He seems to believe it.

mRNA vaccines were, as of 2018, considered to be suspect due to their stability and potential inefficiency. That's why proposed livestock vaccines using mRNA were turned down. Some papers came out that same year that claimed that the issues with the vaccines had been overcome. But that's all that was available: some papers saying the issues had been overcome; no real world usage of mRNA vaccines.

With that information in mind, I can readily understand many people's desire to wait and see if at all possible (that they are being compelled in a quite authoritarian manner concerning a virus strain that hasn't proven its inherent widespread lethality -- we were never this bully boy with polio and other diseases with far higher fatality rates -- is understandable). These aren't the sort of standard vaccines that have been on the market for a long time (the ones the anti-vaxxers like to go on about). He's not engaging the entire truth (but he is engaging in a little ad hominem, and straw man, and false dilemma...and that's just this one statement, knowing him I'm sure there were more -- statements and logical fallacies...which honestly should be posted, or at least a link, in order to derive the context of this one statement...perhaps you and I have judged him too harshly after all and the context would set us straight).