Is the vaccine an experiment? Were aborted babies used? Can I travel if I don’t take it? Here are summarised answers to the seven critical COVID-related FAQs asked by Christians.
Continue or listen or read to this blog below:
Following the roll-out of COVID-19 vaccines across the UK, we asked a panel of subject matter experts a range of questions covering medical, ethical, social and legal matters regarding accepting the COVID-19 vaccine. Sitting on the panel were Rev Israel-Isiavwe from Kingdom Culture Movement, Dave Brennan from Brephos and three experienced medical doctors: Drs Mike Ehima, Shadé Tongo and Ajoke Israel-Isiavwe. Click here to catch the replay.
My hope is that this seven-point summary will satisfy your concerns and help you make an informed decision. Let's get started...
Are the vaccines safe?
As of April 2021, there are three COVID-19 vaccines approved in the UK. These are the mRNA vaccine made by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna, and the viral vector vaccine produced by Oxford/AstraZeneca.
One myth to dispel is the mRNA vaccines having the ability to alter human DNA. It never makes it to the nucleus of our cell (where DNA resides) and therefore cannot tamper with it in any way.
The speedy mass production of the vaccines boils down to the novel vaccine technology in development for decades, the financial backing from the Government and a large number of eager trial participants.
With the roll-out of COVID-19 vaccinations in full swing, statistics have shown reductions in hospital admissions. Safety data is continually collected and monitored, but we do not have years of data to determine long-term side effects. This is a major contributor to safety concerns and vaccine hesitancy.
Is it ethical to use aborted foetal cells?
It has been established that NONE of the above vaccines contains aborted cells but it was used in the overall production process.
The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines used HEK293 for early testing, whereas the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccines used HEK293 in a greater measure during the testing and development of their vaccine. HEK293 are cells derived from the kidneys of an aborted baby in the Netherlands, 1973.
Foetal organ harvesting is an ongoing practice, but the ethical issue at hand is whether taking the vaccine inadvertently suggests endorsement and tolerance for using aborted babies as medical resources.
The CureVac COVID-19 vaccine, pre-ordered by the UK, is currently in Phase III clinical trials and does not use HEK293 in any way.
What are the risks of taking the vaccine?
The main adverse events after taking the vaccine are mild and subside within 48 hours. Examples include pain at the injection site, fever and general unwellness.
There have been troubling reports of blood clots and low platelet counts, particularly in the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, which has caused a number of countries to suspend its use and investigate the case. However, evidence has proven that these are rare cases and the benefits of taking the vaccine to prevent COVID-19 transmission outweigh this low risk.
Some argued that the benefits are questionable. There’s not enough evidence to prove the vaccine's effectiveness in reducing transmissions, and despite the backlash, have refused to take the vaccine.
Is the waiving of liability for pharma companies admittance to safety concerns?
Safety and tolerability is a top priority for vaccine makers, and they’ve maintained that no shortcuts were taken.
In order to encourage companies to develop COVID-19 vaccines expeditiously and keep the costs of the vaccine low, the Government has in return, granted them unprecedented protection for any damages caused to the public till 2024.
There are government compensation schemes available for anyone who suffers from a severe disability after taking the vaccine.
Will it become mandatory to take the vaccine?
Governments have maintained that vaccinations should remain voluntary. Employers are being warned not to force employees to get the vaccine before returning to work. Nonetheless, it is legally within an employer’s rights to mandate vaccines as a reasonable management risk and if written into contracts.
This is a slippery slope due to the national narrative to open up the economy quickly, increasing the pressure on businesses and workplaces.
Where will the line be drawn in limiting civil liberties, and are we near a place where saying “no jab, no job” becomes a normal part of the national language?
See Human Rights Acts 1998, Equality Act 2010.
Will I need a COVID-19 vaccine passport to travel?
Right now there’s no definitive answer, but it’s looking likely. The tourism sector has used yellow fever as an example of an immunity passport that already exists, so aren’t reinventing the wheel.
They’ve made the case that as countries open up their borders, introducing passports will help them relaunch and allow people to travel without having to quarantine.
Some have complained that these are draconian measures and it’s too soon to introduce passports. They could become like supplementary identity cards, increasing opportunities to discriminate. Concerns with civil liberty infringements remain, for instance if e-passports were used instead of paper it’s unclear who would run the database and control personal data.
Is my acceptance of the vaccine the mark of the beast?
This is one of those questions that come up when there’s a global catastrophe. Though this is not the mark of the beast, expect the satanic agenda to be achieved. Prick up your inner ears, wise up and ask yourself these three tangible questions:
Do you believe we are in the end times? Do you take the book of Revelations seriously? Do you believe that Satan is real and uses political systems and global organisations to achieve his aims?
The exercising of government control under the cover of a pandemic should be a wake-up call. Don’t be around where the mark of the beast is. Get yourselves ready for the return of Jesus Christ!