The FDA went ahead and did it, approving a fourth vaccine shot for those age 50 or older. This is a reference post for those wondering if it makes sense to get that second booster.
> Yes, a few people will say ‘look, you did not hold the Official Meetings’ but actual regular people do not care.
The actual regular people who show up as anti-vaxxers do care, and this sort of thing is exactly what they harp on. Maybe they're being disengenous, and I think they're almost certainly wrong in that vaccines are good and safe. But the main anti-vax argument is certainly that it's "unsafe" because it was rushed through the normal process at the behest of Big Pharma and doesn't have the established track record of safety that these people are comfortable with.
Basically everything is so messed up that both sides are true. The existing process is untrustworthy crap, but abandoning existing process and transparency on an ad-hoc basis is still a trust-reducing action.
To actually build trust, you have to build better procedures and justify them.
I realize that such people say that they care. That does not mean that they do, or that any of the proposed solutions would address the concern. I would expect zero practical difference in their responses if additional meetings were held, or additional meetings were skipped, besides tiny changes in talking points.
The steelman of their True Objection is 'this was too fast' is a real concern, but the only way to be slower is to be slower.
I can't help but notice that you left out "price" in your list of costs of getting the second booster. For many people it is probably zero price, but for the nation as a whole it most certainly isn't. We should probably be a little more cognizant of that, considering Pfizer's recent record breaking year, among other things.
One can quibble about things like "how much does the booster really limit transmission when transmission is a function of infection severity and that seems very low anyway" or how one side effect of the vaccine is basically "You get Omicron", but a big cost has to be "How much are we paying for effectively giving people shots that might work a little better than saline?"
I don't know, a few hundred million here, a few hundred million there, and pretty soon that adds up to real money.
Considering that the benefits are very, very small, and apparently limited to a subset of potential recipients, it seems reasonable to bring up the price.
Re: Booster timing. I got a J&J one dose when they first came out. And then an mRNA booster right before Xmas (Hanukah) last year, when I heard omicron was peaking. (mostly thanks to you... thanks. :^) I still kinda wish I caught a mild case of the virus... That seems like the best protection, but I don't really know. Out here in Trump country (Warsaw County, NY) we've been over covid for a while, no one cared too much about masking and now that it's lifted for the school kids. Well, it's now mud season, but summer is coming and life is short, "Party on Wayne, party on Garth!"
> Yes, a few people will say ‘look, you did not hold the Official Meetings’ but actual regular people do not care.
The actual regular people who show up as anti-vaxxers do care, and this sort of thing is exactly what they harp on. Maybe they're being disengenous, and I think they're almost certainly wrong in that vaccines are good and safe. But the main anti-vax argument is certainly that it's "unsafe" because it was rushed through the normal process at the behest of Big Pharma and doesn't have the established track record of safety that these people are comfortable with.
Basically everything is so messed up that both sides are true. The existing process is untrustworthy crap, but abandoning existing process and transparency on an ad-hoc basis is still a trust-reducing action.
To actually build trust, you have to build better procedures and justify them.
I realize that such people say that they care. That does not mean that they do, or that any of the proposed solutions would address the concern. I would expect zero practical difference in their responses if additional meetings were held, or additional meetings were skipped, besides tiny changes in talking points.
The steelman of their True Objection is 'this was too fast' is a real concern, but the only way to be slower is to be slower.
Looks like a busted link for anti-inductive.
I can't help but notice that you left out "price" in your list of costs of getting the second booster. For many people it is probably zero price, but for the nation as a whole it most certainly isn't. We should probably be a little more cognizant of that, considering Pfizer's recent record breaking year, among other things.
One can quibble about things like "how much does the booster really limit transmission when transmission is a function of infection severity and that seems very low anyway" or how one side effect of the vaccine is basically "You get Omicron", but a big cost has to be "How much are we paying for effectively giving people shots that might work a little better than saline?"
From a policy standpoint there is a price, I suppose, but that also seems small.
I don't know, a few hundred million here, a few hundred million there, and pretty soon that adds up to real money.
Considering that the benefits are very, very small, and apparently limited to a subset of potential recipients, it seems reasonable to bring up the price.
Re: Booster timing. I got a J&J one dose when they first came out. And then an mRNA booster right before Xmas (Hanukah) last year, when I heard omicron was peaking. (mostly thanks to you... thanks. :^) I still kinda wish I caught a mild case of the virus... That seems like the best protection, but I don't really know. Out here in Trump country (Warsaw County, NY) we've been over covid for a while, no one cared too much about masking and now that it's lifted for the school kids. Well, it's now mud season, but summer is coming and life is short, "Party on Wayne, party on Garth!"
Again you have provided the clearest, most informed and most pragmatic observations I’ve read—thank you.