From Jeff Childers

Dr. Paul Offit published an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine last week gently and circumspectly raising doubts about Covid boosters. First of all, it’s interesting — and a good sign — that the NEJM would publish ANYTHING critical of the jabs. But it’s even more interesting that the author was Dr. Offit.

Dr. Offit, a highly-published specialist in pediatric vaccination, is perhaps the most well-known and well-credentialed member of the FDA’s vaccine advisory committee. Throughout the pandemic, he has been a reliable ally for the administration, a steady parrot-like mouthpiece for pandemic policy who encased whatever the administration was pushing with a scientific gloss. (He also wrote a terrific book titled “Pandora’s Lab,” which is a great read even though it includes a bizarre anti-Trump rant.)

Link: [Covid-19 Boosters — Where from Here? | NEJM](https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMe2203329)

Dr. Offit begins with an apology of sorts; he explains that it was a “disappointing error” to claim that Covid vaccines would prevent mild illness and transmission, when it was OBVIOUS that they could not do so because they do not generate mucosal immunity. Obvious. And remember that phrase, “mucosal immunity.” It is the jabs’ first serious failure, we’ll talk more about this soon. Offit admits that the vaccines were never trialed for preventing transmission, which is a notion that until recently could get you banned from Twitter.

Offit also trashed the psuedo-science of “asymptomatic infection,” albeit gingerly, explaining “a zero-tolerance strategy for mild or asymptomatic infection, which can be implemented only with frequent booster doses, will continue to mislead the public about what Covid-19 vaccines can and cannot do.” How about that.

Critically, he admitted that the vaccines have RISKS, a plain fact the CDC is yet unwilling to say: “In addition, because boosters are not risk-free, we need to clarify which groups most benefit. For example, boys and men between 16 and 29 years of age are at increased risk for myocarditis caused by mRNA vaccines.” He didn’t minimize the risks by calling them “super rare,” either. Recently and relatedly, Offit was in the news when it was disclosed he’d advised his college-age son NOT to get boosted.

But most significantly, he is — to my knowledge — the first government-approved expert to raise the specter of OAS, warning late in his article, “and all age groups are at risk for the theoretical problem of an ‘original antigenic sin’ — a decreased ability to respond to a new immunogen because the immune system has locked onto the original immunogen.” Gosh.

This is a HUGE admission. If an OAS risk exists, it potentially exists for EVERYONE taking the jabs, as Offit acknowledges (“all age groups are at risk”). The outcome of OAS is terribly difficult to predict; the possibilities include anything from repeated asymptomatic illness to chronic, unshakeable mild illness to serious autoimmune disease to death. In other words, Offit admits the real possibility of a potentially life-long, deadly risk involved in the shots.

So.

The fact that an expert in Offit’s position can now talk openly about jab risks in the most prominent U.S. journal, however tentatively, and the fact that I can blog about what Offit said on Facebook, is a sea change from where we were even two months ago. This is an incredibly encouraging sign. Things are moving in the right direction.