Post by account_disabled on Mar 11, 2024 2:50:25 GMT -6
It is obvious that we must all get vaccinated as soon as possible. And that's what we were doing. Very happy to be in a geographic region where there are accessible vaccines. The few who were ahead of their turn unintentionally helped overcome initial skepticism against vaccines in general. People were eager to get vaccinated and were happy to receive it. Until the information disaster about Astrazeneca arrived. At first he denied what seemed quite likely. There seems to be a minimal incidence of very serious complications. But that risk must be assumed to avoid a greater evil. Any drug can have adverse effects in very rare cases. The problem is that those who decide do not apply their own argument.
A certain age had been established with that vaccine, delaying the priority that continued with the oldest, because it had not been tested massively with that group. We may be facing a trade war and there are many economic interests at stake. But that cannot condition any decision in one direction Belgium Mobile Number List or another. If the risk must be assumed in global terms, why does France decide not to administer a second dose to those who have received the first? What guarantees that there will be fewer complications among current Astrazeneca recipients? Isn't it foreseeable that similar incidents could occur? It is true that they are more at risk due to their age, but that was already known when they were relegated in priority. It is understandable that, when having to speed up the vaccination process, it is hardly feasible to take into account the clinical data of each citizen, except in extremely serious cases.
That it is more functional to proceed by age and it is very complicated to refine the groups based on strictly medical data. But it is disconcerting that there are so many different interpretations of the same data and that each country applies a different criterion. Of course it is good that the criteria are changed as there is new data and that we are faced with a dynamic process. However, it is perplexing that common guidelines cannot be agreed upon at least at the European level. Seeing that your neighbors adopt different measures to solve the same problem is not very understandable, because everyone cannot be right at the same time by taking different courses. In this context, it is chilling that political leaders live in a permanent electoral campaign and instrumentalize something so delicate to throw things at each other's heads. They should hand over their responsibilities to others. We are in your hands.
A certain age had been established with that vaccine, delaying the priority that continued with the oldest, because it had not been tested massively with that group. We may be facing a trade war and there are many economic interests at stake. But that cannot condition any decision in one direction Belgium Mobile Number List or another. If the risk must be assumed in global terms, why does France decide not to administer a second dose to those who have received the first? What guarantees that there will be fewer complications among current Astrazeneca recipients? Isn't it foreseeable that similar incidents could occur? It is true that they are more at risk due to their age, but that was already known when they were relegated in priority. It is understandable that, when having to speed up the vaccination process, it is hardly feasible to take into account the clinical data of each citizen, except in extremely serious cases.
That it is more functional to proceed by age and it is very complicated to refine the groups based on strictly medical data. But it is disconcerting that there are so many different interpretations of the same data and that each country applies a different criterion. Of course it is good that the criteria are changed as there is new data and that we are faced with a dynamic process. However, it is perplexing that common guidelines cannot be agreed upon at least at the European level. Seeing that your neighbors adopt different measures to solve the same problem is not very understandable, because everyone cannot be right at the same time by taking different courses. In this context, it is chilling that political leaders live in a permanent electoral campaign and instrumentalize something so delicate to throw things at each other's heads. They should hand over their responsibilities to others. We are in your hands.