At the 27 day of January, the doctor in Medical Sciences Selma Kückelhaus resigned from the position of coordinator of the undergraduate course in Medicine at the University of Brasília. The reason is a unique symbolism, in view of one of the current debates that most moves the medical community around the world: the effectiveness and legitimacy of the vaccination passport requirement. Before the professor asked for leave, the Board of Directors of the institution decided to impose the presentation of proof of vaccination to everyone who wanted to attend the university’s facilities, including visitors.
Invoking the defense of individual freedoms, Selma communicated to the UnB management her disappointment with the decision and her option for resignation: “considering that I compose the group of unvaccinated servers, my position as coordinator was at odds with the management of the faculty”.
After resisting the whirlwind of aggression caused by the leaked letter, Selma gave an interview to Gazeta do Povo to better explain their motivations and how he sees the situation generated by his act of consistency with personal convictions.
Gazeta do Povo: How do you rate the impact of your letter?
Selma Kückelhaus: The letter was sent only to my peers , but unfortunately leaked to the press. Although I was saddened by what happened, I understand those who judge my decision as astonishing, especially given that the debate was curtailed in the academy. Anyone who goes against the current order is seen as a cross.
In addition, my career is already consolidated. I coordinate a group directory of CNPq – the national research funding agency – entitled “Morphology and Applied Immunology”, composed of several researchers and students who know how to separate things. In addition, I am resilient and able to reinvent myself if necessary. I took an ethical decision, in favor of the management, and without giving up my convictions.
GP: As part of the backlash of your decision, critics circulated a photo of you in the press, in what appears to be a pro-Bolsonaro demonstration. Did that fact bother you?
SK: This is unfortunate! The photo in question was taken on top of a sound car in which prosecutor Júlio Marcelo was. At the time, we were demonstrating in support of the Lava Jato operation.
My political convictions have never interfered with the quality of my work. I work as a teacher and researcher in partnership with people of different ideologies and there has always been a lot of respect and seriousness. Politics does not interfere with my professional life. The management of the Faculty of Medicine was always aware of my political convictions and this was never an obstacle to the conduct of the work. If I’m not mistaken, the photo is from 660, the month I don’t remember, but it was a great demonstration throughout Brazil.
GP: About the vaccination passport, some people defend it based on other restrictive policies, as in the case of immunization against yellow fever, for example. It is also claimed that this interference is justified because unvaccinated people threaten the lives of other people, or can fill ICUs if they catch Covid. How do you respond to these arguments?
SK: These claims do not hold up. I think this position is the result of collective hysteria. People who believe this cannot see the obvious before their eyes: current and experimental vaccines do not prevent new infection, nor contagion. This is the result of minds blunted by fear.
The Santa Casa [de Passos], for example, did the right thing by publishing the distribution of patients hospitalized in the month of January, pointing out that the majority had comorbidities such as arterial hypertension, diabetes, obesity and heart disease.
The frequent narrative uses the artifice of adding up all those who did not “complete the vaccination schedule” to insinuate that the blame for the pandemic is still there is for the unvaccinated. However, the fact is that the schedule will never be complete: “Have you taken the third dose? You owe the fourth one!”.
This is also the result of collectivism. They believe that the collective must prevail over the individual. This is one of the evils of this century.
GP: The CDC (United States Center for Disease Control) published a study with the population of the states of California and New York in which a protection conferred by previous contact with the virus, the so-called natural immunity, has been demonstrated, but conclude that the best protection would be provided by the combination of natural immunity and vaccine immunity. What do you think of this conclusion?
SK: This study is hilarious to say the least, if we’re talking about the new techniques. I think they found a way to redeem the natural immunity that was rejected by the media in collusion with the companies that produce vaccine.
Think, vector vaccines focused on a single protein spike, which I will call wild, but since then, the virus has undergone numerous mutations. Individuals who have contracted the infection, in theory, develop antibodies to different types of antigens (molecular targets in the virus used by antibodies produced by the immune system), but, despite this, several questions remain.
We are not sure how long natural immunity lasts or even if all those infected develop it in a lasting and effective way . One thing is a fact: the vaccine does not prevent contagion or new infection. I am not aware of a large study that shows the relative values of each case, that is, how many vaccinated or immunized naturally contracted a new infection.
GP: How do you rate the administration of UnB, in general, in relation to the pandemic?
SK:
In the first year of the pandemic, the Faculty of Medicine successfully implemented remote teaching. This allowed us to continue teaching, even in an environment of great fear of the disease. However, the internships of the internship were kept in person, as well as a good part of the anatomy practices. The remote classes were directed to the theoretical contents of the disciplines.
No second year, other practices were resumed and persist to this day. This system brought many discontents to students and some teachers. Students are currently on strike and do not intend to withdraw until face-to-face classes resume.
