Would what be?
Reducing the gap
2 Likes
ABC news saying 
for Qld. 
Lots of new exposure sites so 
Not out of the woods by a long way.
Well done Vic. Reckon youâve got this 
13 Likes
4 Likes
I dont reckon anyone on the east cost mainland is ever out of the woods with this strain.
1 Like
From a governmentâs point of view, I think when vaccinations are in short supply, and you want to have as quick an impact as possible, then a longer gap allows the effect of vaccination to be more widespread, and therefore more effective, even though itâs only a single dose. When vaccinations arenât in short supply, then I think it depends. If you have limited capacity to vaccinate, i.e. only so many per day, then initially, a longer dosing period may offer advantages to getting some level of mitigation of spread out quickly, but then youâd reach a tipping point, where having a greater level of protection (2 doses) more quickly offers more advantage. Also, potentially, if 1 dose offers poor protection against the spread of Delta, then the strategy may be skewed toward a shorter time period between doses, to get a decent protection in place faster.
The governmentâs point of view is all about reducing transmission in the community quickly, if there is an outbreak they canât otherwise control. If theyâre thinking long term protection, and arenât facing a crisis, then theyâd likely favour the better long term protection.
From the vaccine manufacturerâs point of view, Pfizerâs recommendation for time between doses was 3-6 weeks. They probably didnât study longer periods, as time was of the essence (I have no proof of that). AZ on the other hand, found their vaccine didnât have the same efficacy as their mRNA competition in trials, and probably extended time between doses to achieve the optimum protection level, so they could up their initial study finding of 70% to 90%+ efficacy.
From your personal point of view, you can either follow government advice, trust their strategy, and âdo your partâ for the whole community, or you can try to optimise your own protection level, either for selfish reasons (which isnât a negative thing necessarily), or because you believe it is a better long term outcome for everyone.
A good example of the government making poor recommendations to dig themselves out of a hole theyâve created, is recommending AZ be taken with a shorter time between doses. This will help fix their short term issues, if people will listen, but it could impact significantly, not just on an individual level, but on a national level longer term, when the mainly elderly whoâve taken it turn out to have even less protection against Delta than they would have had with the recommended 12 weeks between doses. This is why ATAGI immediately refuted the governmentâs recommendation, and instead recommended not shortening time between AZ doses.
Sorry it isnât a simple answer.
10 Likes
How has this not happened months ago?
Can also include teachers here? So we can get our kids back to school.
1 Like
Jesus donât be sorry, thankyou for taking the time and effort with youâre detailed answerđ
3 Likes
Itâs all about the supply issue.
Once the numbers start to show that all eligible people in 1a and 1b (who want to have it), have been done, they can start allocating other people and categories.
1 Like
Think we should do more to incentivize AZ. Something like if you get a blood clot due to the vaccine you receive $X amount. In the case of death your family receives $X amount.
Lots of regular peeps are eligible now. Why havenât we prioritised those at the coal face.
I mean Iâm vaccinated and I donât see anyone. I would have stepped aside to give it to any of those people.
Thereâs an extra large cannon being forged at this very moment to launch these jokers into the sun.
Arrogant Sydney-centric flogs with an undeserved superiority complex.
3 Likes
I could have summarised by simply saying, generally, please listen to the experts in their field, who are motivated to find the best outcome for people individually or as a whole. Whatever you do, donât ever take a politicianâs advice over medical or expert body recommendations. Their motivations have little to do with your best interests.
6 Likes
Thatâs funny. Seeing as what ScoMo has actually done is first, remove any liability from the manufacturer if you suffer injury, and more recently, remove liability from doctors if they recommend AZ. This means the government will cover liability claims. But Iâll bet you they fight tooth and nail to minimise how often and how much they ever pay out.
7 Likes
Yep Glu, the message over here in British Columbia has changed a few times as well- with the development of different variants, as well as newly released research/studies. We are currently on a slightly longer spread between shots- 12 to 16 weeks- as this seems to be coming out as an optimal timeframe for developing an effective antibody response.
I guess itâs all a bit of a movable feast atm- I wouldnât want to be dealing in absolutes
3 Likes
They have been prioritised, but it is ensuring they are aware that they can still get jab. Kinda like a last push to say âcome and get itâ.
1 Like
Gunner pulls no punches
5 Likes
11 Likes
If we compared the first strain (Wuhan?) numbers in Vic with delta numbers in Sydney, to compare the effectiveness of lockdowns, are we normalising given the R0âs are so different (2.5 compared to 5)? The way I see it, the maths demonstrates they are stellar numbers in NSWâŚ
I realise it doesnât fit âthe narrativeâ particularly of the Left, or even current âlessons learnedâ status of Vics aoproach, but you know, itâs just maths
1 Like