The United States needs to have a measured approach to medicine when it comes to boosters. What is the likelihood of hospitalization in the population at college? What is the risk of death in the same population? What is the risk of side effect from the shots?
When you answer these questions, it seems reasonable to not require boosters since the chances of death are low in this population as in the chance of hospitalization. However, the chances of heart damage, especially in males that would attend the school, is higher than the damage from the disease itself. The heart damage is permanent.
I'm not saying no one should get a vaccine, but rather we need to balance benefits and damages from the vaccine regiments. Is one shot enough to reduce the risk of Covid death/hospitalization while also keeping the risk of heart damage low? If yes, why require more shots?
Sadly the goal posts seem to have moved with the Covid in general and the vaccine in particular. People will still get Covid even with the vaccine. The original point of the vaccine is to reduce the risk of death, and the workload on the Hospitals. Now it seems that no one should ever get the disease. While laudable, it is unrealistic.
The myocarditis connected to the vaccinations was reported to be almost always mild. And the higher risk for myocarditis compared to COVID (the topic of the linked paper) only applies to the second shot of Moderna for people under 40, not for Biontech nor for people above 40. And this only compares myocarditis, COVID has other potential complications that were not within the scope of this paper.
So it's reasonable to use Biontech instead of Moderna for young people, but the overall benefit of the vaccine still applies. The risks from COVID for young people are rare, but the side effect from the vaccine are even rarer.
Again, do the added shots help with death and or hospitalization to such a degree that it’s worth the risk? Maybe I’m wrong, but from what I can see, given the age group of those involved in this particular population, the answer is no. They were already at low risks of death and or hospitalization. They were at low risk of complications from the disease itself. The benefit of the booster vaccine appears to be low in the population. Why risk it?
When you answer these questions, it seems reasonable to not require boosters since the chances of death are low in this population as in the chance of hospitalization. However, the chances of heart damage, especially in males that would attend the school, is higher than the damage from the disease itself. The heart damage is permanent.
I'm not saying no one should get a vaccine, but rather we need to balance benefits and damages from the vaccine regiments. Is one shot enough to reduce the risk of Covid death/hospitalization while also keeping the risk of heart damage low? If yes, why require more shots?
Sadly the goal posts seem to have moved with the Covid in general and the vaccine in particular. People will still get Covid even with the vaccine. The original point of the vaccine is to reduce the risk of death, and the workload on the Hospitals. Now it seems that no one should ever get the disease. While laudable, it is unrealistic.