RISK ANALYSIS: PROOF AGAINST C19 JAB FOR STUDENTS
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
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.
DOWNLOAD PAPER HERE.
SSRN-id4206070
.pdf
Download PDF • 633KB
