Categories Government

7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
I've been thinking about the debate of delayed vs. immediate 2nd dose for some time

Over past week, have become convinced that getting all doses out now is better

Its NOT a no-brainer

Reasonable people can (and do!!) disagree

So here's why my thinking evolved

Thread


Obviously, if you want to stick to the trials (reasonable position), then stay with standard interval

But soon, we'll be confronted with question -- do we give 2nd shot to some people or 1st shot to more people

Is there clinical trial evidence that 1 dose is helpful?

Yes

2/n

Yes

There is compelling data from Pfizer and Moderna trials that after about 10 d after 1 dose, you get 80-90% efficacy

https://t.co/38qlTYP77u

https://t.co/4V8SxM3tU5

So the BIG question is -- is that going to be durable beyond 21 to 28 days?

We don't know for sure

3/n

But while we may not be sure, it doesn't mean we have no idea

Here's one of our nation's most expert immunologists, @VirusesImmunity laying out her assessment of delayed vs immediate 2nd


What I take away from Dr. Iwasaki's thread and broader experience with vaccines is that it its unlikely that a short delay will harm protection

But we can't be sure

So why take this risk at all?

Why not just stay with the clinical trial?

Reasonable question

Here's why

5/9
The UK government is reportedly planning to install former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre as chair of the broadcasting regulator OFCOM. Some background: https://t.co/psZabLCOaD 1/

Polls have consistently shown that the UK public currently has a much higher level of trust in TV and radio media than they do in the UK newspaper industry, which has consistently been found to be the least trusted in Europe:
https://t.co/EY7DnA8SvW /2

The UK public's low level of trust in our newspaper industry should perhaps come as no surprise. In 2016 the Daily Mail and Sun were both called out for "fuelling prejudice" in an international report on rising racist violence: https://t.co/mdwZoWPtgf /3

In 2015, the United Nations spoke out, condemning "decades of sustained and unrestrained anti-foreigner abuse, misinformation and distortion" in the UK press: https://t.co/maP2ZIElrL /4

By contrast, UK broadcast media are currently held to a much higher set of standards. Although not perfect, OFCOM has strong powers to tackle racist and hateful coverage within TV and radio, eg: https://t.co/hXjbtkgU2s /5
1. I think this will do it. I think you've finally convinced the Liberals and the Media Party to like you. I hear @rosiebarton and the CBC will now drop her lawsuit against you.

This is the seventh day in a row you have danced to their tune. Do you not have one of your own?


2. This doesn't really say anything, though. It's all boilerplate. It's defensive. Does it move a single vote? Why have you been silent on the key issues of our era -- censorship, lockdowns, cancel culture, carbon taxes, UN/WHO misconduct? Because the CBC disapproves?

3. You will always be in a controversy, because you are a politician in an adversarial system. You cannot wish that away. What you can do is choose better battles -- ones where you're on the offensive and the Liberals are on the defensive. Why not try that?

4. I don't even know what you mean! When you're against Trump -- who do you mean? He's not in Canada. When you're against the "right" -- who do you mean? Whoever the Liberals the CBC tell you are off limits? Aren't you a party of the right? You are in a fetal position, begging.

5. Why not take a stand against lockdowns? Surely that would appeal to more Canadians than you connect with now. Why not talk against tech censorshi, and show Trudeau's connections to Silicon Valley's bullies? Why not stand up against cancel culture for real, not just in memes?