4 ms·

Any group that is offered the vaccine but turns it down at any significant rate is a useful data point in projecting the date date we reach herd immunity. For

Any group that is offered the vaccine but turns it down at any significant rate is a useful data point in projecting the date date we reach herd immunity. For example, consider if vaccine uptake was 100% - we would immediately know that we were supply and rate of delivery limited. Alternative consider if the vaccinate uptake rate was 10% - then we have the opposite problem. Demand is too low. In this case, with some doctors and nurses rejecting the vaccine, it is reasonable to project that overall demand for the vaccine across the general population will be low. This means that the date we reach herd immunity is farther in the future than if the uptake rate was 100%.

sigstoat 6y ago
i was quoting your "Why?", not asking you a question. and if you continue to treat a group of millions as a homogenous unit, you can't have thoughts like "maybe the doctors turning it down right now will accept it after the elderly are all vaccinated" which wouldn't slow down the overall vaccination rate.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- testfoobar 6y ago
  "maybe the doctors turning it down right now will accept it after the elderly are all vaccinated" - This is a conjecture and not a fact observable in any collected data about vaccine uptake. What your thoughts or my thoughts are really don't matter. What matters is observable facts and how they inform us about future policy decisions. To me, medical professionals turning down the vaccine when offered suggests that public policy makers should consider vaccine mandates if we're to reach herd immunity faster.
  - edmundsauto 6y ago
    Only if you think the doctors' decision, right now, is broadly generalizable to the entire population at the moment the vaccine is available to them. To me, this is a massive leap. Broadly, however, you are right: we should be (and are!) studying vaccine uptake. It is not a wise decision to put much weight on the doctor data, as it's not been shown to be generalizable.

sigstoat 6y ago

i was quoting your "Why?", not asking you a question. and if you continue to treat a group of millions as a homogenous unit, you can't have thoughts like "maybe the doctors turning it down right now will accept it after the elderly are all vaccinated" which wouldn't slow down the overall vaccination rate.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
testfoobar 6y ago
"maybe the doctors turning it down right now will accept it after the elderly are all vaccinated" - This is a conjecture and not a fact observable in any collected data about vaccine uptake. What your thoughts or my thoughts are really don't matter. What matters is observable facts and how they inform us about future policy decisions. To me, medical professionals turning down the vaccine when offered suggests that public policy makers should consider vaccine mandates if we're to reach herd immunity faster.
- edmundsauto 6y ago
  Only if you think the doctors' decision, right now, is broadly generalizable to the entire population at the moment the vaccine is available to them. To me, this is a massive leap. Broadly, however, you are right: we should be (and are!) studying vaccine uptake. It is not a wise decision to put much weight on the doctor data, as it's not been shown to be generalizable.