Does a Photo Show Sen. Rand Paul Getting a COVID Vaccination?

No. The photo is from 2015.

By
13

Sen. Rand Paul went viral online with a video in which he encouraged the American people to resist the “mandates, lockdowns, and harmful policies of petty tyrants and bureaucrats,” referring to mask mandates and vaccine requirements instituted during the coronavirus pandemic. After the release of the video, some online began to call out Paul for perceived hypocrisy over a picture of Paul receiving a shot purported to be the coronavirus vaccine:

https://twitter.com/VillainChrisK/status/1424650197322375171
https://twitter.com/vtpatriot/status/1424556019389186051

The picture doesn’t show Paul getting vaccinated against coronavirus; it’s from a New York Times article published in 2015 and shows Paul getting a Hepatitis A booster shot. Paul has said he won’t get a coronavirus vaccine because he has already had the virus. Paul’s office did not respond to a request for comment.

If you have a claim you would like to see us fact check, please send us an email at factcheck@thedispatch.com. If you would like to suggest a correction to this piece or any other Dispatch article, please email corrections@thedispatch.com.

13
By
Comments (13)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    I Am the Eggman

    On the one hand, I think Rand Paul is an idiot, but on the other, anyone who saw this picture and took it as proof that Paul got the Covid vaccine is also an idiot. The photo shows Paul getting a shot in his shoulder, but it's undated (I assume Aug 9 2021 is the date of the tweet, not the photo) and the shot could be anything.

    Collapse
    1. Hope

      Absolutely. And in particular, the fact that neither he nor the person giving the shot is wearing a mask makes it absolutely, blindingly clear that there is no possible way this is a picture of a Covid vaccination.

      Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    CP

    Good Lord.

    1. What is wrong with Rand Paul, who is telling people to resist vaccine mandates that are not occurring (but probably should be, given how many people are dying because of misinformation)? It reminds me of Screwtape talking about how demons tempt people to scramble to the side of the boat that is already sinking fastest.

    2. What is wrong with people, that (even if you agree with Paul about the place of government) somehow _freely_ choosing to get a vaccine makes him a hypocrite here? How does getting a vaccine, developed by the free market, mean you are somehow a bureaucratic tool? This is not a photo of Rand Paul signing a bill to mandate vaccinations, but of him choosing to get one! Come on!

    3. What is wrong with Republicans that they are doing dumb things and saying dumb things they don’t believe because they don’t want to out themselves as smart to the “base” (which is constantly becoming larger and dumber because their leaders are normalizing this sort of nincompoopery)? And then it’s a big strike against them when people find out they’re not really as dumb as they claimed to be? And then it turns out they actually are that dumb, and that the smart thing they were accused of doing was a hoax?

    I mean…

    Collapse
  3. DocHeartless

    Awesome, Alec -- thank you so much for all the fact checking! I know you don't get as many comments and plaudits as some of the other elements on the site, but that doesn't mean it's not a hugely useful addition!!

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Show Jay Janney the 🚪!

    It'll be interesting to watch him, to see if he gets re-infected again, and if so, how serious.
    Granted n=1 isn't a study, but still it'll be interesting.

    I do wish those who refuse the vaccine would get tested to see if they have had it already, so they'd better understand how serious is the risk for them. The well-known people I've heard have all said they've had it already.

    Collapse
    1. GregS

      The risk of any given unvaccinated individual catching COVID-19 and being sick enough to be hospitalized is low .
      Based on KFF data, about 10% risk per year of catching COVID (35M cases in a population of 350M), 6% risk of hospitalization per case = 0.6% hospitalization risk per year).

      Risk of death is about 2% per case (620k dead, 35M cases), possibly as low as 1% (if, for example, there have been 35M additional unknown cases).

      So your risk of catching and dying from COVID is about 2 in a 1000 per year.

      It is lower if the person is previously infected. It is even lower if the person is vaccinated. All this is now well known.
      The individual risk of death is not very high (about as likely as having your car stolen in a given year).

      The societal risk from a 0.6% individual annual risk of hospitalization and a 1-2% case fatality rate is incredibly high.

      Rand Paul is a jackass for encouraging people to take on small individual risks that will have large cumulative societal consequences.

      He might as well say "What's the deal with all these recommendations and mandates about avoiding opioid overuse! Resist them - use as much as you like!" And then hold up the fact that Brett Favre did not die from his opioid abuse as proof that it is safe.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Show Jay Janney the 🚪!

        It is likely lower than that as--a smidge over 36 million confirmed cases, an unknown number of cases which were not tested nor confirmed (either asymptomatic or not severe enough for the person to seek medical care). Lacking better data, I have low confidence in "back of the cocktail napkin" mortality rates, for obvious reasons. Simply better to report "IDK".

        It's why I've long recommended sampling the population, to get better estimates.



        Collapse
        1. GregS

          600k dead in a year in a population of 350M. There's no uncertainty there (and any uncertainty is generally thought to be in the direction of more uncounted COVID deaths).
          That gives you a death rate per year for unvaccinated population of about 2 per 1000.

          It's worth repeating - yes population sampling will give you better estimates of individual risk, *but it is a distraction that doesn't matter.*
          The system risk is clear, obvious, and in our face. Getting a better estimate of individual risk won't change the importance of vaccination to mitigate the societal risk.
          Abbott, the idiot governor of Texas, has again asked hospitals to delay elective surgeries. In 2021. 9 months after an effective vaccine has been made freely available. People like Rand Paul, Ron Johnson, Ron DeSantis, Greg Abbott, Tucker Carlson, and Sean Hannity are significantly to blame for this nonsense. This isn't about "I'm just aSkINg quEsTionS!"

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Show Jay Janney the 🚪!

            What you call a distraction is what I call "science". I like evidence based decision making, particularly when dealing with something complex. It's a hassle getting it right, but in the end your likelihood of making good decisions increases.

            Covid-fatality rates, when you model them, are clearly affected by existing health conditions. A one size fits all approach historically leads to sub-groups comparing themselves to the single approach and discounting it or even ignoring it. It's a form of bias from recency and location. There are known "science" solutions to overcoming those, but using generalized data isn't one of the better approaches.

            I would caution you; minorities continue to lag behind on vaccination, and politically, they tend not to be foxnews fans. You may enjoy your leftist narrative, but you have no explanation for the lower vaccination rates there. Perhaps it is time to try a better approach.

            Collapse