Anonymous
By Dr. Henning Ansorg, M.D., FACP, Health Officer County of Santa Barbara, Department of Public Health
One of the most critical steps we can take to re-open our communities is to be vaccinated when it is our turn. Some have expressed fear of getting vaccinated and unfortunately, misinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine has contributed to that fear. Here are 10 myths with accurate information to help you feel comfortable getting vaccinated.
Myth #1: COVID-19 vaccines were ‘rushed’ so they could still be unsafe.
While it is true that the COVID-19 vaccine was produced relatively quickly, it, does not mean scientists and researchers skipped critical steps. Rather, drug manufacturers and the government removed many of the bureaucratic inefficiencies that typically slow the process. No corners were cut in the trials and the results were remarkable.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration are continuing to monitor COVID-19 vaccine safety as the vaccines are distributed.
So far, serious vaccine reactions have been occurring at a rate of 4.5 in 1 Million doses given. This is very comparable to other vaccines. Of note: none of the severe allergic reactions were deadly and all recovered quickly. No death after receipt of the vaccine could be attributed to the vaccine but only to an expected prognosis in otherwise ill persons.
Myth #2: You can get COVID-19 from the vaccine.
The vaccines that have been approved for use in the United States do NOT contain the live virus that causes COVID-19, which means it is simply not possible to get sick with COVID-19 as a result. Getting a headache, chills or a short-lived fever or feeling fatigued for 1-2 days after getting vaccinated is a normal reaction and a sign that the body’s immune system is getting activated by the vaccine to be able to fight the virus. Short lived soreness at the injection site is also quite common but not dangerous.
Myth #3: Santa Barbara County is receiving fewer vaccines than other counties.
The number of disproportionately impacted communities, settings, and populations may differ among counties, thereby affecting the formula used to determine the State’s allocation of vaccine to the county. Bigger counties also tend to have more large clinic/hospital systems that may get extra allocations of vaccine.
Myth #4: The vaccines can change your DNA.
The approved coronavirus vaccines use messenger RNA, or mRNA. This technology teaches the body’s cells to make a harmless piece of the “spike protein” found on the surface of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. This triggers an immune response that produces antibodies, protecting against COVID-19 infection. This messenger RNA stays in the outer part of our cell, called the cytoplasm. It doesn’t enter into the nucleus of the cell, so it does not have access to our DNA.
Myth #5: The COVID-19 vaccines can cause infertility.
This claim has absolutely no scientific evidence. It was promulgated by social media platforms of the anti-vaxx movement. It was also a story line in a popular TV series Utopia, however completely fictional.
Getting vaccinated is important for pregnant women and those who are planning to become pregnant in order to protect mom/parents and baby from COVID-19.
Myth #6: You don’t have to get vaccinated if you’ve already had COVID-19.
The CDC says that anyone who has had COVID-19 and recovered (and otherwise qualifies for vaccination) should be offered the vaccine. New mutations of the virus are causing variants that may re-infect persons who had the original virus previously. Also, the vaccine causes a more robust immune response than the actual disease. It is recommended to get vaccinated even if you had COVID-19.
Myth #7: Once you’ve been vaccinated, you can no longer spread the virus.
It’s not yet clear whether the vaccines prevent individuals from spreading the virus to others. That means it’s possible that a fully vaccinated person might be exposed to the coronavirus, become infected without any outward symptoms, and then pass the virus along. Therefore, it is crucial that public health measures like mask-wearing, hand-washing and social distancing remain in place, even after obtaining the two-dose vaccination.
Myth #8: Severe reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines are common.
There have been cases of severe allergic reactions to the vaccine but the chances of getting the virus is much higher. While these reactions are alarming, the occurrence is quite rare at 4.5 per 1 million vaccinations and comparable to other vaccines. Also, every occurrence in the USA had a good outcome and quick recovery with typical medical treatment.
Myth #9: You should wait until you can choose the exact type of vaccine you’d like.
There is no significant difference between the two available vaccines and both vaccines behave identically.
Myth #10: I don’t need the vaccine; this will all just go away soon.
Unfortunately, the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19 is here to stay. The most effective way to protect your health and that of our community is to get vaccinated when it is your turn.
You may sign up for vaccine email updates and information from the county here.
These next few weeks will be a time of transition for vaccine distribution. Santa Barbara County will be switching to a new sign-up platform MyTurn.ca.gov and to the new State-run distribution process through Blue Shield. Both will come into effect for Santa Barbara County sometime after March 14.
For more information about local public health orders, guidance, and vaccine distribution in Santa Barbara County, please visit: https://publichealthsbc.org/
Myth 7 is not true, or at least not proven in USA studies one way or another. On the other hand, data from countries that have vaccinated most of the population (Israel, UAE and parts of UK) show that absolutely the vaccines prevent transmission of the virus. Just because the data is not from the USA does not mean it is not true.
In any event: the vaccines–any of them–are ****100% successful in preventing hospitalizations for severe disease and death from coronavirus.**** What else more do you need to know?
Why is this FACT not the very first item in his presentation?
MYTH #1: “This is very comparable to other vaccines.”
The FDA issued and Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for these vaccines, and as such they ARE NOT technically “approved” for use in the standard sense. It’s a risk versus benefit decision, made during a state of emergency, and provides protection against some liability. For example, Pfizer’s EUA states, “The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to permit the emergency use of the unapproved product, Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine”(Ref 1). For what it’s worth, I recommended to both my parents that they get the vaccine, and they did. I’m not against the vaccines, but the use of these technological nucleic acid platforms is unprecedented and should not be dismissed as routine.
MYTH #4: “The approved coronavirus vaccines use messenger RNA, or mRNA.”
Not true. The first vaccines approved are mRNA based. The recently approved Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 Vaccine uses an adenoviral vector, which is DNA. This vaccine was approved on February 27, 2021. I’m shocked that Ansorg doesn’t know this by now.
MYTH #5: “Getting vaccinated is important for pregnant women and those who are planning to become pregnant in order to protect mom/parents and baby from COVID-19.”
This is a reckless statement. The Pfizer EUA clearly states: “Available data on Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine administered to pregnant women are insufficient to inform vaccine-associated risks in pregnancy”(Ref 1).
MYTH #9: “There is no significant difference between the two available vaccines and both vaccines behave identically.”
Three! Three vaccines! Again, someone needs to point out to Ansorg that the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 Vaccine is shipping to Californians right now. In fact, one week ago Gov. Newsom tweeted: “NEW: CA is expecting 380,000 doses of the new Johnson & Johnson vaccine as early as next week. We expect that number to increase as supply becomes more available.” (Ref. 2) This news was also covered by several local news outlets.
(Ref. 1) https://www.fda.gov/media/144413/download
(Ref. 2) https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom/status/1365395573117882371
Dr. A should spend less time issuing saccharine press release platitudes and work to get his house in order. SB County is no shining star in distribution or equity or efficiency. From personal experience I can attest that getting vaccine from SBCPHD is a trek. Friends who have been able to get the vaccine from local pharmacies have much more pleasant experiences. I am told that the county system is somehow related to the state but the pharmacy system is related to the federal distribution. Kudos to Biden’s team if so.
CSF- Please know that your information and diligence for accuracy is truly appreciated.
MountainMan, likewise! I appreciate your clarification on the exact week that deaths have occurred, versus the weeks/days they were reported, as well as some of the other data you’ve been keeping a close eye on. Keep up the great work!
Now…countdown to the obligatory comments on amateur epidemiologists, armchair experts, the peanut gallery, etc. in 3, 2, 1….
CSF – are you sticking with idea that only 3,200 additional Sb county people have had COVID than are accounted for? So the total of every single person since February of 2020 in Sb county who has had COVID is around 36k? If so… the peanut gallery maintains its position that your love affair with numbers is decidedly one sided.
Interesting. Dr. Wen on CNN said that vaccinated people can be assured to be safe when together, and that many of these severe restrictions, such as distancing and masks, are not necessary for groups of vaccinated people. If not, why be vaccinating? One problem is that research has not been done, so the medical folks are people super cautious, making all these inconveniences go on and on.
Or that these days with the internet and Q-anon nut jobs, they have to be proactive.
For starters, don’t get your advice from TV doctors.
Thank you Dr. Ansorg, these are important points. But, I disagree that “myth” #3 is a myth, the rollout has been abysmal and disproportionate between counties. Some counties are multiple tiers ahead of SB, and other counties are even worse off than SB. There are big reasons they are moving toward Blue Shield controlling distribution.
Pointing out that Ansorg’s recommendation for pregnant women to take these vaccines is in direct contradiction the FDA’s warning, which specifically stated that the data is “insufficient to inform vaccine-associated risks in pregnancy”—is somehow a miniscule correction, mostly semantics, and spreading mistruths? I provided a link to the FDA EUA to back that up, so you can read this yourself. Ansorg’s recommendation is reckless, period!
There are risks, which I have estimated are worth taking for most people, which is why I’ve recommended the vaccine to others in specific groups. I’ve even advocated vaccinating the farmworkers when many did feel they deserved access. Still, to act like this is just some run of the mill vaccine with several years of proven safety is 100% completely irresponsible. The most responsible thing that someone can do is try and educate others on these risks and let them choose for themselves. Why are you against educating the public? I’ve even provided a peer-reviewed journal article (Ref.) from possibly the most prestigious journals of all, Nature, which only a science-denier would dismiss. Have you read this article, or FDA EUA? Perhaps you should stay in your own lane.
(Ref.) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-00789-5
Let’s see. When making a decision on a pandemic issue, should I listen to
A) An experienced medical doctor and epidemiologist.
or
B) A chemlab teacher doing amateur epidemiology on social media.
Yup, it’s a tough choice in the age of alternative facts.
Immunology is a branch of biochemistry. It has little to do with epidemiology. Being able to use vocabulary properly goes a long way to convincing your audience you are credible. Also, I prefer peer-reviewed journals to random *.org websites, any day.
Your insult directed at chemlab teachers is noted. I have an enormous respect for chemistry teachers. Are you really going insult an entire profession because you personally disagree with me?
For the record, chemists (even chemlab teachers) probably know a lot more about things like immunology, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics than the average MD, particularly an MD who is little more than a bureaucrat. Do you realize that MDs are exposed to such topics for only a few weeks during their education, while chemists spend a career studying such things?
Do you realize after forgetting all of their undergraduate organic chemistry, practicing MDs rely on pharmaceutical industry drug reps on advice for drug prescriptions, of the insistence of a patient who saw a commercial with happy people running though a meadow on a sunny day? This type of ignorance is exactly why the Purdue Pharma scandal occurred. The reps told the MDs that the opiates were safe and non-addictive (despite having chemical structures similar to opium) and the MDs, intentionally unwilling or pathetically unable to do any research on behalf of their patients, bought it—hook, line and sinker.
Have you noticed that many healthcare providers now rely more on NPs, who can also prescribe on behalf of pharma but cost less to employ? Why pay for someone you don’t really need, right? Think about it.
Epidemiologists do not generally deal with individual patients. Vaccine hesitance will only prolong this pandemic.
On the internet, nobody knows you’re a dog, so you’re free to give medical advice of canine quality.
I was just thinking that very same thing—that historically, scientific progress has only been achieved by questioning the authorities du jour, and pursing new hypotheses . One doesn’t have to ignore the opinions of the experts du jour in order to also consider new input from others who are experts in relevant fields. After all, the “experts du jour” have contradicted each other, maybe purposely misled the public (remember masks do more harm than good) and been wrong so often on this new virus. It is a good thing to do additional research before going into “lock step.” I used to do P.R. for more than 150 physicians, and can attest that second opinions are of vital importance to preserve one’s health!
Biology is hugely complex, for sure, but your example is one of differing opinions, not a conclusion being determined from data.
CSF, your points are minuscule corrections that are mostly semantics. Look at some of the deleted comments that are already spreading mistruths and a comment like yours only fans the flames to not believe the experts. While you claim to be a scientist, you are not an epidemiologist, infectious disease expert, or public health official. Please stay in your lane.
BONUS MYTH #11: THE VACCINE MAY PRODUCE SUBOPTIMAL ANTIBODIES AGAINST VARIANTS FOR WHICH IT WAS NOT DESIGNED, CAUSING ANTIBODY-DEPENDENT ENHANCEMENT (ADE) WHEN PRESENTED WITH A SUBSEQUENT VIRAL CHALLENGE AND LEAD TO POTENTIAL RESPIRATORY DISEASE AND LUNG DAMAGE.
Dr. Ansorg’s response: …..????….. [head explodes]
The phenomena of vaccine associated disease enhancement has been observed with Dengue, Yellow fever, Zika, several coronaviruses, influenza, and HIV (Ref. 1), resulting in numerous failed vaccine trials (Ref. 2). For COVID, the issue is less about how well the vaccine performed in clinical trials against the specific target it was designed against, but rather how those antibodies would perform against a variant that has mutated sufficiently. In that scenario, the vaccine-elicited antibodies may become non-neutralizing and allow the virus to enter the host via the complement pathway, much like a Trojan horse.
(Ref. 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antibody-dependent_enhancement
(Ref. 2) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-00789-5
BENE: There’s also the off-label use of medications to treat conditions not included in the original “data” resulting from studying the drug for it’s initially intended use. There are numerous examples of this.