Global reactions poured in Friday after the World Health Organization (WHO) endorsed the R21/Matrix-M™ Malaria vaccine.
The CEO of Serum Institute of India,Adar Poonawalla, celebrated the announcement on X, stating, “The efforts of @SerumInstIndia and @UniOfOxford have come to fruition. This will save thousands of lives and bridge the gap between the demand and supply of vaccines against Malaria.”
Despite the positive outlook, many netizens voiced skepticism on X (formerly Twitter).
User @Obilaw444 expressed concerns about the vaccine’s efficacy in sub-Saharan Africa, claiming, “There is no vaccine against malaria that will match the immunity sub-Saharan Africans have gotten from repeated infestations.” The user warned that widespread vaccination could diminish natural immunity, potentially increasing susceptibility to severe malaria complications.
Another user, @growing2027272, questioned the credibility of Oxford’s research, stating, “ZERO trust in Oxford: they hid the original statin data, and their AstraZeneca ‘vaccine’ was toxic. This is just another mix of heavy metals and pseudo-science.”
The user criticised perceived inconsistencies in data reporting and called for more transparency regarding the vaccine’s safety.
Adding to the skepticism, Socorro Silva raised concerns about past vaccine incidents, questioning, “How can we trust this malaria vaccine after the incidents of contaminated COVID-19 vaccines?”
As discussions continue, the WHO’s recommendation faces scrutiny from both supporters and detractors. The R21/Matrix-M™ vaccine aims to address a critical public health issue, but the global community remains divided on its trustworthiness and potential impact.
