Harvard is requiring Covid boosters for registration...

…because, “science”

If we have learned anything over the past almost three years, it’s that our institutes of higher education seem to be staffed by the uneducated. Yeah, that’s a pretty harsh judgement, and one that is well-deserved. Looking back over the past few years at the pushing of CRT, segregation of students (things like “multicultural - read: non-white - spaces and/or dorms, segregated graduation ceremonies, refusing admission based on “race”, etc.), changing of school building names and potentially school names, removal of “offensive” statues and landmarks (like a rock - literally, a rock), it is not difficult to see that colleges are failing. They are not only failing to educate students, but they are failing to uphold the standards that should be foundational to a university.

Now we have Harvard requiring Covid shots for all students registering for the Spring semester:

Students must be compliant with all vaccine requirements in order to register for the spring term. This includes the annual flu shot as well as the bivalent Omicron-specific COVID-19 booster. Bivalent boosters can be administered two months after the last COVID-19 vaccination. Students will be alerted to non-compliance as early as mid-October. 

https://huhs.harvard.edu/news/fall-2022-immunization-requirement-alert#gsc.tab=0

They don’t say why it is required. Never mind that all appearances point to the Covid shots as the cause of rising global all-cause mortality. Of course, instead of admitting this, the medical establishment has manufactured a mythical malady called “Sudden Adult Death Syndrome” to account for the mysterious rise in people abruptly dropping dead. I mean, it couldn’t possibly be the shots, right? It must be anything but:

Medical professionals remain baffled…

Perhaps we can find some published material that will help us understand. An opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, which claims that “college students aren’t guniea pigs” appears to disagree with Harvard’s requirement:

Universities might counter that—as with elementary schools requiring pediatric vaccinations—immunization is for students’ own good. But children can be at significant medical risks from the illnesses that we vaccinate them against, particularly when community vaccination rates are low. Not so with Covid. For those under 30, the risks of serious morbidity and mortality are close to zero. By contrast, early indications from passive surveillance systems (which call for follow-up investigation) and a June 10 review by the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee indicated an excess risk for heart inflammation, especially in men 30 and younger.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/university-vaccine-mandates-violate-medical-ethics-11623689220

Winona State University published a paper on their website stating that mandating vaccines for college-age students is unethical because the potential side-effects of the shots is “up to 98 times worse than the disease.” This result is based on a pre-print paper from researchers at Johns Hopkins and, of all places, Harvard:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4206070 .

“But that’s from September. This is November.” Fair enough. Perhaps there are studies showing that the new bi-valent shots are more effective. 

According to Pfizer, the boosters are better at fighting Omicron than the old shots: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/04/covid-news-pfizer-releases-data-showing-omicron-boosters-are-better-than-old-shots.html

According to two independent studies, they’re not: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/27/new-covid-booster-shots-dont-protect-better-against-omicron-bapoint5-studies-find.html

Funny how both of those appear on CNBC (and Bloomberg, and…). Now, the FDA claims the two independent studies (which together looked at 39 re-shot recipients) did not have a sufficient cohort (https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/28/fda-says-two-studies-showing-omicron-boosters-werent-much-better-than-old-shots-were-too-small-to-come-to-any-conclusions.html). Of course, Pfizer’s own study only looked at a quad-jabbed cohort of 36. So, who to believe? Two independent studies from Columbia and…oh…Harvard? Or the FDA and Pfizer who have been a little less than truthful with safety and effectiveness data?

If Harvard chooses to eschew the results of studies, from their own medical school, showing that mandating the boosters is unethical, and that the boosters are ineffective, perhaps they deserve to lose their registrants. After all, we’ve been told for the past two years that we should follow the science™, and here they are outright rejecting it, even when the science™ comes from within their own hallowed halls. Students surely can find another institution, where they can receive a real education, in which to matriculate. If only students would take a stand for their own safety, perhaps then we could coin a new (modified) trope: Go poke, go broke.