This pushback is necessary because of armchair vaccinologists like Nate Silver.
-
-
Also worth noting: not many of the scientists pushing a single dose regimen have substantial and specific prior experience in human vaccine development. Even if they are virologists or immunologists.
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
I have only seen one scientist with actual vaccine development experience weigh in on this and they were on the side of delayed dosage
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
halvorz ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Retweeted halvorz ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I've been looking for more but so far it's been frustratingly sparsehttps://twitter.com/halvorz/status/1345180640359182337 …
halvorz ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ added,
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
coming to the conclusion that vaccinologists need to be More Online
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Again, I cannot resolve the debate within that field (except to keep calling for data collection) but I disagree a bit with Alex. The people with deep/appropriate expertise calling for delaying the booster aren't that few. That said, very thoughtful/leading people also disagree.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
The worst case scenario is that we do this, but don't collect data. If there is a significant downside (like very rapid waning), we should monitor. The numbers on the side of rapid mass vaccination aren't minor either, but public trust is crucial, and that requires transparency.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Trying to think if I've seen a *single* BIPOC scientist with relevant expertise speak out in support of single-dosing. Coming up empty.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Rajeev Venkayya MD
You mean delayed booster? That's the debate. One, I know many. For example. Two, looked from an actual position of global equity (which was my biggest initial concern, tbh, as someone from the global south), trust me, there are many who'll take that side.https://twitter.com/rvenkayya/status/1345026172074262528 …
zeynep tufekci added,
Rajeev Venkayya MDVerified account @rvenkayyaIn my view, the immediate priority is prevention of severe disease that drives deaths and the strain on health systems. Efficacy against severe disease is likely better than overall vaccine efficacy. Data after the first dose is promising although the numbers are small. 8/ pic.twitter.com/vxrNPzV4vFShow this thread1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Rich nation debate is "we have an excellent double-dose vaccine, why tinker with it." I get it. The global question is there are billions who will be denied any vaccination or vaccines with higher-efficacy because rich nations have bought up all those excellent doses. Real issue.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Once again, I'm not making an argument about immunology (way above my pay-grade, I don't know the answer, and I just want better data to resolve it with public trust) but the idea that equity is on the side of ignoring the thorny trade-off in coverage is just not true.
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.