It’s interesting how journalism works these days.
Instead of doing any kind of real research or due diligence, most of the media is a bunch of parrots – they are lazy – they treat stories like they are all from the the Associated Press and they just repeat the information without looking into what they publish.
And that makes them dangerous – especially during a pandemic.
And with a media that acts as stenographers for democrats, it’s even more dangerous.
But they don’t care because they have an agenda and they know the brainwashed minions out there will re-tweet their stuff after reading ONLY the headline.
It’s pretty sad that we have biased “gatekeepers” of information instead of people striving to find out and report truth.
Even in junior high school, I was taught to do my own research and get several sources on things. I was also taught to find documents, when available, and actually read them.
Maybe that’s why I am (currently) the only one that I’ve seen out here in internet-land advising AGAINST mixing and matching your COVID-19 vaccines.
No, I’m not a doctor but I don’t need to be. I can read English.
Yes, I’m an “opinion” writer. But that doesn’t mean that I want to have opinions and write stories based on false information.
I want accuracy and credibility.
I know. What a concept, right?
I’m telling you this because the information in my article actually reports what the mix and match booster study says, not what I WANT it to say with information cherry picked out like the other media outlets.
Last week, I started seeing several stories on how you can mix and match COVID-19 vaccines and not have a care in the world about it. Even science and medical  websites were touting it.
The idea of mixing and matching vaccines seemed idiotic to me from the get-go since the vaccines are different, especially the mRNA ones (Moderna and Pfizer) in comparison to the Johnson & Johnson  one which uses more of a natural delivery into your system on a disabled adenovirus.
But now that it was reported that the FDA is going to endorse the mix and match boosters, I wanted to look into it more. I wanted to look into the weeds so to speak because I’m sure that the CDC will follow soon in their footsteps.
First of all, the endorsement of the FDA (and everyone else) to mix and match vaccines is based on a preliminary report (it says “preliminary” right on the cover) and is not certified by peer review.
If anyone cares about those kinds of things.
I actually read through this study that the media and the government are referring to with their endorsements. I wanted to see if there is enough actual science to back up to their recommendations.
In my opinion, there is not.
And keep in mind this is a FEDERALLY FUNDED study, not an independent one. It was conducted by the National Institutes of Health.
First, when we look at vaccines, we have to look at the vaccines available in the United States. We have two of them (Moderna and Pfizer) that use mRNA technology.
These are the vaccines that are currently failing in their efficacy against infection, especially Pfizer  which is reported to be down to 20% infection efficacy after four months.
The mRNA technology has never been used in humans before the COVID-19 vaccines came out and it looks like they are not long-lasting – hence the push to get boosters.
The mRNA vaccines are basically an “experiment” on all of us – we have no long-term data on the effects that two vaccines will have on us – let alone three… or four…. or more…
Then we have a politically motivated CDC rolling over  who they need to roll over, telling everyone to get a Pfizer booster even when their own panel didn’t recommend it for everyone.
But that’s not good enough for them either. Mandates are everywhere. They want vaccines, vaccines, vaccines…
So according to the New York Times , the Biden folks at the FDA are planning to (recklessly in my opinion) tell everyone it’s okay to mix and match their vaccines even though the study they are using for this message doesn’t appear to support the science of doing so.
What the government and the media IS telling you from the study is that the mix and match boosters can lead to an increase in the antibody count.
What they are NOT telling you is plenty.
Most media outlets are not telling you that the study itself admits that the results are based on a short-term study with hardly any people in it.
Here is something DIRECTLY from the report, word-for-word, to pay attention to. It says “Our study has limitations. It was not designed to directly compare responses between different booster regiments. The sample size is insufficient for inter-group comparisons and the demographics of those studied are not representative of the US population.”
What about safety? Also important, they admit “…the sample size and interim follow-up period were not sufficient to identify rare or late adverse events following booster vaccination….”
They also did NOT study the levels of immune cells that were primed to attack the virus which is important to find out to see if a vaccine is successful.
So let’s look at what else the study shows (or doesn’t), shall we?
What about side effects – or what the scientific community calls AEs (adverse events). There were 64 AEs out of 458 people. 15.6% had an AEs with the Moderna booster; 12% with Johnson and Johnson, 14.3% with Pfizer.
But the most important part of the study to look at, in my opinion, is the SMALL number of people in the study. The study only had 458 participants!
I repeat – The study only had 458 participants!
Wow. I REALLY want to base life decisions on what happened to 458 people.
Then we see in the study that there are nine combinations of vaccines/boosters that can be done and they put people in groups of three categories depending on what booster they got.
So divide 458 by nine and you end up with only 50 different people participating per combination IF they were divided out evenly. About 150 people per booster choice.
Again… no impressive numbers here.
Nevertheless, the Biden FDA is recommending mixing and matching boosters with this low number of people studied on a short term basis.
Not cool at all.