4 ms·

There's a lot of scepticism with regards to vaccines, which, in the current situation, the European Commission and national governments are keen not to encourag

There's a lot of scepticism with regards to vaccines, which, in the current situation, the European Commission and national governments are keen not to encourage. There are also a couple of unfortunate incidents in recent memory which exacerbate the situation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemrix

Tenoke 6y ago
Err, the national governments and the European Commission are very much encouraging the skepticism especially in regards to AZ. Saying it's not effective for older people, temporarily banning it, saying it's not for younger people etc. At this point a lot of average people are skeptical not because they are anti-vaxx but because of the mixed messages from the governments.
- brianwawok 6y ago
  You really don't want to be on the wrong side of history for this. Delay 2 weeks to double check some reaction numbers vs rush and possibly cause thousands of deaths? I think it's good they were willing to put on brakes if not sure, and good they resumed when science told them it was fine.
  - Tenoke 6y ago
    'Science told them it was fine' before they pumped the breaks, too. You can excuse anything based on caution but both before and after the fact the expected value of the decision was that it will cost lives.
  - dagw 6y ago
    I think it's good they were willing to put on brakes if not sure, and good they resumed when science told them it was fine. Except that's not the order that things went. They put on the brakes after 'science' told them it was fine to continue, and then resumed based on no new (public) scientific information. Even if their intentions are good, the timing and communication around the whole things looks and feels chaotic and arbitrary and does not make people feel confident that they have any idea what they are doing.
- rsynnott 6y ago
  > Saying it's not effective for older people Nobody said that; they said that the trial showed no statistically useful evidence that it was effective for older people (which was true, at least for the original trial). Given limited supplies of AZ it arguably made more sense to use the more plentiful Pfizer vaccine for groups it was known to work on, and use the rarer AZ vaccine for groups it was known to work on. This was informed by the limited supply; if AZ had been the main vaccine available decisions were different. As it is, restricting AZ to under 65s didn't meaningfully slow rollouts in countries that did it.
- johnchristopher 6y ago
  Temporary bans were decided by state members, not the EU.

Tenoke 6y ago

Err, the national governments and the European Commission are very much encouraging the skepticism especially in regards to AZ. Saying it's not effective for older people, temporarily banning it, saying it's not for younger people etc. At this point a lot of average people are skeptical not because they are anti-vaxx but because of the mixed messages from the governments.

brianwawok 6y ago
You really don't want to be on the wrong side of history for this. Delay 2 weeks to double check some reaction numbers vs rush and possibly cause thousands of deaths? I think it's good they were willing to put on brakes if not sure, and good they resumed when science told them it was fine.
- Tenoke 6y ago
  'Science told them it was fine' before they pumped the breaks, too. You can excuse anything based on caution but both before and after the fact the expected value of the decision was that it will cost lives.
- dagw 6y ago
  I think it's good they were willing to put on brakes if not sure, and good they resumed when science told them it was fine. Except that's not the order that things went. They put on the brakes after 'science' told them it was fine to continue, and then resumed based on no new (public) scientific information. Even if their intentions are good, the timing and communication around the whole things looks and feels chaotic and arbitrary and does not make people feel confident that they have any idea what they are doing.
rsynnott 6y ago
> Saying it's not effective for older people Nobody said that; they said that the trial showed no statistically useful evidence that it was effective for older people (which was true, at least for the original trial). Given limited supplies of AZ it arguably made more sense to use the more plentiful Pfizer vaccine for groups it was known to work on, and use the rarer AZ vaccine for groups it was known to work on. This was informed by the limited supply; if AZ had been the main vaccine available decisions were different. As it is, restricting AZ to under 65s didn't meaningfully slow rollouts in countries that did it.
johnchristopher 6y ago
Temporary bans were decided by state members, not the EU.