Alfred Dawes | Will you take the vaccine?

I must confess that my reason for staying far from the topic of COVID-19 vaccination is that my leanings have fluctuated as I have researched and observed happenings the world over. While not an antivaxxer by any stretch of the imagination, I had harboured the same doubts shared by many who still resolutely oppose the vaccines. There are many misconceptions and conspiracy theories that act as obstacles to meaningful debates as to why one should take the shot. These require some mention before we tackle the crux of the matter – why I believe you most likely should take the COVID-19 vaccine after defeating my former arguments as to why I should not.

We have heard the conspiracies – Bill Gates trying to depopulate the world, there are nanoparticles and chips inside the vaccines, they change your genes, the mark of the beast, etc., etc. I do not dismiss conspiracy theories without evaluating them thoroughly, but the level of cover-up that would be necessary would make this impossible to pull off a worldwide scam of that magnitude in the era of WikiLeaks. It is fair to say that we can brush aside those arguments to have conversations about genuine concerns, such as how in God’s name did they develop a vaccine so fast when we have the common cold and HIV around so long without one?

That one had me suspicious at first. On closer inspection though, the technology for vaccines against similar coronaviruses that cause SARS (2005) and MERS (2012) have been under development for years. All that was needed was to tweak them from one virus to its close relative. It is as if the frame of the house was already built and they simply changed the fixtures. To compare the time taken to change the fixtures and deliver with the time taken to build a house from the foundation up is unfair at best. So, in reality, the release of the vaccines has just shown how technology has progressed to allow for their rapid development. And what about other diseases without vaccines? Well, some viruses change so much and so fast that by the time there is a vaccine they have already reinvented themselves several times over. This happens with the common cold viruses and somewhat with the flu that requires a yearly, hemisphere-specific shot.

My greatest concerns were with safety and the fact that COVID-19 is not as deadly locally, so why not just allow natural herd immunity since we are protected by a tropical climate. Unfortunately, the only way we can be certain about vaccine safety is by waiting until next year when we have seen a few billion people OK after taking the vaccine. That approach would not serve the interest of the health sector, our loved ones or the economy. We do know that the side effects are extremely rare although extremely magnified because of the controversies. Being fairly young, fit and healthy I know my risks are low, so why bother? That argument was quickly quelled when I saw at first hand the long-haul symptoms of shortness of breath and fatigue long after young people had recovered from the disease. Then there are the arguments of why take it if I can still catch it and have to wear masks.

RETURN TO NORMALITY

It is evident that the COVID-19 vaccines will not stop everyone from contracting the virus. What it will do is stop a large percentage from getting sick from the virus, for those who do contract the virus it will shorten the duration of sickness, the severity of the disease and the risk of dying, and the chances of transmitting the virus to others. These vaccines are not silver bullets. You will still need to observe the sanitisation and social-distancing protocols. What it does is to give some reassurance that for you COVID-19 will at its worst be like a bad flu if you are unfortunate enough to still catch it. In that sense, it makes sense to take the jab even if others around will not in the numbers required to reach herd immunity, thus allowing the pandemic to flourish. Vaccination is touted as the only way to return to normality. However, while they may be the best method to weaken the effect of the virus and achieve herd immunity, the vaccine may not be the only way to achieve some degree of normality.

TREATMENT OPTION

Ivermectin is an old FDA approved parasite medicine now mostly given to animals. There is mounting evidence that Ivermectin can achieve similar results to the available vaccines, i.e., lessened chance of contracting COVID-19, a shorter, less severe disease course and less transmission of the virus. The drug kills the virus and can lead to less hospitalisations and deaths, converting COVID-19 to a less lethal disease as the vaccine does. The drug should not be seen as an alternative to vaccines. Instead, we should view it as a treatment option for persons who contract the disease rather than simply sending them home to check in if they are getting sicker. The utilisation as a substitute for prevention should only be considered if we cannot get enough of the vaccines.

Pandemic politics will make it difficult to access adequate vaccine supplies, and the Western/PAHO/WHO bias against cheap but effective drugs such as Ivermectin in favour of less effective ones such as Remdesivir should not condemn us to a third-world future where wealthy countries emerge from the crisis first. The people need to do what is right and be guided by science and not fears. The Government, on the other hand, must give us all the available weapons in the arsenal to fight, vaccines from ‘lesser’ countries and proven drugs such as Ivermectin, even if the Western gods have not sanctified them on their altars of hypocrisy.

- Alfred Dawes is a general, laparoscopic, and weight-loss surgeon; Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; former senior medical officer of the Savanna-la-Mar Public General Hospital; former president of the Jamaica Medical Doctors Association. @dr_aldawes. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and adawes@ilapmedical.com.