Is consideration of the 'risk/benefit equation' following a local outbreak, opposed to the risk/benefit equation in a global context, part of the problem? In being reactionary we will always be 'too late' as a result of the dosing schedule and time needed for immunity?
-
-
-
Exactly! ATAGI should have used a much higher rate of covid than was present to gauge the risk of bad events from covid infection because the advice needed to go forward in time to what might happen if there was an outbreak
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Wow. Australia had 6 covid deaths (aged and fragile) and 5 Astra deaths this year (mostly healthy).
#PublicHealth -
So you are now in favor of Australia staying in lockdown to make vaccinations unnecessary?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
What is Australia’s exit strategy, it looks like zero Covid, but isn’t that now impossible?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'm not sure that alone's enough to change the advice to 18+. I suspect it is also the apparent 10x hospitalization rate for delta, calling into question the validity of older age-stratified death tables. It could be death from VITT is a more confident estimate than from delta.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Dont Need vaxine, Just lockdown harder
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The probability of an outbreak should have been factored in to original reasoning. ATAGI imprudently assumed best case of zero chance of uncontrolled outbreak. Precautionary principle would have considered reasonable worst case instead.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Significant shift in ATAGI vaccine advice today: