Quotes from the news wire:
I think people don’t think of them as medicines. But some of them can interfere with therapies like a medicine can, including chemotherapies, it’s really important for doctors to know what you are taking.
Found on CNN 7 months ago
I was angry to find out that there was data that was relevant to our decision that I didn’t get to see. Angry because they should trust us to make the decision based on all the data. These agencies, whether it’s the FDA or CDC, can’t make that decision for us. That’s the point of having an independent advisory committee.
Where's the evidence that somebody over 50 benefits from a fourth dose ? Because the evidence to date appears to support the possibility for those over 65, although I haven't, we haven't, seen all the data, but where's the evidence for a 50 to 64 year old ? Where's that evidence ? Because absent that evidence, then there shouldn't be this recommendation.
The FDA would have sent the message to the general public that something's wrong with this vaccine. And then [ if ] we come back a few months later and vote yes, people may still be suspicious or less likely to take the vaccine up, my word to parents who have young children is that this is not a' no' ; it's a' not yet,'.
Right now, we have about 90 % population immunity, meaning people who have either been naturally infected or immunized or both -- that's good. We're moving into the warmer climates -- that's good. This is really basically, at its heart, a winter virus. The numbers are way down from where they had been -- that's good. But you still had 150,000 cases yesterday and 1,000 deaths. That's still a lot of cases and deaths, so, what I would say is, independent of whether there's mandates or not, I think people should reasonably wear masks when they're indoors for the next few weeks, until we're much farther down then where we are right now.
I think we need to show why a booster dose is clearly of benefit to 18-29 year-olds, because if it's not clearly of benefit, we have to consider the fact that myocarditis was a second dose phenomenon and may also be a third dose phenomenon. Do the benefits clearly and definitively outweigh risks for 18-29 year old ?
This false notion was born of this letter that was actually written to the European Medicines Agency, which is like the European equivalent of the Food and Drug Administration, claiming that there was similarity between the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which is what you're making an antibody response to when you get these vaccines, and a protein that sits on the surface of placental cells called syncytin-1.
First of all, that wasn't true. Those two proteins are very different. It's like saying you and I both have the same social security number because they both contain the number five. So that was wrong to begin with, if it was affecting fertility, if natural infection was affecting fertility, then birth rates should have gone down, but that's not what happened. Birth rates have actually gone up slightly. So, those are two pieces of evidence that argue against this vaccine or natural infection in any sense affecting fertility.
We're being asked to approve this as a three-dose vaccine for people 16 years of age and older, without any clear evidence the third dose for a younger person, when compared to an elderly person, is of value, if Stanford University Medical Center.They's not of value, then the risks may outweigh the benefits. And we know the 16-29-year-old is at higher risk of myocarditis.
It's confusing to people. I've had a number of calls and emails from people saying,' Wait, so I'm not fully protected anymore ?' i think the message that should come out right now is if you received two doses of mRNA vaccines, you have a very high chance of not having serious infection, and that that has lasted up until the present moment, that you should consider yourself protected against serious illness.
I think from the standpoint of the public, it really shouldn't matter, it's been given to half of the American population. We have more than 300 million doses out there. This is far from experimental. We have a tremendous safety and efficacy portfolio on these vaccines -- I mean, it's more than most licensed products that are out there now.
You let the the first people who volunteer to get these vaccines be older adults, and then middle aged adults, and then we work our way down the age ladder, somebody may ask,' Gee, why don't you do them simultaneously ?' Well, there's not that bandwidth. You just can't do too many trials simultaneously.
The American public should understand that there is a risk, but it's an exceedingly rare risk, by basically putting a scarlet letter on this vaccine, by scaring people about this vaccine, by not really trusting them to understand the concept of relative risk, we may have done more harm than good, and there are people now who won't get a vaccine because this is the vaccine they would have gotten.
It is a little worrisome that you see a lesser neutralizing antibody response, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that you are unprotected, the goal of this vaccine is to keep you out of the hospital and to keep you out of the morgue. If you get a symptomatic infection or mildly symptomatic infection that is not a burden to the healthcare system.
Found on Reuters 2 years ago
The thing about anaphylaxis is although it is frightening to watch, it's easily identified, it's quickly identified, and it's easily treated with epinephrine, i don't see how taking this off the market is a conservative thing to do or exercising an abundance of caution. I think all it does is put people at risk unnecessarily.
There are going to be people who either aren't getting this vaccine or aren't getting their second doses of vaccine, which then puts them at risk in a situation where we have a virus which is rapidly spreading in the country, there's going to be another probably roughly 100,000 people that die over the next couple of months, and among those people could be those who are not getting this vaccine because of quote-unquote' an abundance of caution.'.
The one thing you can't truncate or coalesce or overlap is the Phase 3 trial, the proof is in the pudding. The Phase 3 trial's the pudding and now you're going to test hopefully 10, 15, 20,000 people that will get this vaccine, 15,000 people that will get placebo and you'll see to what extent this is really safe and you'll see to what extent it's effective.
If the bar is set at two doses, which is what Kathryn Edwards need the first time Kathryn Edwards get it, then unfortunately there are going to be some kids who don’t end up fully vaccinated even when their parents do bring them in for that first dose.
Found on Reuters 7 years ago
He will live in a vegetative state probably for five years until he dies from something else. Basically, we snuffed out potentially a 75-year-old perfectly normal life because of a false concern that vaccines would do harm, or in their misguided notion that somehow religion teaches us anything other than we should care for our children.
Share your thoughts on Paul Offit's quotes with the community:
Would you like us to send you a FREE inspiring quote delivered to your inbox daily?
Use the citation below to add this author page to your bibliography:
"Paul Offit Quotes." Quotes.net. STANDS4 LLC, 2023. Web. 8 Dec. 2023. <https://www.quotes.net/authors/Paul+Offit+Quotes>.