Category: Vaccines

So, I’ve been asking people who are uncomfortable with the new COVID vaccines what their concerns were about them in order to attempt to answer with what we do (and don’t) know. As a medical student, I am very excited that we have a vaccine for this devastating disease. As a scientist, I want to know how it works, why it works, what are the side-effects, and many other questions which I have heard repeated in these conversations. I thought I might share a synopsis of what I learned, and a snippet of what I shared. Please take it as a consideration of risks and benefits, as every decision made in medicine (and life in general) is a balance of pros and cons.

I have studied human physiology, cell biology, immunology and many other relevant courses. I believe that informed consent is way too important to make this vaccine mandatory across the board, that understanding should be cultivated and respect should be mutual between patient and clinician. Whether you choose to get this vaccine or not is your choice, and I believe that should be respected. Also, please know that I am a student, not an expert, and will refer you to a clinician if you have specific health concerns.

And before we begin, let me encourage you, if you are my brother or sister in Christ, to begin with prayer. This is a stressful topic and one for which wisdom & clarity is needed.

Immunology

That’s the pertinent biology to how the vaccine will work. The pertinent immunology will follow. The first stage of an immune response starts with that every single cell in our bodies that has a nucleus also displays a “flag” of sorts on its membrane. This flag is called MHC or HLA, and its purpose is to display bits and pieces of the proteins which that cell is making. Normally it will display what we call “self” proteins, and the immune cells recognize the MHC flag holding self proteins and then decides that that cell is healthy and should be allowed to live. If a cell gets infected with a virus, the cell will start making the proteins that virus has instructions for and the cell will display “non-self” proteins on the flag. The immune cells then notice the non-self protein and decide that cell is not healthy and should be destroyed. That destruction process is what produces fever, achiness, swelling and redness, and we call those symptoms “inflammation.” Those symptoms simply mean the immune system is working on something in a very general way. The second step of the immune system’s response is when the immune cell (T cell) that noticed the infected cell’s flag travels to our lymph nodes to find its mate, another kind of immune cell (a B cell). B cells are extremely specific to particular offenders (called pathogens) and good at making similarly specific antibodies. This takes a while because there is only one B cell (or very few B cells, anyway) in the whole body which matches that activated T cell perfectly. After that B cell & T cell interact, the B cell grows and divides into lots of baby versions of itself, sending some to fight and some to train. This process is important, though, because it is how our bodies learn to fight pathogens and how we differentiate between different pathogens. Without antibodies being made, we would have the same response to any offender every time we encountered it. But if we make antibodies specific to a virus, those antibodies will engulf the offender and make it either easier for our body to fight or impossible for that offender to attack our body cells.

The body also responds differently to the offending pathogen on the second encounter with that pathogen than the first. During the first response, B Cells fight with whatever they already have. They send out a bunch of antibodies which work against the pathogen, but have not been honed against that pathogen. The B cells which got sent to training instead of the front line fight spend their time attempting to make their antibodies even better at attacking the pathogen of interest. (This process is called affinity maturation by somatic hypermutation.) This means that the second time the body encounters that same antigen, those better trained B cells will be leading the attack! (And this is the basis for immunity.)

Concern #1: Effects on DNA

Since mRNA cannot travel into the nucleus, this vaccine cannot edit our genome. There is one vaccine being developed in the UK which uses DNA instead of mRNA, but I have not been studying that one very much. The two approved for Emergency Use in the United States are both mRNA-based, as was described previously.

*Update: a DNA-based vaccine has been given emergency use approval now; it is called the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. Still, I haven’t had the time to look deeper into this one, but from the studies I’ve read on it there are no increased risks with this type versus the mRNA types.

Concern #2: Fertility & Pregnancy*

The concern about reproduction is a more complex one. There are concerns that the protein which the mRNA is designed to make looks similar to some natural human proteins involved in the reproductive system, especially of females. I do not think this is a big problem because our bodies develop antibodies which are HIGHLY specific to the offender. There have been no studies done on the Pfizer vaccine relating to effects on the reproductive system and only a small number of studies done on the Moderna vaccine (and those only in rats). I want to see more studies on this because this is an important aspect of proving safety. The American College of Obstetrics & Gynecology actually recommends that any pregnant or lactating woman who wants to be vaccinated should be allowed to be vaccinated (their statement). That recommendation is based upon the known increased risk of severe disease due to the coronavirus when pregnant (study 1, study 2, study 3). Just as we want our seat-belts to be safety tested not because we know there’s a problem with the fabric, but because we want proof that there isn’t a problem with it, I want the vaccine testing to continue. I don’t have any reason to believe there will be any problems with it, but these tests haven’t been run yet and still need to be.

I would like to point out, however, that the likelihood of fertility complications from this vaccine would not be much different than the likelihood of fertility complications from getting the virus naturally. The spike protein used in the vaccine is the spike protein found on the virus, so if we develop antibodies to it from natural infection or from immunization the result is the same. So why get the vaccine? I’ll come back to that one, but in regards to fertility there has not been a spike in infertility to match the spike in COVID cases, so it wouldn’t make sense to say that a vaccine based exactly on one of the proteins in that virus would by itself cause infertility.

*Update (3/24/21): There have been some studies done now on the women who elected to get the vaccine based on the data I shared with you above! There were a lot of pregnant women in healthcare who saw the risk of severe COVID during pregnancy and chose to protect themselves & their babies. A study which is not yet published shows that in 84 (mostly white) pregnant patients who got the COVID vaccine, only 1 person had a fever in response to the vaccine, 1 woman had a pre-term delivery (1 in 84 is not higher than the normal expected rate) and there were no other reported adverse birth outcomes (no fetal growth restriction or preeclampsia). Additionally, there were 31 patients who were lactating at the time of vaccination. All of these patients saw a significant rise in their antibodies (just like the general population does), and especially in IgG-type antibodies. This is important because IgG is the only type of antibody which can cross the placenta and it provides the best protection of newborns out of all kinds of immunological protection. IgA is the only kind of antibody which is in breast milk, and it is a little helpful to newborns, but since it is in their food, their bodies digest those antibodies (as opposed to IgG which is in their blood when they are born). This study found that IgG was in the umbilical cord blood of almost all participants. IgA was observed in many particpants’ breast milk, but the IgA antibody formation was not as strong as the IgG formation. (Likely this is because the vaccine is administered in the muscles & not given as an oral preparation; see polio vaccines.)

Concern #3: Aborted Baby Cells*

I have spent hours in the cell culture lab working with cell lines. This technique was very opaque to me before I started, so let me explain what scientists do with cell cultures. The use of cells was developed in order to give scientists a means of observing what effects specific objects of study (a virus, a bacterium, a medication, etc.) has on a living cell. This is extremely important for safety testing, and before the development of cell lines, this research was only done on animals or embryonated eggs. That period of science history includes a lot of hard dilemmas regarding use of embryos, and an alternative was sought for. When scientists discovered that they could harvest cells from a living human and keep those cells alive perpetually, the game changed. They take a sample of cells and then nurture those cells in a solution which provides them with everything they need to grow. I spent weeks “culturing” cells, which means checking on them daily, feeding them at the right times, etc. The cells I worked with were taken from an African American woman who was being treated for cancer whose cancer cell sample was found to have an extraordinary ability to survive. Now, there is much concern that she and her family never were able to give consent for this use of her cells and that the profits from her cells have not been shared with them. (I did not know the history of these cells at the time of my experiments.) Science has a history which includes some dark choices, indeed. That cell line I worked with was one of many, many cell lines which are used today. Many of those cell lines do not have such ethical concerns in their history. Different kinds of cells are better for different kinds of research (study describing the use of cell culture and its history). Some cell lines in use for some research purposes are derived from aborted embryos, it’s true. Please note that in science, an “aborted” embryo is simply one which did not develop into a viable baby and has nothing to tell us about how that embryo died. However, those cells were taken from an embryo far in the past and the use of these cells does not sponsor any further addition to the cell line. The major benefit of using these cells is that they are all exactly the same, so adding any further donors would negate that benefit. While it is true that a baby once died and cells were harvested from its body, the cells which are used today are many generations down from that baby and do not contribute to the abortion industry today (Focus on the Family discussion with infectious disease specialists, please note the information below conflicts with a statement made by Dr. James).

Now, for the vaccine candidates against COVID19 there is a large chart developed (linked here) to show which cell lines were used for which vaccine candidate. Each cell line has a different history, so if you are interested in a specific cell line I would advise googling that specific one. Moderna used HEK293T/17, Vero E6, Huh7.5 & ACE2-expressing 293T cells (study) HEK stands for human embryonic kidney cells, and were derived from an embryo in the past, as was discussed above (study). It was started about 45 years ago (study). Vero E6 comes from monkeys, Huh7.5 are liver cells taken from a man with liver cancer, and the 293T cells are derivatives of the HEK293 cells mentioned above. Pfizer also used HEK293 cells (study). Both companies used these HEK cells only during the confirmatory testing phase, meaning that the vaccine was not made with these cells, only tested on these cells for safety.

*this information was updated on 12/27/2020

Concern #4: Too-Fast Development*

The concern that this vaccine was developed too quickly is one that I had before looking into this. In truth, mRNA-based therapies have been in studies for about 30 years (1990 study, 1995 study). It is true that this technology has never before been used as a vaccine, but there are lots of studies showing this mechanism works and is useful (2017 patent on the idea), especially used in cancer therapies (2015 study, 2016 study). Even other members of the coronavirus family have been being studied for years (2011 study, 2015 study), and other mRNA vaccines have been in development (2016 study, 2018 study). The reason development was so fast is the interconnected nature of science today. The previous studies provided the methods (which are usually the longest part of doing any experiment: figuring out how to do it right), and our DNA sequencing technology (think 23andMe) is fast and inexpensive compared to any other time in history (here’s the genome). Once we sequenced the viral DNA, we could compare it to thousands of other sequences available online to find the part which coded for a protein that was on the outside of the virus. Genetics is a quickly developing field because engineers optimize the tools scientists use & the scientists can then share their knowledge easily (this website has much of that shared scientific data, including the Sars-Cov2 genome). I am no longer concerned about the speed of development, personally.

*Addendum 4/8/21 – Studies are underway for both pregnant women and children under the age of 16. Pfizer’s March 31 report discusses the 100% prevention of COVID infection in the 1,131 adolescent participants who received the vaccine without any serious adverse effects. Their clinical trial on the vaccine in pregnant women has no published findings yet.

Concern #5: Mutating Virus

It is true that the virus has many different mutations even now, compared to when it was first discovered (you can see a map of the mutation tree here). Different strains are more common in different geographical areas than others. However, it has been observed that the spike protein which was chosen for the vaccines’ target is not in a frequently changing region of the genome (called a consensus sequence). This means that the antibodies we develop and the training the T cell receive should not be rendered useless if we encounter different versions of the virus.

Update: Yup, the mutations in the virus did get to the spike protein! This is why we see varying responses with various mutations. However, consistently the vaccinated populations have had lower risks of severe effects from COVID infections, even if they still contract the disease.

Concern #6: Long-term Effects & Allergies*

While long-term effects have, by definition, yet to be observed, I have little concern for long-term effects in this case. mRNA is quickly degraded by our cells and our immune system kills any cell that expresses non-self proteins. Since the mRNA cannot integrate into our DNA and the contents of the vaccine are all natural components of our bodies, the theoretical long-term risk is very low. However, just like with any vaccine, allergic reactions can still happen, and some have already been reported. If you have had serious allergic reactions to vaccines in the past, please consult your doctor before getting any vaccine, including these. I will be watching the weekly reports regarding the vaccine here, and the public is encouraged to report any adverse effects from vaccines here.

*Addendum 4/7/21 – Long-term effects of the virus should also be considered when weighing the benefits versus the risks of this vaccine. This study showed that a third of the patients followed for long-term effects of having COVID-19 were diagnosed with neurological or first-time psychiatric diagnoses within 6 months of recovering from COVID-19. While not everyone has terrible long-term effects from COVID, these are definitely a risk with natural infection.

Pfizer’s April 1 report looks closely at what effects have occurred in those who have been vaccinated for 6 months. While there were some COVID cases (about 9% of participants) in the immunized group, none of those immunized had severe COVID and none of them got the B.1.351 variant from South Africa. While this report is not technically a peer-reviewed journal article, I wanted to share the most up to date info we have. Pfizer says that they are preparing a publication which will be peer-reviewed soon.

Concern #7: Big Pharma

I have been asked the very good question, “How do we know that our available information has not been curated/canceled/payed off by those with a vested interest in the public not knowing the truth?” In essence, can we trust the data we see to be the whole picture? If I were to tell you the answer was absolutely, unreservedly yes, I would be either lying outright or just daydreaming because the truth is that we have no solid proof, either way. We have witnessed social media cancellation of dissident views and I will confess to you, friends, that I have this same concern. That is why I do my very best to look at a wide variety of sources, while still restricting myself to peer-reviewed articles or official reports. Is that enough to counter a large, invisible organization manipulating the data I see? Probably not. However, please let me remind you that the lack of proof against something is not equal to proof of that thing.

For instance, we all know that simply because we cannot disprove the existence of a jolly old man named Santa who goes around giving little kids toys on Christmas does not mean Santa therefore must exist. We cannot disprove his existence because we can’t be everywhere all at once. We could prove that he doesn’t live at the North Pole because we can go there and see no house, but we can’t prove that he doesn’t live anywhere. The same applies here. Just because I cannot disprove the theory that all data is curated by a malevolent “pharma,” does not mean that it is.

I would love to have hard proof that this is not happening, or definitive proof that it is. It is a fear of mine, as well. Are all of my time & efforts being wasted because I’m being brainwashed? That would be completely horrible and an extremely expensive folly. But I am called to do my best, not to know everything, and you are called to the same thing. We can only know what is for us to know and the rest we must lean on guidance from the Lord. While I think the best I can do is to study the available literature and learn from those experts who have literally devoted their lives to learning the truth about medicine and science, I know that it is possible that you will disagree with me. I would like to encourage you to lean in and seek the peace that surpasses understanding, regardless of your stance. And if your current stance does not hold that peace, seek His guidance as to if you should change your stance.

A more specific concern under Big Pharma is that this invisible, powerful group gains a lot of money from vaccines, in general. I am currently researching this, because I have been told by a professor whom I greatly respect that pharmaceutical companies do not usually break even on vaccines. He explained to me that it is the pills which treat medical conditions which earns them the big bucks, and the reason that former President Trump started “Operation Warp Speed” was to give the pharmaceutical companies incentive to participate in COVID vaccine research. Without those funds, my professor said, there would be no reason for those companies to invest into vaccines at all. Vaccine development is very expensive, and are often covered by insurance (now if you wanna go off on insurance companies as the maleficent being, that’s another story… plenty of evidence there). The pharmaceutical companies would do better financially providing a drug to treat COVID because a vaccine has a self-limiting demand (meaning as soon as everyone is vaccinated, they can’t sell any more doses). While I believe this professor who has been an allergy doctor for decades, I do not yet have sources to share with you on this topic.

Final Question: Are you in line?

Yes! As a medical student, my school has been working on getting the vaccine for me and my peers. I have chosen to get it, even though I have already had COVID, for multiple reasons. There are studies showing that those who get the vaccine actually have a better immune response than those who developed immunity naturally (study), so it may still be important to get the vaccine even if I have developed antibodies. There are also reports of people getting COVID for a second time, and of people getting tested for antibodies and coming out empty. Natural infection of this virus may not induce our immune system to make the long-term memory defenses we need. While I fought off COVID with very little trouble the first time, this virus has been known to be worse the second time around. I have loved ones who are very vulnerable and I hope to be able to work in clinics soon, so I want to protect the people around me. I also want to be able to travel internationally this summer. I encourage every Christian to approach this decision with prayer, and I have done so. My husband and I feel that the Lord is leading me to get the vaccine when I can. I recognize fully that He may direct others down a different path, and encourage you to listen closely to His leading.

Summary

These vaccines are of a new type, which is concerning to many people. However, the real-world outcomes have been very safe & I see no reason to believe that this vaccine will have dangerous long-term effects. In fact, I think it will be a standard for others to follow and may make all future vaccinations more safe. As always, I encourage anyone who is worried to ask questions of those who have training in the area of concern.

Resources

10/11/21 – I wanted to add a space for me to share resources with you, even though I think most people already read this document & won’t see it. But the Institute for Functional Medicine has a great dashboard! And I love their vaccine data tables.