COVID Vaccine Conspiracy Theories?

By /

I’ve got quite a few critical COVID topics to cover, but given that many people have been chiming in on the blog where I showed myself getting vaccinated, I thought this blog needed to come first. The Internet abounds with various easily disprovable conspiracy theories around the two existing COVID-19 vaccines. So today I will tackle those I hear the most. Let’s dig in.

I Hate the Phrase “Conspiracy Theory”

One person’s facts are another person’s conspiracy theories. Meaning what is or is not a conspiracy often depends on your perspective. However, here, I’ll define it as something that’s easily disprovable with only a little searching around the Internet.

Request a Regenexx Appointment

A Stroll through a Century-Old Cemetary

I’ve always been fascinated with the Victorian era and that’s where my blog will begin today. You can’t really get a sense of how much an impact modern medicine has had on life expectancy until you stroll through a graveyard where everyone died over 100 years ago. What you’ll immediately notice is that dying young was VERY common. Young women who died in childbirth. Young children who died of infectious diseases. Young men who died of infections or trauma. Middle-aged people who died of tuberculosis. Reading the tombstones will literally blow you away.

What were the two things that changed everything? We began conquering deadly bacterial infections and viruses. Antibiotics became widespread in the 1940s and vaccinations in the 1950s. Let’s focus on the latter. For example, smallpox had a mortality rate of 30%. Smallpox was irradicated worldwide through widespread vaccination in 1980 with the last known case in 1977.  In the US, the last smallpox outbreak occurred in 1949. How was smallpox eradicated? Everyone got vaccinated and with few hosts where the virus could survive, it eventually died out.

The Beginnings of the Anti-Vaccine Movement

I remember my older siblings who wore their smallpox vaccine scars on their shoulders like a badge of honor. So how could we go from that world to ours today where 40% of Americans refuse to have their kids vaccinated? (1) That seems to have begun with a now-discredited 1998 paper written by an English physician showing a connection between the pediatric MMR vaccine and autism. A 2011 paper published in the British Medical Journal then demonstrated that this Wakefield paper involved research fraud (2):

“Specifically, Deer reports that while the paper claimed that eight of the study’s 12 children showed either gastrointestinal or autism-like symptoms days after vaccination, records instead show that at most two children experienced these symptoms in this time frame. Additionally, while the paper claimed that all 12 of the children were “previously normal” before vaccination with MMR, at least two had developmental delays that were noted in their records before the vaccination took place.

After examining the records for all 12 children, Deer noted that the statements made in the paper did not match numbers from the records in any category: the children having regressive autism; non-specific colitis; or first symptoms within days after receiving the MMR vaccine. The Lancet paper claimed that six of the children had all three of these conditions; according to the records, not a single child actually did. (See a table that breaks down the comparison between the Lancet numbers and the medical records here.)”

However, the Wakefield paper had already changed the public’s perceptions of vaccine safety, so the damage was done.

Vaccines and Side Effects

Even if Wakefield had been right that 12 kids had autism because of the MMR vaccine (he wasn’t), about 9 million doses of the vaccine had been administered. So let’s say that 90 kids out of 9 million were disabled due to the vaccine. How many kids would have died if the MMR vaccine didn’t exist:

  • Measles-about 1,000 British kids dead with 250,000 hospitalizations
  • Mumps-100 kids dead with tens of thousands with permanent neurologic damage due to encephalitis
  • Rubella-The biggest impact is that infected women pass the virus to their unborn babies with an 85% risk of birth defects in the first trimester. So hundreds of thousands of miscarriages or birth defects.

Hence, the benefits of widespread MMR vaccination would still far outweigh the risk of a rare vaccine side effect. That’s the thing with vaccines, they only work to bend the curve when nearly everyone gets one for the good of society as a whole.

Join us for a free Regenexx webinar

The COVID Vaccines

Ever since I posted my blog on getting vaccinated, I’ve had countless comments about how these vaccines will do everything from rewriting your DNA to them being part of a worldwide conspiracy to half-baked science lectures by people who barely finished high-school biology. I think many of the fans of my hard-hitting science-based COVID blogs that question the prevailing media narrative were shocked that I could have somehow defected to the other side and become a shill for Pfizer and Moderna.

If you read this blog every day, you know one key thing about me. I follow the data like a dog with a bone. In fact, that’s why people fly from all over the world to get treated in our Colorado clinic or decide to go to a Regenexx site instead of a local office offering dead stem cells. I am a scientist physician.

Medicine is ALWAYS Playing the Odds

On a personal note, all of my kids are vaccinated because the net positive effects of vaccination outweigh any possible net negative effects. People don’t like to acknowledge that they can be harmed or killed by any drug, medical procedure, physical therapy session, or even chiropractic adjustment, but rare events can and do happen. Hence, that’s why I’m so focused on using small injection-based procedures with lower risk to replace much bigger surgical procedures with higher risk. Vaccines are no different.

Dismantling the Internet PseudoScience on COVID Vaccines

This Will Rewrite My DNA

This is false. DNA plus an enzyme generates mRNA which generates proteins and then is destroyed. These vaccines use mRNA to generate the spike protein from the SARS-CoV2 virus. Then that mRNA is destroyed. There is no way that mRNA can reprogram your DNA. That statement comes from somebody who obviously failed high school biology class.

Months after Being Vaccinated Many People Will Develop Severe Immune Reactions

This is an interesting one as it seems to come from a video online put together by a virologist from Ireland:

Her position is that the COVID vaccines will prime the immune system in such a severe way that people will begin dying 2 months after they get the vaccination. As proof of this, she shows a 2012 research paper, which I looked up and read (4).

First, this paper didn’t test the novel coronavirus (SARS-Cov2) from 2019, but the MUCH more lethal (by two orders of magnitude) SARS-CoV from 2003. This is from the CDC and the  SARS-CoV (3):

“Almost all patients with laboratory evidence of SARS-CoV disease evaluated to date developed radiographic evidence of pneumonia by day 7-10 of illness, and most (70% -90%) developed lymphopenia. The overall case-fatality rate of approximately 10% can increase to >50% in persons older than age 60.”

Meaning that the original 2003 SARS-CoV was so serious that a very high proportion of patients ended up in the ICU, which is one reason it burnt itself out so quickly as these people were so sick they could only spread it to hospital employees.

In addition, this paper didn’t look at an mRNA/liposome vaccine like the Pfizer and Moderna products but a deactivated whole virus vaccine (two of them), a recombinant DNA vaccine (a very dangerous approach), and a virus against mouse hepatitis coronavirus. They tested the lungs of rats and ferrets on day 2 and 56 and saw significant inflammatory lung disease.

So what’s the practical issue with how this paper is being applied? First, we have the wrong virus, second, we have the wrong vaccines, third no human subjects, and fourth, if anything like this was happening, the initial study patients who got this vaccine would be dropping like flies. For example, Moderna had enrolled 30,000 patients by Oct 22nd and is still providing the FDA with safety data. Their initial FDA submission includes follow-up through a mean of 2+ months and NONE of these types of reactions were reported (2). From the FDA approval documents, there was a 1% chance of a severe adverse reaction in both the vaccine group and placebo group.

These Vaccines Have only Been Tested on Under 200 People

False.

The Moderna trial enrolled more than 30,000 people with 15,208 getting into the vaccine group and 15,210 getting into the placebo group (5). Of those people, 2.2% of each tested positive for the virus before the study began so they were excluded (a total of 675 people). On the first analysis of the data, there were 5 COVID-19 cases in the vaccine group and 90 COVID-19 cases in the placebo group. The serious adverse events were 2.0% and the same in both vaccine and placebo groups.

The Pfizer trial initially enrolled 38,000 people and then more to get to a total of 43,651 participants (6). 21,823 were in the vaccine group and the same number made it into the placebo group. Unlike the Moderna study, there was no pre-trial testing for COVID-19. There were 8 cases of COVID-19 in the vaccine group over two months and 162 in the placebo group. Serious adverse events were 0.6% in the vaccine group and 0.5% in the placebo group.

Hence, between the two vaccine trials, more than 70,000 patients were treated. The safety profiles were excellent. The efficacy rates were high.

Is this typical for a vaccine trial? Yes. For example, this Hep C vaccine was determined to be ineffective based on recruiting 548 patients with 14 infections in the control and 14 in the vaccinated (7). That’s not a study of 28 patients, that’s a study of the effects of a vaccine on 548 patients.

There is No Data that this Vaccine Will Reduce Disease Transmission nor Protect Anyone!

A little true but mostly false. These vaccines were approved under operation Warp Speed, so there was no time to perform research on a vaccinated person’s inability to spread the disease. However, since widespread vaccinations were first used, they have always irradicated the diseases they targeted. That list now includes smallpox, polio, diphtheria, mumps, measles, and rubella. Meaning once everyone who is vaccinated develops antibodies to COVID-19, the disease can’t spread as it dies in its new host. Hence the data we have strongly suggests that this vaccine will be able to reduce disease spread.

This Vaccine Only Helps Reduce Symptoms-Nothing Else

False. These vaccines are approved by the FDA for a claim that they prevent COVID-19 infection. Both approval documents show clearly that the companies meticulously defined how they determined COVID-19 infections and severe COVID.

Let’s focus here on the Moderna vaccine. In the second tier later analysis submitted to FDA, there were ultimately 11 COVID-19 cases in the vaccine group and 189 in the placebo group. There were 0 severe COVID-19 cases in the vaccine group and 30 in the control group. These approval documents say nothing about a reduction of symptoms, only that using stringent case definitions that the disease was prevented.

A Side Note

I have been a big critic of the pseudoscience surrounding COVID-19. From tests that are far too sensitive and that are likely picking up an epic number of false positives to over attribution of COVID-19 as a cause of death. Having said that, after hundreds of hours of research on this topic, some facts are indisputable. Many people have died and we have wrecked the lives and livelihoods of countless people with our reaction to this virus. The only way that gets fixed asap is if everyone gets the vaccine. This means that conspiracy theories need to stop. That doesn’t mean that we can’t continue to report and analyze additional data on the safety of these vaccines. Nor does it mean that smart people with medical and science training can’t look at that data and come to different conclusions than Pfizer or Moderna.

The upshot? As you can see, these anti-COVID-19 vaccine points floating around on the Internet are easily disprovable. Please do your homework and please, for the sake of all of your neighbors, get vaccinated.

_________________________________

References:

(1) National Public Radio. How The ‘Pox’ Epidemic Changed Vaccination Rules. https://www.npr.org/2011/04/05/135121451/how-the-pox-epidemic-changed-vaccination-rules Accessed 1/8/21

(2) The History of Vaccines. BMJ: Wakefield Paper Alleging Link between MMR Vaccine and Autism Fraudulent. https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/bmj-wakefield-paper-alleging-link-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism-fraudulent Accessed 1/8/21

(3) The centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In the Absence of SARS-CoV Transmission Worldwide: Guidance for Surveillance, Clinical and Laboratory Evaluation, and Reporting. https://www.cdc.gov/sars/surveillance/absence.html Accessed 1/8/21

(4) Tseng CT, Sbrana E, Iwata-Yoshikawa N, et al. Immunization with SARS coronavirus vaccines leads to pulmonary immunopathology on challenge with the SARS virus [published correction appears in PLoS One. 2012;7(8). doi:10.1371/annotation/2965cfae-b77d-4014-8b7b-236e01a35492]. PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e35421. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0035421

(5) USFDA. Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advivisory Committee Meeting December 17, 2020. https://www.fda.gov/media/144434/download#:~:text=Efficacy%20data%20from%20the%20final,the%20placebo%20group%20and%20was Accessed 1/8/21

(6) USFDA. Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee Meeting
December 10, 2020. https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download Accessed 1/8/21

(7) Lantos PM, Shapiro ED, Auwaerter PG, et al. Unorthodox alternative therapies marketed to treat Lyme disease. Clin Infect Dis. 2015;60(12):1776-1782. doi:10.1093/cid/civ186

This blog post provides general information to help the reader better understand regenerative medicine, musculoskeletal health, and related subjects. All content provided in this blog, website, or any linked materials, including text, graphics, images, patient profiles, outcomes, and information, are not intended and should not be considered or used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Please always consult with a professional and certified healthcare provider to discuss if a treatment is right for you.

Get health and wellness information from a trusted source.

By submitting the form, you are agreeing that you read and consent to our Privacy Policy. We may also contact you via email, phone, and other electronic means to communicate information about our products and services. We do not sell, or share your information to third party vendors.

Category: Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

32 thoughts on “COVID Vaccine Conspiracy Theories?

  1. Greg

    Excellent post! Thank you. If you could do a post about the benefits/differences between the Pfizer/Moderna-style vaccines vs. the AstraZeneca that would be fascinating, especially in light of the significantly different outcomes.

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Thanks! I Will put it on the list.

  2. Steve

    A lot to respond to in this article but I will start with the erroneous claim that the vaccine does more than prevent symptoms. You first need to educate your readers that there is a difference between sars-cov-2 and Covid-19. Sars-cov-2 is the actual disease and Covid-19 are the symptoms that are caused by the disease. All the vaccine trials indicate that they can reduce the instance of covid-19 (the symptoms). Nowhere do any of these studies says they prevent sars-cov-2. Here is that same example from your Pfizer document:

    Primary efficacy analysis demonstrates BNT162b2 to be 95% effective against COVID-19 beginning 28 days after the first dose;170 confirmed cases of COVID-19 were evaluated, with 162 observed in the placebo group versus 8 in the vaccine group

    What this is actually saying is that the vaccine is 95% better than the placebo at masking the symptoms of the disease. That is it. Even Dr. Fauci admits that they have no idea if these vaccines will do anything to prevent infection or transmission.

    Also, I assume you know, these vaccines work nothing like the old ones you mentioned and you provided no data that “strongly suggests that this vaccine will be able to reduce disease spread.

    You still have not demonstrated where more than 200 people were used to determine efficacy rates. We all know that tens of thousands were in the initial trials but again I reference back to your own document.

    170 confirmed cases of COVID-19 were evaluated

    That says it all. 170 cases were evaluated. Not 30K, not 40k but 170 people.

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Steve, you need to go back and do more homework. SARS-Cov-2 is the virus and COVID-19 is the disease. Symptoms are what people with the disease express.

      I can’t respond to the whole thing about symptoms versus the disease because you have that backward.

      The studies clearly defined how someone with COVID-19 was diagnosed. From the Moderna FDA document:
      For the primary efficacy endpoint, the case definition for a confirmed COVID-19 case was defined as:
      • At least TWO of the following systemic symptoms: Fever (≥38ºC), chills, myalgia, headache,
      sore throat, new olfactory and taste disorder(s), or
      • At least ONE of the following respiratory signs/ symptoms: cough, shortness of breath or
      difficulty breathing, OR clinical or radiographical evidence of pneumonia; and
      • NP swab, nasal swab, or saliva sample (or respiratory sample, if hospitalized) positive for
      SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR.

      This study was double-blinded and randomized, hence nobody knew when these diagnoses were being made what the patient had received.

      Steve, the rest of the issues were answered in the blog.

  3. Shawn Andrews, DC

    I have always enjoyed your blog and your honest take on the pandemic. I was disappointed in this post though. You can make your point without ad hominem attacks on those that disagree with you. It only serves to inflame and weakens your points. Your points that are otherwise very strong.

    On a side note what’s with the anti chiropractic hate? Is it the profession as a whole or just the chiropractors pushing junk stem cells?

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Shawn, not sure what part this blog is an attack. I work with many chiropractors on a day to day basis, so I have no hate for the profession. In fact, two of my best friends are chiropractors and our office receives and sends referrals with dozens. If you meant the reference to chiros offering dead stem cells, that’s consumer fraud. That scam is mostly being run by chiropractic offices, but since some other provider types offer it as well, hence I changed the wording.

  4. Robin

    Once again, thank you for this informative and clear minded post about the vaccines. With the internet as a constant backdrop of potentially false information, It is reassuring to get complex science explained in a way that lay folks can understand. Just wondering what you think of the idea being floated from officials now of giving the public only one dose of the Covid19 vaccine “to vaccinate twice as many people.” Pros? Cons? Thanks so much for being so dedicated and knowledgeable.

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      That could work, but nobody knows for sure.

  5. Sally

    Great article! Thanks for posting.

  6. David Wieland

    Thanks for another succinctly explanatory post and for directly addressing the worries based on fallacies. (But “irradicated” should be “eradicated”.)

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Thanks, fixed it…

  7. Ray D

    Thank you for your thoughtful articles. We’re in quite a pickle, eh?

    Given the epic number of PCR false positives, a quickly growing population will be thinking they have already fought off SARS-Cov2 and developed the antibodies plus T- and B-cells for longer term immunity.

    Especially if they were asymptomatic, or with generic and/or sub-clinical symptoms, their positive PCR test could also lead them to conclude they don’t need the vaccine.

    As a healthy 65yo male, If I had tested positive a few months ago, how to effectively determine if I should take the vaccine as offered or give that dose to someone who never tested positive?

    Do you think I would be eligible to travel (to the Caymans?) without taking a vaccine because I recovered from the positive PCR test result ?

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Ray, you’re right, we probably have a number of people walking around out there who believe they had COVID, but due to the high false-positive rate of the existing PCR tests, really didn’t. I would definitely recommend to anybody who was positive on PCR but never really sick, to get an antibody titer test. No, I doubt Cayman will allow anybody in without a vaccine (or a two-week quarantine if not vaccinated).

  8. Kay

    You twice posted a blog using your malamutes as analagous to the point you were making. My absolute favorite blogs ever. My point: You can bet most responsible people take Puppy Puppy or Kitty Kitty to the vet soon after getting them for worming and VACCINATIONS. Heck, most puppies have already had their first shots when you get them. I would love to see a poll of vets in your area who have owners bringing their pups for worming but tell the vet to hold the vaccines because they are anti-vaxxers. I bet none. My cats live to be 21 and my dogs 12-16 years old. Their COD’s were not delayed reactions to their shots. So we vaccinate our animals but not ourselves? Hmm! I do realize the mRNA vaccine was rolled out fast and its safety could not possibly have been tested on patients with various conditions. Legitimate questions and concerns don’t need doctoral level education to ask. For autism, something is causing the increased prevalence but I don’t think the Covid vaccine is being recommended for children.

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      That’s an interesting question on whether people get their dogs vaccinated, which looks like it’s mostly the law: https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/2021-01/State-Rabies-Vaccination-Laws-Chart.pdf
      On autism rates, part of that would be better diagnosis and there also may be some exposure causes, but it’s unlikely to be the MMR vaccine.

  9. Nate

    Time for a “controversial comment”.

    Covid-19 is a small problem dwarfed by a much bigger problem. The health of American’s at least is in free fall. Joints failing earlier(1), chronic pain, mental disorders on the rise, something in the body is failing. The current medical institution is leaving people with much disappointment. Perhaps left with notions that the problem is just in their head.

    This can only go on for so long before it reaches a critical mass of societal awareness of a problem never mentioned; perhaps even denied existing.

    Cognitive dissonance then starts happening to resolve such a reality. How can our ancestors have lived better than us? Is the medical knowledge that is held true wrong? Perhaps socialized medicine is what solves these problems? Thoughts start firing in infinitely many directions and conspiracy theories start latching onto a rapidly reforming thought process.

    What does data even mean if such a big problem remains unsolved and the current medical institution seems ignorant of it? The only thing that matters then is what is not being addressed.

    I think it means something that if I could see patients using only the knowledge from what I gathered desperately seeking to solve my health issues, I would probably be viewed as the ultimate authority of all health information. I ask the patient to keep explaining in more detail. I make a best effort to address the problem and validate the patients problem as one that needs lots of effort and care to fix. Probably rated better than the last doctor seen from that alone when my medical knowledge is barely above abysmal just by validating.

    This is all just my opinion and I could be way off and is based on what I have observed.

    Thank you for wanting to put yourself out there Doctor Centeno and not just stay in your office where it is easy to view the current system as perfect. You do a lot of good answering people’s questions and providing knowledge on your own time. Your work inspires others to become doctors even. Quite fun reading the in depth case studies and figuring out you want to do that all day every day.

    I am sure there are those who think my controversial comment should be erased from the internet and others who think what I say is divine truth. I respect all opinions of what I have said.

    (1) Future Arthritis Case Projection. February 7, 2018:
    https://www.cdc.gov/arthritis/data_statistics/national-statistics.html
    Accessed 1/12/2021

  10. Steve

    I know you won’t publish anything that remotely goes against your narrative but just trying to provide you insight into what others are learning from doctors we trust, and have proven to be very credible over the years regarding our health. This is today’s article from Dr. Mercola.

    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/01/12/future-of-vaccines.aspx?ui=2f29a15baadf2ca09127bc989e8ba330296bb6aed30f72b633f64490438fac0c&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20210112&mid=DM772761&rid=1057600961

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Steve, Mercola’s claims on this are ridiculous. For example, his concept that allergies to PEG (a common ingredient also in medical implants) will cause many allergic deaths is absurd. 10 million US vaccinations have been given and clearly “many allergic deaths” have not happened. On the placental development issue, see: https://fullfact.org/online/placenta-protein-vaccine/

    2. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Steve, reading Mercola’s backlinks is pretty bizarre. There’s that same claim that these study designs were “to reduce COVID-19 symptoms”. Please have a physician friend read the actual trial results with you as I have posted above. There is nothing about reducing symptoms, just reducing the appearance of confirmed COVID-19 cases based on both PCR X 2 and symptoms c/w the disease. This was a blinded study, so the physicians making those diagnoses of who had COVID in each group had no idea who had gotten the vaccine.

  11. Daniel Green

    Thank you Dr. Centeno for a voice of truth and reason. There is far too much misinformation on the internet. I am dumbfounded that so many people believe the unfounded nonsense conspiracy theories you mentioned without questioning the research and data, but then turn around and refuse to acknowledge the truth from expert doctors like you. However, I am a biostatistician and I even double check your references – no insult intended. A good statistician does this for everything before believing it.
    Dr. D Green Ph. D.

  12. Glena

    Great blog as usual. A couple of questions: First, with respect to the vaccine reducing disease transmission– quite a few media sources such as BBC & CNN have put out articles telling people not to expect any return to “normal”–because after everyone is vacc-ed we’ll still have to wear masks and socially distance.
    Second: of course the virus will mutate, so will that mean a new vaccine every year? like for flu? FYI I grew up in a family who never went to doctors and I never got vaccinated against anything. So I absolutely respect your take on vaccines, but I also have my experience. Will this turn out to be a yearly billions of dollar profit machine for vaccine makers? And yet more draconian coercion to get everyone to take it—YEARLY?

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Glena, once disease transmission begins to decline due to getting as many people vaccinated as possible (likely summer to early fall and assuming we have high vaccination rates of 70%+), then there should be little need for social distancing and masks. That would be what I call “Panic Porn” that the media loves because it sells eyeballs to advertisers.
      So far, the good news about this virus is that the spike protein has been conserved throughout the mutations. Hence, we’ve got a good chance that the existing vaccines will continue to work. As far as how long the immunity from the vaccine lasts, that’s an open-ended question.

  13. Barbara Morris

    Disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of specific risk of COVID-19 vaccines worsening clinical disease in informed consents
    Timothy Cardone and Ronald Veazey
    Tulane University School of Medicine
    September 11, 2020
    Specifically, see highlighted material on page 4

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Disclosure for all trials and medical procedures includes death due to the trial or medical procedure. The idea of consenting patients that a vaccine could make them worse is a pretty typical trial consent. In fact, an IRB likely wouldn’t approve a vaccine trial without consent like that.

  14. Bernard Schleien

    I am 45 years old; 75kg and 1.80m tall. I work out 7 hours a week. My Vitamin D is 61 ng/ml. No comorbidities. I eat almost exclusively grass fed meat and organic food. I could go on portraying the enormous care I invest in my health (and my family’s).

    For the past 10 months I have had a normal life in a highly populated city (Lima) that belongs to a country that for many months has had the most deaths per capita due to Covid 19 (Peru). Despite all the “risks” I took, which included continuous gatherings and team sports, I never tested positive.

    Why should I risk my health, even if it is a tiny risk, with a fast-tracked vaccine? (and this comes from a guy who owns a travel agency which has had enormous financial losses in the past 10 months).

    PS: I am not anti-vaccine. I highly encourage the obese and those over 80 years old to take it.

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      From a big picture standpoint because it’s your civic duty as that’s how vaccines work. everyone takes a very tiny risk (in this case less than 1 in 10 million so far) in exchange for the greater good of getting rid of this disease. On a personal note, good luck with traveling to many countries without vaccination records. It’s likely that all EU countries and many others will require travelers to be vaccinated and that this data will have to presented at immigration with your passport.

  15. Tom

    Dr. Centeno, there’s a lot more to the Andrew Wakefield story than your posting would lead your readers to believe. What you presented is so one sided. Have you seen the movie VAXXED? The article below presents the other side of the story. https://lynnemctaggart.com/shooting-the-messenger-the-heroism-of-andrew-wakefield/
    Here’s a notable excerpt:
    “In VAXXED, Dr Walter Thompson one of the CDC insiders involved in the study finally speaks up, to explain about the agency’s deception.
    Compelled to make an honest breast of it, he sent thousands of xeroxed pages of the original full data to Dr Brian Hooker, who re-analyzed it and finally discovered an enormous excess risk of autism among children who get the vaccine.”

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Tom, as I said, if the risk of Autism was 90 or even 900 in 9,000,000, that’s a very safe therapy to save the lives of tens of thousands and the birth defects of hundreds of thousands. If you want risk free medical care, that doesn’t exist.

  16. John

    Thanks for supplying such valuable information. I am about 90% decided to get a vaccination.
    Would you please comment on possible ‘pathogenic priming’ ?

    https://jameslyonsweiler.com/2020/12/06/susceptibility-of-people-to-pathogenic-priming-is-a-prime-reason-to-eschew-covid19-vaccine-mandates/

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      Yes, this is based on the same study done on rats/ferrets with SARS-CovV that I covered in this blog and discussed by Dolores Cahill. The time frame for this to happen in that study was under 2 months. This was not seen in these trials. With 10 million in the US and tens of millions already vaccinated worldwide, if this were happening, the ERs would be full of severe side effects of the vaccines.

  17. Deni Blaisch

    Doc,
    Thank you for posting this. I have some concerns. First, I question the use of NPR as a source. Second, Have you read the original study that Dr. Andy Wakefield wrote? I believe that the other doctors in his study all got back their licenses. Third, I watch the Highwire with Del Bigtree. I believe he investigates issues thoroughly. This week (1/14/) he spoke with Chris Shaw, PhD Professor, University of British Columbia and Dr. Neu (sorry don’t have correct spelling). They discussed the reactions people are having right now from this new vaccine. Thank you for your time.

    1. Chris Centeno, MD Post author

      The reactions are all in the VAERS data: https://vaers.hhs.gov/index.html I’ve reviewed about 500 of these records to get an idea of what was being reported. Nothing looked out of the ordinary for any adverse event reporting system for a drug, medical device, or vaccine. In particular, the adverse event rate in the Moderna trial was 2.0% for both the control and vaccine groups. For Pfizer, it was 0.5% in the control and 0.6% in the vaccine group. mManing that people who got saline injected in those trials reported an adverse event between 1 in 50 and 1 in 200 shots. Del Bigtree has no medical credentials nor science education, he’s a TV producer.

Is Regenexx Right For You?

Request a free Regenexx Info Packet

REGENEXX WEBINARS

Learn about the #1 Stem Cell & Platelet Procedures for treating arthritis, common joint injuries & spine pain.

Join a Webinar

RECEIVE BLOG ARTICLES BY EMAIL

Get fresh updates and insights from Regenexx delivered straight to your inbox.

Subscribe to the Blog

CONTACT US

9035 Wadsworth Pkwy #1000
Westminster, CO 80021
888-525-3005

FOLLOW US

Copyright © Regenexx 2021. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy

*DISCLAIMER: Like all medical procedures, Regenexx® Procedures have a success and failure rate. Patient reviews and testimonials on this site should not be interpreted as a statement on the effectiveness of our treatments for anyone else.

Providers listed on the Regenexx website are for informational purposes only and are not a recommendation from Regenexx for a specific provider or a guarantee of the outcome of any treatment you receive.

LinkedIn
Email
TO TOP