I'm going to devil's advocate against his position:
You're right, mRNA treatments are not traditional vaccines and work against repository infections in a novel way. We would not expect the same patterns of infection as with smallpox or mumps.
This paper suggests ADE does not occur in CoVs because it infects respiratory epithelium, not macrophages.
The mRNA data demonstrates efficacy. Of 44,486 evaluable participants (50% in each cohort), irrespective of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, 81 COVID-19 cases were observed among vaccine and 873 among placebo recipients.
--
I'll stop there. I'm not trying to personally argue against the venerable doctor - I am in agreement with him, but I am just constructing the sort of rebuttal he is up against by trying to use facts and logic.
That article's abstract you cite specifically warns again VAH (vaccine hypersensitivity reactions). Sort of similar concern as ADE. There are plenty of papers that cite ADE as a valid concern, including those reposed at the NIH! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7645850/
And establishing efficacy that way is most shady. Unless you have a well conducted blind trial where a ten thousand are given the vax and ten thousand are giving saline of the exact same population and you look back six months later I'm not buying it. Too much shady stuff with data manipulation and whatnot to believe anything taken from population data at this point.
I'm going to devil's advocate against his position:
You're right, mRNA treatments are not traditional vaccines and work against repository infections in a novel way. We would not expect the same patterns of infection as with smallpox or mumps.
This paper suggests ADE does not occur in CoVs because it infects respiratory epithelium, not macrophages.
The mRNA data demonstrates efficacy. Of 44,486 evaluable participants (50% in each cohort), irrespective of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, 81 COVID-19 cases were observed among vaccine and 873 among placebo recipients.
--
I'll stop there. I'm not trying to personally argue against the venerable doctor - I am in agreement with him, but I am just constructing the sort of rebuttal he is up against by trying to use facts and logic.
That article's abstract you cite specifically warns again VAH (vaccine hypersensitivity reactions). Sort of similar concern as ADE. There are plenty of papers that cite ADE as a valid concern, including those reposed at the NIH! https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7645850/
And establishing efficacy that way is most shady. Unless you have a well conducted blind trial where a ten thousand are given the vax and ten thousand are giving saline of the exact same population and you look back six months later I'm not buying it. Too much shady stuff with data manipulation and whatnot to believe anything taken from population data at this point.