I don’t agree with 100% of this, but if this were what was being proposed by the CDC I wouldn’t really argue.
I agree with most of this. Nate isn’t always right, but he tries to go where the data go.
I’m a little surprised that he says the vaccines should have already been approved for younger kids. I thought it was just taking longer to collect the data for them and it would likely be approved this winter. Maybe he’s seen something suggesting the data are already there. I know he opposed the J&J pause a while back.
I follow him pretty closely on the Twitter and that pretty much sums it up.
From what I can tell, his opinion is the FDA drags their feet too much looking for “outliers” instead of just going with the data that is in front of them.
1 Like
In normal circumstances, they’d probably be right to err on the side of conservatism. But maybe not in the middle of a pandemic.
They have to be careful. Imagine If they missed something. Kids can’t always communicate how they feel.
While I want them to hurry. I want the science to be solid
People are already exaggerating the heart issues. Claims that heart attacks went up 83% in Israel. 83% from a baseline of 30. Even for low-risk people, the virus is likely a bigger problem than the vaccines (not even considering who they might spread it to), but people don’t know how to compare risk.
It’s a concern. You can’t overwhelm the hospitals with heart issues. all it means is they’d cycle the injections to prevent overwhelming the hospitals.
The heart issue is the most concerning I’ve heard. That can require hospitalization.
That’s still a huge percentage.
The point is the vaccine is not risk free. People need to choose their own path and decide which risk they want to take.
100%, but the FDA is possibly dragging their feet and not allowing some people to make that decision