The problem with calling “vaccine hesitant” people antivaxxers is that most of them aren’t really antivaxxers along the lines of Rob Schneider, et al. Most of the Covid antivaxxers are hesitant because they have yet to be convinced of two things. First, the necessity of receiving the vaccine and second the safety of the vaccine once it is received.
The vaccine pushers have been out in force shouting to anyone within range that the virus is deadly and the vaccine is safe. The problem with this position is that it sounds very much like propaganda and very little like the honest truth.
Many people – exactly 10.98% of the country if the CDC is to be believed – have contracted the virus as of this writing. Of those who have, 1.6% have died. (CDC data is here. Population Data is here.) Mathematically, that means you have a 99.998% chance of surviving Covid. To put those numbers in perspective, as an American male I have an 11.6% chance of developing prostate cancer and a 2.4% chance of dying from it. I am more likely to contract and die from prostate cancer (as my father did) than I am to contract and die from Covid. Yet not only am I free from prostate cancer propaganda, I am free to wander among the general populace without carrying proof that I have recently been tested and proven to be prostate cancer free. To my knowledge, despite the greater health risks, no government agency or business entity has restricted my access or mobility to ensure that I am taking proper precautions to prevent prostate cancer.
Despite the mathematical evidence of its lack of necessity, we are still being pushed to get the vaccine. After all, better safe than sorry, right? If you could get a vaccine that would reduce your chance of contracting and dying from prostate cancer, you would take it, right? Well, the problem is that besides the numbers not supporting the urgency, there are some respected voices raising concerns about the safety of the vaccine, or coming out against it altogether. Dr. Mike Yeadon, ex-vice president of Pfizer, has been one of those voices. Considering his credentials, he should be allowed to make his case to the public via legacy and social media. Instead, however, he has been banned from every platform and relegated to alternative sources such as podcasts on Bitchute. If you haven’t seen any of his arguments against the vaccine, you can see a good one here.
Why would a scientist with a respected background like Dr. Yeadon not be given equal time in the vaccine discussion? Is he crazy? Are his credentials false? Does he have a history of falling victim to scams and conspiracy theories? The Center for Countering Digital Hate in the UK said “Yeadon’s background gives his dangerous and harmful messages false credibility”. In other words, questioning the safety and efficacy of a vaccine, regardless of how qualified you may be to discuss the issue, is now considered digital hate. They go on to say that his concerns have been debunked, but they don’t say how it was debunked, just who said it was debunked.
To be clear, everyone including Yeadon himself, admit that Yeadon has always pushed vaccines. Early in 2020 he even asked people to be patient with the development of the Covid vaccine and urged people to take it. “When a fellow Twitter user said vaccines “harm many, many people,” Yeadon replied: “Ok, please refuse it, but do not impede its flow to neutrals or those keen to get it, thanks.”” That attitude is what we would expect in a free society. You’re free to take the vaccine or not. Just don’t interfere with the choices other people make.
It wasn’t until he learned that the mRNA vaccines were going to be used did he suddenly change his opinions on the use of Covid vaccines. Again, like many people, Yeadon isn’t an antivaxxer, he’s just anti this vaccine – the Covid mRNA vaccine. And according to him, for good reason.