True that there is “no data” from their trial, but plenty of reasons to think that protection will last longer than 21 days based on (a) our understanding of the mechanism (b) experience with vaccines for other pathogens.
-
Yep understand that there are risks and data is limited. But the decision is not only based on this data - trials of other covid vaccines, other metrics from these trials (eg antibody production) and what we know about vaccines in general 1/2
...points to this path being worth trying. It’s higher risk/higher reward for sure, but lots of people smarter than me think it’s worth it. It’s certainly not obviously the wrong thing to do.
-
-
(fwiw many of my doctor friends agree with me but my wife, a consultant paediatrician, would prefer to prioritise two doses. So clearly there is reasonable disagreement!)
-
Thanks appreciate the thoughtful response. Going this route - doubling the distribution coverage but making assumptions about effectiveness outside of the study - is politically high risk. Seems more downside than upside risk to me (from a political standpoint)
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.