Advertisement

September 19, 2021
|

The Biden White House’s plan to start rolling out COVID-19 booster shots as soon as Monday hit a wall on Friday when an FDA advisory panel overwhelmingly voted against it.

https://www.westernjournal.com/fda-panel-stages-revolt-biden-admin-pfizer-gives-good-news-vaccine-skeptical-parents/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=huckabee

In a 16-2 vote, the committee rejected the idea of giving a third booster vaccine shot to 16-to-64-year-old Americans who are not at high risk for a severe case of the disease. The panel voted unanimously to give emergency authorization for booster shots for seniors and those at high risk, but most members believe the average vaccinated person doesn’t need them. There’s also concern about the rare but real possibility of side effects, particularly heart inflammation in young males, when the disease itself poses such a small risk to that group.

This came after two top FDA officials quit and co-authored a paper in the British medical journal The Lancet denouncing the push for universal booster shots.

The FDA doesn’t have to take the panel’s recommendation, but if it doesn’t, it will be interesting to hear their justification, especially considering that 16-2 margin. Journalist Jordan Schachtel tweeted that this was a clear and “legit revolt” by the FDA bureaucracy against the Biden plan to roll out booster shots for everyone, and “The White House is not happy.”

I’m fascinated to see what they’ll do next. They keep telling us to “follow the science” and treating any questions or objections as if they’re coming from knuckle-dragging cave persons. Now, experts from their own FDA have voted 16-2 against their booster plan. Will they try to tell us those people don’t know science as well as Joe Biden? Or will they just get their friends in the news and social media worlds to silence them?

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

Comments 1-1 of 1

  • Ann Bennett

    09/19/2021 04:09 PM

    I do not think this is a good thing. The vaccine is effective 5-6 months, just like a flu vaccine. Flu season goes away after that so you don’t have to run out and get re-vaccinated until the next flu season. China virus is lasting over 2 years since fall 2019. I read the scientific article and basically they opposed the booster because these guys can’t “prove” the booster should be for everybody and they think poor countries should have access before we get a third shot to help Americans have full immunity. They believe we have adequate immunity to keep the majority from dying from China virus with 2 shots. They are operating from a hospitalization emphasis- 2 shots will make the hospital situation manageable and so they don’t want us to get 3 shots depriving the poor world of their shots. They are saying The vaccinated can get sick since they probably won’t die with 2 shots.
    Their “lack of peer studies” about 3 shots argument is no better than the arguments against ivermectin- we know it works but hey say they have no proof so you can’t take ivermectin for covid. If I want 3 shots I should be able to get 3 shots at 6 months to protect me from the virus. I am-an American and the vaccine was created and produced here. If I don’t want to take the vaccine and I want to take ivermectin to treat my China virus case, then as an American I should be able to get it at the pharmacy instead of going to Tractor Supply for a dangerous dose. Woke America last policies are in charge of too many of these agencies. Vaccines are good, ivermectin is good, and mandates should be illegal. But the article referenced is not a good reason to stop widespread availability of vaccine boosters.