Dear [name],

I wanted to write to you, because I know we don't see eye to eye on the issue of Covid vaccinations. I really value our relationship, and I don't want our different perspectives on this subject to irreparably damage or destroy it.

Can I start off by saying I fully respect your right to have your view. I may disagree with or challenge it, but I absolutely acknowledge and accept that, at the end of the day, it's your decision, and I will still care about and value you, and our relationship, whatever you decide. 

I know you think my view is misguided, poorly informed, and potentially even dangerous, so i just wanted to take this opportunity to put a few things down in writing, to assure you that I have really looked into this in depth, using fully accredited and professional sources. I haven't reached my views using unsourced YouTube videos or Facebook posts - and I don't believe the vaccine is going to implant Bill Gates into my brain! But I am firmly against receiving a Covid-19 vaccine, and this is why:

In the first instance, I'm against having the vaccine because safety testing has not yet been completed. Data from the vaccine manufacturers confirms safety testing is still ongoing, and will not be complete until 2023 (1).

This means that, at present, no Covid vaccines are approved for use in the general public - they are licenced for emergency purposes only (2), effectively meaning that we are the guinea pigs. I personally am not prepared to offer myself up as a test subject, especially not for pharmaceutical companies who have extensive histories of criminal fraud surrounding their products. 

Pfizer, producer of one of the two Covid vaccines currently available in the UK, was, in 2009, fined $2.3 billion to settle civil and criminal allegations that it had illegally marketed its painkiller Bextra, which has been withdrawn. This is the largest health care fraud settlement and the largest criminal fine of any kind ever (3).

Meanwhile, AstraZeneca, producer of the second Covid vaccine that has been widely distributed in the UK, pleaded guilty in 2003 to criminal and civil charges relating to the illegal marketing of the prostate cancer drug, Zoladex. The company agreed to pay $355 million, consisting of $64 million in criminal fines, a $266 million settlement of civil False Claims Act charges, and a $25 million settlement of fraud charges. This is just one example of many such cases AstraZeneca has been involved in (4).

The newer vaccines that have been or may be introduced to the UK are produced by companies who have either never brought a vaccine to market before (Moderna), or who have both never brought a vaccine to market before and are also serial felons (Johnson & Johnson (5).

Leading on from this is the very accelerated nature of the development of Covid vaccines. Vaccine development usually takes years or decades. The Covid vaccines have been produced in a matter of months. By definition, this means there is no data on long-term safety, and so we may discover in years to come - as has been the case with so many medical products initially deemed "safe", such as Thalidomide - that the long-term effects are far more deleterious to health than any benefits the vaccines may provide.

The UK Government is certainly expecting the vaccines to cause severe impairments and disability in some individuals, and has structured a compensation programme accordingly (6). 

There is no way to accurately predict who may have a severe adverse reaction to the vaccines, and so this is not a risk I am willing to take, for a virus that is asymptomatic or mild for most who contract it, only very rarely requiring hospital treatment. Please note that the average age of death from Covid-19 is 82 - the same as the average age of death generally (7).

It is also important to note that, although these products are being marketed as vaccines, that's not really an accurate scientific term to describe the mechanism by which they operate. A vaccine is defined as an intervention which prevents both the contraction and transmission of disease. There is no evidence to suggest the Covid-19 injections do either, as the NHS confirms (8).

What the Covid-19 injections purport to do is reduce symptoms, which makes them a therapy, rather than a vaccine. As the safety testing around them is not yet complete, and as they are using very new mRNA technology (2), they are actually experimental gene therapies - not vaccines.  As I mentioned earlier, I'm not prepared to be a test subject for interventions that are so untested and new. 

It's also important to note that harbouring concerns about the Covid vaccines is not an "anti-vax" position, and many very eminent and entirely pro-vaccine authorities have issued warnings about these vaccines, in particular, their accelerated development.

Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, has said: “I understand the importance of accelerating timelines for vaccines in general, but from everything I know, this is not the vaccine to be doing it with." (9)

Dr. Hotez worked on development of a vaccine for SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome), the coronavirus behind a major 2003 outbreak, and found that some vaccinated animals developed more severe disease compared with unvaccinated animals when they were exposed to the virus.

In plain English, this means that the vaccine could enhance the effects of the disease, when vaccinated individuals come into contact with the wild virus - an effect we might not see until winter, when coronaviruses are generally circulating. Again, this is not a risk I am prepared to take. 

To sum, there are too many unanswered questions and areas of concern for me to consider receiving a risky and experimental therapy for an illness that is, for most, mild, and quickly resolves itself without requiring medical treatment (10). 

I hope that the above has done a little to reassure you that I'm not a "crazy conspiracy theorist", and all the links I've provided in the reference section below are from mainstream sources, such as the government's website, The Guardian, and The Times. 

As I said at the start, I'm not expecting to convert you to my position, merely to give you a little further clarity on why I hold the position I do, in the hope that we can respect one another's differences, and remain on good terms.

Looking forward to seeing you soon.

Love,

[Name]

References:

1) https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04368728?term=NCT04368728&draw=2&rank=1

2) https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3115838/what-are-coronavirus-mrna-vaccines-and-how-do-they-work

3) https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/sep/02/pfizer-drugs-us-criminal-fine

4) https://www.corp-research.org/astrazeneca

5) https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/18/johnson-and-johnson-opioids-lawsuits-product-recalls

6) https://www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment/eligibility

7) https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/average-age-of-coronavirus-fatalities-is-82-pcwqrzdzz

8) https://www.ulh.nhs.uk/content/uploads/2020/12/PHE-vaccine-leaflet.pdf

9) https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-vaccines-insight/as-pressure-for-coronavirus-vaccine-mounts-scientists-debate-risks-of-accelerated-testing-idUKKBN20Y1I1?edition-redirect

10) https://www.webmd.com/lung/covid-19-symptoms#1