Vaccines

Now that COVID-19 vaccines are widely available in the US, the CDC have released a handy chart to illustrate the relative risks of certain activities to vaccinated vs unvaccinated people. The color-coded chart, titled ‘Choosing Safer Activities’ and published this week, seems to be meant to persuade more people to get jabbed: the vaccinated figure is given a green light to do all sorts of things, including seeing friends, going to the movies and dining indoors, while the unvaccinated person gets a red or yellow danger alert for all but the smallest outdoor gatherings. However, the vaccinated figure is also pictured wearing a mask, which seems to suggest a startling lack of confidence in the vaccines' efficacy.

The widespread implementation of some kind of digital vaccine passport or ‘vaxport’ appears to be a foregone conclusion in the United States — but not if I can help it. I’m going hard against it while there’s still time. You should too. It’s a very simple question: do I trust the government, Big Tech and corporations not to abuse this power? The answer is NO. Absolutely not. And why should I? Why would anyone? I could have just stopped at ‘do I trust the government, Big Tech and corporations?’ Opposing vaccine passports seems like something that should unite people across the entire political spectrum. Over the past decade we’ve had all of these institutions sell our data, spy on us and lie to us.

The ethical case against domestic use of ‘vaccine passports’ was made with some passion in Britain before Boris Johnson’s change of heart. Matt Hancock repeatedly assured people that Britain is 'not a papers-carrying country'. Vaccine minister Nadhim Zahawi said vaccine passports would be 'discriminatory'. Michael Gove promised that there were 'no plans' to introduce them. In a Westminster Hall debate, MPs from all parties lined up to say that out of principle, the minority who chose not to take the vaccine should suffer no penalty. Brits have not been told the reason for the U-turn. In theory, the UK government is taking soundings. In practice, those involved in Michael Gove’s review have been told that the decision has already been made by the PM: so they’re happening.

Pfizer and BioNTech have released some extraordinary findings from a Phase 3 trial involving 46,307 participants, between seven days and six months after a second dose was administered. The vaccine was found to have a 91.3 percent efficacy rate. These findings line up with the real world data coming out of Israel, which has used the Pfizer vaccine to inoculate its population, and reported several weeks ago that it proved 94 percent effective in preventing symptomatic illness. But on top of the overall efficacy rate came even better news: Pfizer is reporting that the ‘vaccine was 100 percent effective in preventing severe disease’ as defined by the Centers for Disease Control.

Donald Trump said during the second and final presidential debate on October 22 that he was optimistic a vaccine would be ready 'within weeks’. When moderator Kristen Welker asked if that was a 'guarantee’, Trump replied that it was not, but that the US would have a vaccine by the 'end of the year’. It wasn't the first time he had made this prediction publicly: 'I think we’re going to have a vaccine by the end of the year,’ Trump said back in May. The media could have accepted that the President probably has better insight into the timeline of vaccine development and approval than those not involved in the process.

After eight months of frantic work, several coronavirus vaccines appear ready for launch. But there are 330 million Americans, and decidedly less than 330 million shots right now. So the great question America must ask is, who should receive the vaccine first?At least, it was supposed to be a great question. Mercifully, the New York Times has come forth like the Good Witch of the North to show us the way. Figuring out health policy is easy, it turns out: just decide the best policy based on race.That was the clear message of a Saturday article posing the question: 'The Elderly vs. Essential Workers: Who Should Get the Coronavirus Vaccine First?