Mailbox: The vaccine dilemma – more questions herd than answers

By Dewald Lubbe wrote the below in response to Alec Hogg’s Daily Insider:

AH: Even vaccine sceptics will have to be impressed with the Covid-19 numbers now coming out of the UK which celebrated surpassing 50 million jabs this week. More than 90% of Britons over the age of 45 have now had at least one jab. On Monday the nation recorded just one coronavirus death. That triggered PM Boris Johnson to confirm that on May 17 more restrictions will ease and the June 21 deadline for ending all social distancing is almost set in concrete. The UK was one of a handful of nations that pre-planned vaccine purchases during the worst of the pandemic. It also relies heavily on the home-developed Astra Zeneca vaccine which costs a fraction of the price of alternatives.

Are we sure that the vaccines make such a massive difference? Why is the Covid death chart for one of the most vaccinated (UK) remarkably similar to that of probably the least vaccinated (SA). While vaccines certainly appear to make a contribution, maybe the primary driver here is good old herd immunity – which costs nothing. In addition, the last trickle of deaths or even a possible resurgence can most probably be prevented if Ivermectin is actively promoted by the DOH. If a low cost, minimal risk, no side effect medication is available to effectively both prevent and treat Covid, why the frenzy to vaccinate?

What would your view be on’s shocking allegation: “Considering how quickly vaccines using novel technology with unproven long-term safety records have been authorised for use, the failure to approve a known safe drug with considerable evidence to suggest clinical benefit is almost inexplicable. Some have suggested the resistance has been motivated by a wish among pharmaceutical companies to prioritise more profitable medicines like the vaccines. If so, this is a criminal example of putting profits before people.”

Read also:

Visited 1,477 times, 3 visit(s) today