7 ms·

This seems very Canada specific, is any other country doing it like this? I'm fairly sure neither the US nor most european countries are doing this (I mean, Can

by Lewton 6y ago

This seems very Canada specific, is any other country doing it like this? I'm fairly sure neither the US nor most european countries are doing this (I mean, Canada seems to be the only place that are reserving the second doses) Edit: This article is clearly being upvoted based on title alone

the_svd_doctor 6y ago
I’ve seen multiple experts in the media mentioning this idea in Belgium. Not sure if it is really considered by the government though.
kevin_nisbet 6y ago
The initial vaccination statistics I saw over the weekend suggested that the US/UK have both far outpaced the Canadian vaccination rate (adjusted for population). I don't want to cite specific numbers as I don't remember what they were, but it was a pretty large gap among countries that had approved the vaccines.
Mauricebranagh 6y ago
Tony Blair suggested it
- tonyedgecombe 6y ago
  That famous epidemiologist.
Exmoor 6y ago
I had read that the USA is/was initially ensuring there were two doses onsite for each person vaccinated, until they felt the supply chain had proven to be consistent. I'm having trouble sourcing that though.
- formercoder 6y ago
  I saw that too and it makes sense. Begin with the most conservative approach and transition to just in time as confidence builds.
  - hanniabu 6y ago
    Yup, you don't want to send out a lot and having doses going bad because they were sitting around too long or some other issue.
jewayne 6y ago
The US is DEFINITELY doing this. Each time a first dose goes out of the Pfizer warehouse in Michigan, the second dose for it is set aside. Not only that, but they literally set aside ANOTHER 500,000 doses "just in case". They seem to be prioritizing smoothness of rollout and equity across states over immunizing the maximum number of people possible.
- Lewton 6y ago
  Whelp, guess I'm wrong on this one. That is extremely disappointing
  - mlyle 6y ago
    Yup. It's stupid. You shouldn't hold back 0, but >50% is too much.
  - jcims 6y ago
    What happens when people start missing their second dose because of insufficient supplies? - Endless stories of incompetence in the media - Lack of clarity in need for second dose - Infections in suboptimally vaccinated people draw question towards efficacy of vaccine. These are all going to have deleterious effects on future messaging and policy decisions. There's no way to survive this situation with your reputation intact as there are loudmouths on both sides, at least try to salvage the process restore confidence in the underlying medical science. I've been in a situation where medical policy directly contravenes with the health of a dearly loved individual. We lost that battle and the lives of myself and my children will be forever changed. However, I can rationally see the merit of this approach.
sradman 6y ago
Ontario was the only province to start with this strategy. Retired general Rick Hillier, chair of Ontario's vaccine distribution task force, discussed the strategy in a CBC interview on Dec 14 [1] just before the rollout. [1] https://youtu.be/PSFX5qFVzhw?t=369 https://youtu.be/PSFX5qFVzhw?t=369

by Lewton 6y ago

the_svd_doctor 6y ago

I’ve seen multiple experts in the media mentioning this idea in Belgium. Not sure if it is really considered by the government though.

kevin_nisbet 6y ago

The initial vaccination statistics I saw over the weekend suggested that the US/UK have both far outpaced the Canadian vaccination rate (adjusted for population). I don't want to cite specific numbers as I don't remember what they were, but it was a pretty large gap among countries that had approved the vaccines.

Mauricebranagh 6y ago

Tony Blair suggested it

tonyedgecombe 6y ago
That famous epidemiologist.

Exmoor 6y ago

I had read that the USA is/was initially ensuring there were two doses onsite for each person vaccinated, until they felt the supply chain had proven to be consistent. I'm having trouble sourcing that though.

formercoder 6y ago
I saw that too and it makes sense. Begin with the most conservative approach and transition to just in time as confidence builds.
- hanniabu 6y ago
  Yup, you don't want to send out a lot and having doses going bad because they were sitting around too long or some other issue.

jewayne 6y ago

The US is DEFINITELY doing this. Each time a first dose goes out of the Pfizer warehouse in Michigan, the second dose for it is set aside. Not only that, but they literally set aside ANOTHER 500,000 doses "just in case". They seem to be prioritizing smoothness of rollout and equity across states over immunizing the maximum number of people possible.

Lewton 6y ago
Whelp, guess I'm wrong on this one. That is extremely disappointing
- mlyle 6y ago
  Yup. It's stupid. You shouldn't hold back 0, but >50% is too much.
- jcims 6y ago
  What happens when people start missing their second dose because of insufficient supplies? - Endless stories of incompetence in the media - Lack of clarity in need for second dose - Infections in suboptimally vaccinated people draw question towards efficacy of vaccine. These are all going to have deleterious effects on future messaging and policy decisions. There's no way to survive this situation with your reputation intact as there are loudmouths on both sides, at least try to salvage the process restore confidence in the underlying medical science. I've been in a situation where medical policy directly contravenes with the health of a dearly loved individual. We lost that battle and the lives of myself and my children will be forever changed. However, I can rationally see the merit of this approach.

sradman 6y ago

Ontario was the only province to start with this strategy. Retired general Rick Hillier, chair of Ontario's vaccine distribution task force, discussed the strategy in a CBC interview on Dec 14 [1] just before the rollout. [1] https://youtu.be/PSFX5qFVzhw?t=369 https://youtu.be/PSFX5qFVzhw?t=369