Opposition to New Booster Mandate Rests on Misinformation and Confusion
The recent update to the university’s immunization requirements has drawn criticism from students and parents
A number of parents have expressed displeasure with the university’s handling of its new COVID-19 booster mandate.
October 14, 2022
Fordham announced on Sept. 27 that it has officially updated its immunization requirements so that students and faculty have until Nov. 1 to get the newly approved COVID-19 bivalent boosters. The additional dose is approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to defend against the original strain of the virus, as well as newer ones, particularly the omicron variant.
University Health Services (UHS) signaled the possibility of mandating a second booster as early as April of this year. The university stated that its decision falls in line with the CDC guidelines, which recently changed their recommendations to include the additional booster shot.
However, Fordham is one of the only colleges in the country that has mandated a second booster shot. According to Best Colleges, a college ranking website and college search advisor, which published a list on Sept. 15 that outlines which universities are requiring vaccines and boosters, only three institutions — Bowdoin College, Wake Forest University and St. Olaf College — have mandated the bivalent booster.
Since the list was released, additional colleges such as Harvard University and Tufts University have also rolled out new mandates. Some of these requirements only impact students, but others include faculty and staff as well. At Fordham, these new requirements encompass the entire university community and have drawn some criticism.
After the decision was announced, many parents of students who attend Fordham began a campaign that called on the university to remove the mandate, according to a Newsweek article. In the letter, published on Oct. 6, parents cited conspiracy theories and health concerns as reasons to see the mandate reversed.
Newsweek spoke of a letter written by “over 400 people … including students, parents and alumni” that expresses staunch opposition to the mandate. According to Newsweek, David Betten, a parent who signed the letter, said that he chose to sign because he believes that vaccines have not been proven to work and may cause harm in young adults. These statements have been debunked by the CDC as well as other health agencies and professionals.
“Up until this point, the school has been becoming more and more lenient with their COVID policy. And this mandate is a 180-degree turnaround from their actions in the recent months.” Zachary Visconti, GSBRH ’25
Zachary Visconti, Gabelli School of Business at Rose Hill ’25 and another interviewee of Newsweek, said he and other students who signed “are not anti-vaccine.” He said that he believes the CDC’s recommendation should remain just that: a recommendation. Citing loosened COVID-19 restrictions in the city, Visconti does not believe that Fordham should be toughening its policy at this time. He also felt that it was a major reversal of Fordham’s policy.
“Up until this point, the school has been becoming more and more lenient with their COVID policy,” Visconti said. “And this mandate is a 180-degree turnaround from their actions in the recent months.”
The university has directed questions to its statement on the matter, which was released on Oct. 5. The statement, published on the Fordham News website, argues that COVID-19 is still a major public health issue.
In response to common complaints regarding lower hospitalization and death rates, the statement says that these reductions are evidence of the efficacy of the vaccine and boosters. Like past vaccination updates, the university rests its argument on the authority of the CDC.
Related Stories
“Fordham already requires proof of immunizations for measles, mumps, rubella, and meningitis — and has done so for decades,” the statement said. “Like those diseases, COVID-19 is a public health issue, and the relevant authority is the CDC.”
As the deadline for the booster approaches, it remains to be seen if the opposition will amount to anything. Fordham has defended its vaccine mandates before and has threatened expulsion of students who do not comply.
UHS did not respond to a request for comment.
Fordham Together • Nov 2, 2022 at 7:59 am
Couple of things.
1) Your first paragraph states that the bivalent booster has been “approved” by the CDC. Pretty sure that’s misinformation? A quick check of the CDC website says that the bivalent is “recommended.” In fact, not even the FDA has “approved” the bivalent. A quick check on the FDA and Pfizer sites show that the bivalent still only has “Emergency Use Authorization.”
2) The 6th paragraph somehow transforms this direct quote from the Newsweek article…
“In the beginning, everybody was hopeful that they [COVID vaccines] would work and unfortunately they haven’t. And now with newer studies, and with time, we’ve seen that there are risks associated with them and especially for young adults, and that’s really what we’re most concerned about, is our kids,” David Betten, one of the parents who signed the letter, told Newsweek on the phone on Thursday, adding that the bivalent booster should be a recommendation and not mandated.”
…into the Observer’s summary….
“he believes that vaccines have not been proven to work and may cause harm in young adults.”
Pretty sure that’s libel? If not, it’s at minimum a seemingly deliberate mischaracterization which we hope the Observer does not endorse.
3)Paragraph 5 states that “parents cited conspiracy theories and health concerns.” Coupling “conspiracy theories” with “health concerns” reveals a disturbing lack of care over now well-known adverse side effects, many of them permanent, like myocarditis.
Finally, your use of 2020’s Scarlet Letter phrase “conspiracy theories” is, in 2022, nothing more than comical.
CJ • Dec 5, 2022 at 11:18 pm
Thank God my son had sense enough to research the science and promptly throw all Fordham literature in the circular file. He will only apply to data-driven, science adhering colleges who respect bodily autonomy. Fordham is a shining example of institutional dictatorship. I pity any student stuck under their rule. Truly, evil knows no bounds. May they get what they deserve.
Links aren’t allowed here, anyone interested in science, particularly the risk-benefit analysis re young adults, google:
COVID-19 vaccine boosters for young adults: a risk benefit assessment and ethical analysis of mandate policies at universities, Journal of Medical Ethics, bmj
Blake Ellman • Oct 17, 2022 at 7:33 am
Fordham is claiming to be following “CDC recommendations”, but the CDC does NOT recommend a mandate. No other college in NY or any other Jesuit college in the country has a new booster mandate.
The article should be edited.
Nobody is citing conspiracy theories. There is well documented medical evidence that college age kids are at extremely low risk of hospitalization. Particularly since everyone on campus is already vaccinated and had the original booster.
On the other hand negative cardiac side effects occur at a statistically higher rate for young men, specifically in the 17-25 age group. Each person must weigh their own age and health related risks and decide if the new booster is right for them. This new booster mandate is ethically and medically wrong.
Margo • Oct 16, 2022 at 10:28 pm
This latest booster should be “optional”. Mandating a new booster has zero logic. Young people have minimal risk with Covid. Pfizer executives just testified in Germany the shot does nothing to stop the spread. You only need it for yourself – if you have underlying conditions. Optional is key here.
David • Oct 16, 2022 at 4:43 pm
Arelien, you reporting is purposefully misrepresenting the facts. I told Newsweek that “ while we were all hopefully in the beginning, COVID vaccines didn’t work” (to stop infection or spread). Your use of general ‘vaccine’ term is meant to discredit the truthful comment.
Also, please post the letter written by the parents so everyone can see all these “conspiracy theories” you speak of. Listed is the most recent study from Oxford/Harvard/John’s Hopkins professionals with the conclusion being that the risk /reward isn’t good for healthy young adults to take covid boosters.
You can retract my citation or you will hear from my lawyer.
Kelly • Oct 16, 2022 at 3:27 pm
If this is Fordham education at its best – I’d ask for a refund. The article reads more like indoctrination. Fordhams mandate and demand for obedience or compliance smacks of the Catholic Church in the 1950s. What’s next – are we bringing back nuns with rulers? To say this mandate shall not be questioned at the risk of expulsion is absurd and wholly at odds with the sine qua non of a true Jesuit education. It’s also obnoxious virtue signaling because the LC campus does not even ask visitors for vaccine cards. This Administration is lulling snowflakes into a false sense of security while potentially doing real harm with a booster that does not live up to the hype. Disgraceful on all counts.
Bridget Scott • Oct 16, 2022 at 10:38 am
“Fordham already requires proof of immunizations for measles, mumps, rubella, and meningitis — and has done so for decades,” the statement said. “Like those diseases, COVID-19 is a public health issue, and the relevant authority is the CDC.”
You can sign a waiver and opt out of the meningitis vaccine.
Gilbert • Oct 25, 2022 at 3:13 pm
There is one crucial difference. Unlike the vaccines against measles, mumps, rubella and meningitis, which have been tried and tested for decades, the vaccines against covid-19 do not protect against infection and transmission.
Shelli • Oct 15, 2022 at 9:23 pm
First of all thank you for drawing attention to the concerns of parents, students, faculty, staff, vendors, and alumni who are not in favor of having the bivalent booster forced on anyone. Secondly, there are a few misconceptions in the Observer’s article that I’d like to address if I may. It seems the university is attempting to minimize the number of people who are opposed to a mandate – a letter received by President Tetlow from those in opposition had over 1200 signatures and has continued to garner interest and signatures. There is a faculty petition as well as a student petition circulating which are gathering even more names. This is not a negligible number of people; this is a large percentage associated with Fordham who will be affected by the mandate and would prefer a recommendation as stated by the CDC – not a requirement with repercussions.
The article states that there is confusion and conspiracy theories surrounding the bivalent booster. With the anti-mandate group there is neither confusion nor conspiratorial beliefs, merely facts that are supported by data. Pfizer, the WHO, and several countries have acknowledged adverse reactions to the mRNA shots. There are also serious health issues recorded on the CDCs VAERS report. This is something that Fordham seems not to have taken into consideration and I feel they should.
The article quotes a Fordham spokesperson stating that the school requires other vaccines to attend and COVID vaccines are no different. In comparing the mRNA vaccines and boosters to vaccines for Polio and MMR I ask President Tetlow this: how many polio boosters have you had? How many MMR boosters have you had? Polio and MMR vaccines prevent both contracting and spreading those diseases; COVID vaccines/boosters do neither. If someone chooses to receive the bivalent booster, that is their right. If someone chooses not to, that decision should also be respected.
Thanks again to the Observer for shining a spotlight on this extremely important debate.
Karen • Oct 16, 2022 at 12:45 pm
Perfectly said!
Alexandra Gecin • Oct 15, 2022 at 4:44 pm
Where is the evidence for this statement? “the statement says that these reductions are evidence of the efficacy of the vaccine and boosters” Why is that not challenged but other statements are called debunked and conspiracy theories? Previous pandemics have all followed a similar pattern of the deadliest effects being in early waves, followed by weaker successive waves until the virus is weakened to a far less deadly state. What evidence exists for saying that the reason for where the world is now in regard to corona virus is due to vaccination, as opposed to the pandemic having followed a predictable, natural path?
Nabi • Oct 15, 2022 at 12:01 am
Fordham Dean Eldridge believes he is a religious scholar and denied my child’s letter for religious exemptions.
Simply evil, these mandates.
KN • Oct 14, 2022 at 1:39 pm
Therein lies the rub. Fordham is the one pushing misinformation, simply relying on whatever CDC says. CDC has been taking orders from the White House at least since fall 2021, when top vax experts Gruber and Krause resigned over inappropriate White House pressure on boosters.
Did it ever occur to any of you that CDC would issue recommendations so lacking in scientific support? That has been happening for at least a year now.
There is quite literally zero data on transmission prevention, efficacy or safety on the BA 4/5 booster. There is not yet any published human data. Not even CDC claims transmission prevention, yet Fordham is using “transmission prevention” to support its mandate, perhaps because without that, mandates violate medical ethics.
There was never age-stratified clinical trial data proving booster benefit for college students even for the old monovalent booster. Nor was that one trialed for transmission prevention either.
Note for your article, the bivalent booster IS NOT “approved”. It has Emergency Use Authorization only. Coercion is contrary to the EUA statute.