Antivaxxers have always written dubious scientific review articles to try to make their wild speculations about vaccine science seem credible. Usually such articles wind up in bottom-feeding journals. Unfortunately a recent pseudo-review article was published by an Elsevier journal, making it seem more credible when it isn't.
Recycling old antivax tropes as “bioethics”-based arguments against COVID-19 vaccination for children
A recently published article in Bioethics makes ethical arguments against vaccinating children against COVID-19. If you change the word "COVID-19" to measles, chickenpox, or rotavirus (or others), this article could have been published on one of the higher-brow antivax websites in 2010. Antivax arguments never change; they're just continually recycled.
Over the last couple of weeks, a claim that the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) shows that COVID-19 vaccines have caused a massive increase in cancer, neurological, and cardiovascular diseases in military personnel has gone viral. A closer look shows that the increases are almost certainly spurious and due to underreporting in previous years.
Quacks, science deniers, and conspiracy theorists love to challenge doctors, scientists, and science communicators to "live public debates" over the science they deny. I just say no, and you should say no too if you are in a position to receive such a challenge.
Jay Bhattacharya: “If It’s True That The Novel Coronavirus Would Kill Millions Without Shelter-In-Place Orders and Quarantines, Then the Extraordinary Measures Being Carried Out in Cities and States Around the Country Are Surely Justified”
Dr. Bhattacharya doesn't take the words of Dr. Bhattacharya seriously. So why should anybody else?