From what I am routinely told about the COVID-19 vaccine, it is perfectly safe and effective, and any possible side effects are only experienced by an infinitesimal percentage of patients.
Meanwhile, the only people who would put off getting one over concerns about side effects are nutty, fake news-consuming conspiracy theorists who need a hefty dose of establishment media fact-checks and a Pfizer shot in the arm, stat.
That said, why is it that refugees from nations like war-torn Afghanistan, Ethiopia and Myanmar are having such a difficult time getting vaccines because pharmaceutical companies can’t secure indemnity from lawsuits in places where there is no government structure to provide it for them?
If their products are so remarkably safe, why do Big Pharma companies only feel comfortable administering vaccines under the auspices of governments that will shield them from liability?
Humanitarian organizations say one of the major impediments to delivering vaccines to tens of millions of migrants and refugees is that some of the major manufacturers of the COVID-19 jab aren’t comfortable with the lack of legal protections, Reuters reported.
As many of the world’s poorer nations still struggle to obtain sufficient supplies of the COVID-19 vaccine, a program called COVAX has set up a reserve of shots for humanitarian groups to administer to refugees, migrants and asylum seekers.
These individuals are often not covered by government mechanisms through which vaccine manufacturers are shielded from lawsuits.
Gavi, the charity that runs COVAX in partnership with the World Health Organization, says that the mostly NGO groups applying for doses from COVAX are unable to assume the legal risks and that many of the companies that produce the vaccines are unwilling to do so.
So Gavi can’t deliver the vaccines.
Less than 2 million doses have been sent from Gavi’s supply, leaving 167 million people cut off from vaccination, according to United Nations data. Gavi documents state that “access to vaccines for some populations will remain a challenge” unless Big Pharma is willing to accept liability.
Three Chinese drugmakers have agreed to do so, according to Gavi, while Johnson & Johnson said it would waive a requirement for indemnity for the reserve doses.
Interestingly, Reuters also noted that “there have been few reported COVID infections among refugees, migrants and asylum-seekers — testing is not always systematic and infections can generate only mild symptoms especially in younger people.”
Advocates say these at-risk groups are in dire need of vaccination, yet they don’t seem to have been hit very hard by the pandemic despite living in close quarters with very limited access to health care and adequate sanitation.
That’s a bit odd, don’t you think?
All the same, officials warn that if these groups remain unvaccinated, they could serve as conduits for the emergence of new variants.
“Leaving them unvaccinated could help spread the virus and its variants across the world,” said Mireille Lembwadio, global vaccination coordinator at the International Organization of Migration.
So, let’s recap our story as well as the narratives surrounding COVID-19 and vaccination that we’ve been fed for nearly two years.
This is a virus so deadly that it is of the utmost imperative that the entire world population is vaccinated against it as soon as possible, including those who don’t appear to have been particularly affected by it, like healthy people under the age of 65, migrants and refugees.
The vaccine, which will save the world from the clutches of the virus, is so safe and effective that any concerns about risks or side effects are not only unfounded, but selfish and immoral.
But we need to make sure the pharmaceutical companies that produce the humanity-saving vaccines aren’t sued by any displaced war refugees before we go ahead and distribute these inoculations?
I don’t know about you, but something doesn’t add up.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.