. Always appreciate not being alone on rational issues!

Expand full comment

Another sad hijacking of religion for other ideological agendas. When we think of all the transgressions that have occurred in the name of religion, it’s really shocking. Not to mention another manifestation of institutionalized child abuse. I feel bad for those who will be hurt by this ruling, some will die, and for the good, sensible religious people in whose name these bills are being passed.

Expand full comment

Vaccines are a hammer. A tool. There are other tools. Maybe optimal cardiometabolic health would better protect most people from disease. (not infection.) Of those who died in this article, how many were truly healthy? I'm 61 and less than 1% of my peers are healthy. Maybe that is the problem. The vaccine hammer works, but I need a rowing machine.

Expand full comment