Share This Episode
The Christian Perspective Chris Hughes Logo

Have you had the booster shot for COVID-19?

The Christian Perspective / Chris Hughes
The Truth Network Radio
February 11, 2022 8:30 am

Have you had the booster shot for COVID-19?

The Christian Perspective / Chris Hughes

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 163 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

February 11, 2022 8:30 am

Special guest, Hallmon Hughes joins The Christian Perspective today to talk about the need for Booster shots, how do they work and do you need to take one.

What's Right What's Left
Pastor Ernie Sanders
The Christian Worldview
David Wheaton
Dana Loesch Show
Dana Loesch
Dana Loesch Show
Dana Loesch

This is Stu Epperson from the Truth Talk Podcast, connecting current events, pop culture, and theology, and we're so grateful for you that you've chosen the Truth Podcast Network. It's about to start in just a few seconds.

Enjoy it, and please share it around with all your friends. Thanks for listening, and thanks for choosing the Truth Podcast Network. This is the Truth Network. A coffee company with the Christian perspective. This is the answer that Christians and conservatives have been looking for. A coffee company that gives back to causes you care about.

Order your coffee today at, and even subscribe to a subscription coffee plan and never forget the coffee you love, or the causes you care about. Welcome to the Christian perspective, where we look in God's word in order to develop a Christian worldview and modern culture. We're going to have some different guests today, but our first guest is going to talk to us about the booster shots. You know, that's still a big issue. We're two years into COVID. First, we were told if we social distance, we'd be okay. Then we're told if we wear a mask, we'll be okay. Then a vaccine was developed, and we were told if we take the vaccine, it would be okay. Then we were told, well, if you take the vaccine, you're still going to get sick, but maybe not as sick as before. Now there's a big push to have boosters. Some of the vaccines have one shot. The ones that the government's pushing have two shots, and then to get a booster, and sometimes you're encouraged to get even two or three or more boosters. Well, it's all very confusing to me, and the little country boy that I am.

I don't know what shot I should get, what booster should I get, how often do you get it, and how does it help? So we have a guest today with us. Our guest is Holman Hughes. Holman studies at the Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University, where she's studying microbiology and immunology, if I got that correctly, and we've asked her to come today with her scientific mind and to tell us a little bit about what's going on. You know, I want you to have a comfort level. I'm certainly not for vaccine mandates, but if you want a vaccine, you should get one.

If you don't, I'm not going to get mad at you if you don't. But we need to understand the science behind these. There's different kinds of shots and what we're doing and why we're doing. So Holman Hughes, welcome to The Christian Perspective. Hi, thank you so much for having me. Well, I'm excited to have you here today.

Before I get into boosters, though, I want to back up just a little bit. Can you explain to us what a COVID virus is versus how is it different from the flu? Okay, so the flu is a different type of virus than what coronavirus is. The biggest thing that we've noticed with a coronavirus is that there are a lot of the body's immune responses that are really hyperactivated when responding to the coronavirus. So while some people may have asymptomatic cases, the flu, I feel like, is more standardized. You know what you're going to get with the flu.

You know what you're going to expect. But with the coronavirus, a lot of people are coming in and they may seem asymptomatic for a while. It might be undetected in the body.

And the next thing you know, there's all these immune responses that are really heightened that have permanent long lasting effects and can be deadly. So you mentioned the word asymptomatic a couple of times and people hear that on news. What does asymptomatic mean? So generally asymptomatic means that you don't have the runny nose that you would expect that you'd normally see that says, hey, I'm sick or the sore throat or something that would tell you that, hey, I'm not doing too well. I'm sick. My body has a virus. You may have the virus in you and not be showing any what we'd consider traditional sickness symptoms. So in other words, somebody could have coronavirus, but they would not necessarily be sick.

So though the symptoms show and that's where someone, when they take the test and it says are asymptomatic, then that's what it's referring to. That they wouldn't be in a traditional sense sick. But that's one thing that's so interesting about this pandemic is it's really changing the definition of what does it mean to be sick? Does sick mean that you have to not feel well? Or does sick mean that you just have something that you could spread to other people that would make them not feel well? So that's something we're really having to redefine in public health is what does sick mean? Okay, so we've talked about what COVID is and then, you know, under the Trump administration, they developed a vaccine and they had this big push to develop it.

I think it was called Operation Warp Speed. So before we talk about a booster, what is a vaccine? The purpose of a vaccine?

What does a vaccine do? So the major purpose of any vaccine is to give your body a memory response. So the next time your body encounters that virus or that bacteria or whatever the booster or the vaccine is preventing against, the body will be able to recognize that, hey, that's not supposed to be here. We need to mount an immune response to get rid of that before it results in serious disease or sickness symptoms. So by vaccinating and introducing some properties, whether it be the outside of what a virus or a bacteria looks like or some type of other protein or something that goes into your body. That way, your immune system can recognize it and it can destroy it before it's able to propagate and cause disease. So the idea of the vaccine does not need to give it to someone who's sick.

That would be a different medicine they would take. But this is a kind of a preventive medicine that someone takes before they get COVID-19 or whatever the sickness may be. But in the past, people have thought, well, if I take the vaccine for polio or for the mumps or whatever, German measles, people believe that they would never get sick if they took that vaccine. But that has not happened here.

Why? So first, I'd like to go back to something you said about vaccines are preventative. But there's actually two different types of vaccines. There are preventative vaccines and there's also therapeutic vaccines. So some vaccines are actually meant to be given after you've already contracted disease. And I believe I may be wrong, but I believe that rabies is one of those vaccines that you don't get a rabies vaccine until you've already contracted rabies.

And that's therapeutic. But with COVID, the mindset is to have different preventative vaccines. Now, there is this misconception that a vaccine will prevent you from being able to get a virus. But with COVID or with coronavirus, what a lot of people have seen is that you can have a vaccine and it can prevent serious symptoms of sickness, but you might still be able to transmit that illness or that virus to somebody else. So just because you're vaccinated doesn't mean that you can't contract COVID, that you can't have COVID symptoms.

It just means that your symptoms are not going to be as serious because your immune system has that little alarm system that can tell your body, hey, there's something wrong and give it that little bit of an edge to be quicker and prevent serious disease. Okay, so if somebody takes a vaccine and just is a preventative method, a method of some people being required by their work or the federal government or whatever, if they take a vaccine, then why in the world do they need a booster shot? And what is a booster shot? So the idea behind a booster shot is that for some viruses and some other forms of disease-causing ailments, your antibody response is limited. So for viruses such as the polio virus, the average lifetime span of that memory that you get from a vaccine is over 100 years sometimes.

And so for that one, you're only going to get vaccinated against it once. But with viruses such as the influenza virus, which is the flu, or such as coronavirus, there are so many different mutations within the viruses that sometimes you have to get booster shots in order to be more prepared because your antibodies, which is that memory response, declines over time. So you have to constantly give your memory response a little bit of a boost so that way it can have more of kind of an endurance. So if you think about it kind of like a race, you're running down this race and sometimes you need a little extra snack bar or something to get you going to that finish line just because your body's been depleted even though you carb loaded before the race. So this is kind of like that little snack bar to give your immune system a little bit more of a boost so that it can push further and get faster towards the end. That's a really good way to put it.

I never understood it that way. So if it's giving us a boost, is it giving a boost on what we've already had? So here we are now two years into this and we have the original coronavirus, we have at least the Delta variant and now the Omnicron variant.

There could be others out there that I don't know about. Are the boosters addressing these variants as well or just boosting what we've already tried to prevent against the original coronavirus? So that's a very good point that you bring up and that's something that a lot of people in public health and in medicine are kind of conflicted about because Omnicron has approximately 50 new mutations to the virus that were not present in the original coronavirus. And the vaccines are based off of the original coronavirus.

And what's even more interesting is out of those 50 mutations, 36 of those mutations are on the spike protein. And the spike protein is what's important for the virus to enter your body. So the virus has gotten a lot more efficient at entering the human body and becoming, in a sense, even more infective because it's able to get your body easier. And these vaccines are still based off of that original coronavirus and now studies are showing that sometimes a booster may only provide six to 10 weeks of effectiveness towards Omnicron before you may have to get another booster.

And another booster. And that's something that is hard to address right now because we just figured out this vaccine set up. And so research has to really catch up with that because we're not really used to creating vaccines at such a rapid pace over and over again with such a high mutation rate. So are the boosters we're taking now addressing Omnicron or are they still based on the original coronavirus variant? So they're still based on the original coronavirus variant, but some health experts say that they protect you better against Omnicron because you're giving your body that extra boost and your body needs all the help that it can get in order to be able to protect against Omnicron because it's so much more effective at entering the body, or at least that's what some researchers are saying right now.

So any help that you can give your body is needed because Omnicron is argued to be somewhat more dangerous and deadly than other variants and so they want extra precautions to be taken in order to protect people. So just like there are different vaccines out here, there are different boosters. What are the differences between the boosters? Like if I take one, let's say I took the Johnson & Johnson shot, do I have to have a Johnson & Johnson booster? Are there differences?

What are we looking for? So interestingly enough, a lot of research says that you should have mixed booster shots with your vaccine shots. So if you have a Johnson & Johnson and you get an mRNA, you may be better protected because you have two different types of vaccines. Now what am I saying when I say two different types of vaccines? The Johnson & Johnson vaccine is what's called a viral vector vaccine, which is different than the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines that are called mRNA vaccines. So basically the biggest difference is that the proteins of the virus are presented in different ways.

So in Johnson & Johnson, you're going to kind of get direct presentation. In Moderna and Pfizer, you have a coding transcript that goes into your body, and your body's actually using that transcript to produce viral proteins. So it's two different ways that your body can detect what the virus is doing. So that way, by having both, you're kind of expanding what your alarm system will react to versus having one. So it won't hurt you if you didn't have that, and I'm probably saying this wrong, let's say you had the Johnson & Johnson, which is not mRNA, whatever, it won't hurt to get the booster that has that, it won't confuse it? Actually, people say that it's probably better for your immune system to have both because it expands that range of what your body's alarm system is responding to. Well, we only have a few seconds left, but before we leave, so if there's a person, I know some people are concerned about having an mRNA shot, does the booster have that in it as well?

Yes. So the difference between a booster and a regular dose is a booster is half the dose of a regular. But one thing that I would note is if you're looking between mRNAs, Moderna has twice as much mRNA as Pfizer. So if you're wanting less of an mRNA dose, then you should go with a Pfizer shot. Or a Johnson & Johnson, which has none, right? But a lot of places are not accepting Johnson & Johnson as a booster shot anymore.

They're expecting you to have either a Moderna or Pfizer booster. All right. Well, Holman Hughes, we thank you for giving us update today. I know a lot of people are wondering what a booster is. You gave a great explanation of like a snack bar when you're running a race. And so thank you for giving that information. Folks, go online. You can learn more.

Always find out before you just get a shot. And thank you, Holman, for being with us. Thank you for having me. Folks, we're going to take a commercial break. We'll be right back with our next guest. This show is brought to you by Generous Joe's, the coffee company with the Christian perspective. This is the answer that Christians and conservatives have been looking for. A coffee company that gives back to causes you care about.

Order your coffee today at and even subscribe to a subscription coffee plan and never forget the coffee you love or the causes you care about. Welcome to the Christian perspective, where we look in God's word in order to develop a Christian worldview and modern culture. I'm Chris Hughes, and I am excited about the guest that I have with me today. His name is Kenny Shue. Kenny is the head of an organization called Color Us United. You can learn more about them at And he's written a book he's going to tell us about called The Inconvenient Minority.

I'm so excited. You've probably seen him on his podcast. You've seen his book.

He's made a lot of national news. Kenny, thank you so much for being with us today. And thanks so much, Chris, for having me. I appreciate it.

It's exciting to have to have you here and talk about what you're doing. So you were telling me, for those that may recall, was it a year or two ago where people found out that Harvard and other schools, not just Harvard, were really showing discrimination and how they accepted students. You were part of that process.

So tell us what happened there. Right. So Harvard University right now, you know, progressive utopia, Harvard University, they are actually discriminating against qualified Asian-Americans and whites in the name of diversity, diversity and inclusion. That's what that's their motto.

That's their mantra. As a result, an Asian-American has to score 440 points higher on the SAT to have the same chance of admission as a black person and over 150 points higher to have the same chance of admission as a white person. So there's this hierarchy that Harvard has, this racial hierarchy, because they want specifically racial diversity. They care mostly about the color of a person's skin and they're willing to eliminate even objectively more meritorious applicants from their applicant pool just because of the color of their skin.

But Kenny, if they're saying that they want to have diversity, which I know is a huge I've got two kids in college and it is just crazy to me when I hear the things that they have to go through at school and diversity and that kind of thing. But so why are Asians not considered part of their diversity formula that they want to attract? Because they are they're overrepresented in higher achieving educational ranks. You know, Asian-Americans, they they themselves because they study hard because they work hard.

Their parents train them to value education. Asian-Americans are some of the highest scoring, highest achieving academically races in America today in this culture. And in fact, Harvard University's own study said that if Asians were not discriminated in Harvard, Asian-Americans would make up 43 percent of Harvard University's student body.

Instead, they make up about 18 percent. And that's because Harvard does not want too many Asians in their student body. They they think it messes up their their their diversity standards. They think it makes them look bad. They grade Asians lowest on personality because they have these stereotypes against Asian-Americans as low personality human beings. And they do this all, you know, justifying it all in the name of diversity and inclusion.

It actually becomes exclusion. But Kenny, you know, Harvard used to be considered one of the best schools in the world. If the Asian students are performing, why is it not about performance? Because performance, you know, Harvard has this mantra. They say race is only one factor in the way we conducted missions. Well, I'd like to amend that.

I think merit is only one factor in the way they conducted missions. They're very. Harvard has very much become sensitive to the woke movement today. And what the woke movement in critical race theory says, right, is that America is a fundamentally white, supremacist, oppressive country that whites are at the top, blacks are at the bottom and Asians. They view Asians as this as this privileged minority. That's what they would say, because Asians are higher achieving. They assume it must be because of their white privilege.

So they are willing to justify discrimination against Asians the same way they justify discrimination against whites, because supposedly it's supposed to right the system of discrimination in of historic systemic racism in America. Well, the thing that's concerning about that, and this is not a racial statement, OK, just take color out of it. If a student is not performing as well in high school and not doing as well on the SAT, they're not going to be able to handle the coursework at Harvard or anywhere else. And so we've got doctors and lawyers that may not really be qualified that are entering the career field is pretty scary.

Yeah. And now we have actual evidence, we have proof showing that if you admit a student into a college that they're not prepared for or major they're not prepared for, they do tend to perform much more poorly. Take a look at law school, for example. I use the example of law school. New studies have found that an American, a black American or Latino American who's admitted based on affirmative action, who is less meritorious, tends to graduate in the bottom 25 percentile of their law school class. Now, this is detrimental to them because even though they got into a more prestigious law school than they otherwise would have gotten in, the fact is the fact that they graduate the bottom 25 percent of that law school actually influences everything from their graduation rate to their initial starting salary. It affects things like the rates of matriculation and graduation and their ability to pass the bar.

It gives them a false sense of security when, in fact, the top law firms are only going to admit those at the top of the class, not at the bottom. So you're actually not helping these students by admitting them, you're hurting them. Yeah. So it sounds like they're definitely discriminating in the application process, but are they discriminating in the classroom, too? If the students cannot handle the workload, are they dumbing it down for the other students or are they giving them special, maybe the lower scoring students who should have never been there in the first place, are they helping them with grades in the classroom for others? Yes.

Yes, very much. And, in fact, the new progressive mantra, actually since the 90s it's been around, is the elimination of gifted and talented programs. Progressives don't like gifted and talented programs because it assumes that, correctly, that there are different intelligences, there are different capabilities among kids, among students. So actually the new movement in progressivism right now is to eliminate gifted and talented programs.

Now, for the sake of equity, they use the word equity. And as a result, what happens is that you have these immensely gifted kids who are put into classes with kids who are not so gifted. And as a result is that the teacher always has to teach the middle, right?

Teachers teach to the middle. And as a result, the gifted and talented kids are not getting the challenging education that they need. It results in higher rates of depression.

It results in any low work performance. And it fundamentally results in these kids not being able to achieve the potential that they otherwise would have achieved. Kenny, that's not just happening in college.

I mean, I've been blessed. I don't talk about a lot on the show, but I have a daughter and son, and they were both very gifted academically. The state of North Carolina three years ago decided that there will no longer be any valedictorians named in high schools across the state of North Carolina because they don't want to recognize academic excellence.

So luckily, my daughter was the last valedictorian before they passed that law. But my son is really brilliant in what's happening. He's in classrooms. And because the teachers are having to teach, you know, because they're not having classes for gifted kids, he gets bored. And then that becomes a problem sometimes for smart kids. People assume they've got other problems, just they're not being challenged in the classroom. And it's a big issue.

Exactly. I'll give you another way that this movement, this equity movement corrodes excellence in this country, which is the subject of my book, An Inconvenient Minority, The Attack on Asian American Excellence in the Fight for Meritocracy. You have the top math and science high school in the country, Thomas Jefferson High School in Fairfax, Virginia, very well recognized for producing the top scientists, engineers. Recently, over the past 25 years, Thomas Jefferson has gotten progressively more Asian. It used to be predominantly white.

Now it's about 71 percent Asian. And these Asians, they fight for their spots through sheer merit and competitiveness, right, because admissions is a merit based process. Well, suddenly the woke don't like this because they say, well, what about black students? What about Hispanic students? And the truth is these students are not admitted into Thomas Jefferson High School, not because they're black or Hispanic, but it's because they're just not performing at the competitive level.

In fact, only one percent of the nation's top SAT math scores are are black, unfortunately. And that that is an unfortunate reality. What we need to do, we can do it. We need to address that.

We need to fix that. But we shouldn't compromise the system of excellence just to address that. And so what happened is the woke and when came into Fairfax County and they radically overhauled Fairfax County, Thomas Jefferson's admissions process to a guess what?

To a lottery system, a lottery system. The top high school in the nation became a lottery system in a single year. You know what that's going to do to the top high school in the nation? Sure ain't going to be the top high school in the nation after one year.

Well, and Kenny, it's not just hurting that high school. It's going to hurt our nation. We're already underperforming in math and science and STEM across the world. And this is just going to hurt our future generations.

And, you know, America, we ranked 19th out of the 39 developed nations in the piece of math scores, international math scores. We could use a dose of excellence in this country, especially when you see countries like China coming in on our tail and nipping in our butt. Already, you know, they're they're fighting for tech supremacy in the world. They're fighting for defense supremacy in the world. And trust me, China has no qualms. You know, China's no qualms with with with promoting the most excellent because of how how much the Cultural Revolution, which was an anti-excellence revolution back in their country, damaged their country.

So if the U.S. is not careful, it's going to fall directly into the same straits that China did 50 years ago. Well, why don't they follow these programs in athletics? Why is it OK to excel in athletics, but not academics?

There you go. I mean, one of the one of the one of the things I always like to say is, hey, you know, the NBA is 75 percent black. You know, what about equity in the NBA? What about admitting more Asians in the NBA? Why can't we have eight percent Asians in the NBA? Why can't we have 75 percent whites in the NBA?

You know, then the reality is no one cares because you want to you want to recruit and train the best athletes, period, without regards to their race. Yeah. So, Kenny, were you a student at Harvard? Is that how you got into this?

It's funny. I was a student at Davidson College. Davidson. I was a math student. And I actually the while I was studying math at Davidson, I did not intend to write this book. But the Harvard case became a huge issue, you know, in 2018 when the group of Asian-Americans sued Harvard. And then I realized and I just saw how disingenuous Harvard was and pushing back. I mean, everybody knew that Harvard discriminated against Asians for the past 20 years. Open secret Chinese-American community.

No one didn't know. And Harvard comes out and denies discrimination. I saw that as a fundamental lie that Harvard was telling people. And I said, you know what?

Harvard keeps lying. I have to tell the truth. So I used my expertise as an author. I'd written books before and I decided, you know, I'm going to pursue this project, an inconvenient minority, which I did. I got a book contract for it. Came out in stores in July and it's been a best seller.

It's been so good. It's an incredible story. So, Kenny, when you were doing your research, I know Harvard is kind of what started this.

But I bet you found the same thing. Did you look at other schools to see if others were having the same practice? It's not just Harvard. It is every Ivy League university in the country, as well as Stanford and MIT. The lone exception in terms of top elite universities in discrimination against Asians is Caltech. California Technology Institute in California only admits on academic merit, which is what they were, you know, the purpose of a university. And as a result, Caltech has about 50 percent Asians, but it also has like 15 percent Latinos, like 10 percent blacks and 35 percent whites. And also, you know what, because of that admissions process, over the past 25 years, Caltech has gone from number 15 or lower in research papers produced per capita to number five, right below MIT. So this shows that when you actually admit based on merit, you actually are creating more excellent university culture.

You are building the reputation of your university. I hope MIT listens. So when you were doing the research, for those who aren't familiar with the case, what was the outcome? What happened? Well, the outcome hasn't been decided yet. It's moved through the courts, the district court.

Judge Allison Burroughs, First District Court of Massachusetts, opted to go with Harvard. And that's a great way to end our show today. Y'all, thanks for joining us today.

I'm Chris Hughes, and this is The Christian Perspective. Please subscribe and like our podcast. Please share our podcast with your friends on social media. And be sure to tune here each weekday to learn how you can develop a Christian perspective. Now let's go change the culture for Jesus.

Thank you for listening. The Christian Perspective with Chris Hughes. Learn more about impacting the culture for Jesus. Visit This show is brought to you by Generous Joe's, the coffee company with the Christian perspective. This is the answer that Christians and conservatives have been looking for. A coffee company that gives back to causes you care about. Order your coffee today at and even subscribe to a subscription coffee plan and never forget the coffee you love or the causes you care about.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-06-03 21:15:38 / 2023-06-03 21:27:15 / 12

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime