With this research paper I’ll step back from the topic. A salient question is how real world data is sampled and collated as well as what the goal/metric of success is.
Covid vaccination is it is one of a few times the whole world becomes the data set, and there are real time data of untreated and treated. Many treatments are limited to those with pre-exisisting ailments or a subset of the population. The only other one possibly like it would be the smallpox vaccine.
As experts rely on the covid vaccination real world data, we don’t have the expertise to question their knowledge and experience.
If one has an opinion which differs with the current advice associated with the vaccines use and approved in Australia, and believes their opinion is correct, it is suggested that contact is made with the relevant experts and ATAGI. One can then voice their opinions and argue why they are better than leading Australian experts. Until such time that expert advice changes, laypeople should be relying on their advice and not muddy the advice of experts with their own opinions.
As outlined above, if one is concerned about Covid-19 vaccines, please see your own medical/vaccination professional to seek current and relevant expert advice based on your own circumstances and situation.
Apologies, I assumed this source was an acceptable point of reference. Critically it demonstrates that there is more than one successful technology solution to producing vaccines effective against Covid-19 variants.
There are differences in how each is manufactured, administered and perform short/longer term. NSW in recently calling out for more of the option that is in short supply appeared to recognise the benefit of achieving the higher level of protection sooner for those at greatest risk, given circumstance.
The ATAGI recommendations are what they are. The current health directions of the CHO’s and Government decisions are not in question. However as with the recently released vaccination targets for phase 2/3 of the ‘get out of Covid - “free”!’ plan there is little transparency around the decision making. We are left to seek other sources of information to question the quality of the decision process. Note that Parliamentary scrutiny is currently limited.
It is, but like all good information sources, they provide information/are transparent on its source, currency and limitations. Source, currency and limitations are used within the scientific community to understand the veracity of results, information presented or conclusions made.
This they should be commended for and anyone using the website should also understand the sources, currency and limitations of the data presented. The website presents data and isn’t there to make conclusions. Conclusions can only be drawn when information behind the data is understood. This is something the Australian (and world) experts have the necessary expertise to do, and why accepting their advice is important.
It is hoped that as new variants emerge or new vaccines are approved for use, the information on their website is updated (along with currency and its limitations). If they do this, it will be a useful resource to peruse in the long term.
This is irrelevant and a different discussion. If you question the modelling done for the government by the Doherty Institute (which is not a government body or right/left leading think tank but some of the leading Australian experts on infection and immunology - and it is likely that Australian Noble Laurate Peter Doherty was also involved in the Institute advice - see earlier post about Peter Doherty assisting even though he has formally retired), I suggest you take up your concerns with these experts in relation to their advice to the government.
Seems there is much planning, defining stages, making pretty diagrams, and directing and redirecting scarce supplies overlaid by whether you are 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b, front line, or whatever in which state. Since it seems to be hitting the fan all the overheads and bureaucracy in the name of making and filling priorities could be dilutive of getting it done. Since it takes weeks to months for a vax to become effective it opens the question what motives are behind diverting scarce supplies to current outbreaks.
Between disposing of unused vaccines on a day when demand is less than supply, or incorrect/inept/incompetent record keeping keeps one ‘out’ and whether a particular vaccine is good bad or indifferent does not matter if it is not in ‘your’ arm.
2 Likes
More of the same?
We have what we have.
A message to those vaccinated, check the register and if your jab is not showing after 4 days follow up. As the reports suggest getting it corrected may be neither quick nor even easy. Fill out a form and wait, and after a while do it again.
It is one reason even real world data is imperfect, because records are imperfect. Even though they are more perfect is some places than others it does not provide the confidence in our systems as I would have hoped. It shouldn’t be hard to get it right.
1 Like
My COVID certificate was showing the day after the second AstraZeneca shot.
Not everyone is impressed by the plan:
2 Likes
Mine too, and now I’ve put it into my Apple Wallet which will make the thing easier to display if I’m asked for it.
5 Likes
There have been a number of recent comments on whether Vaccination against Covid-19 should be mandatory. The Federal Govt (PM) has stated it was within the authority of employers to decide and pursue. IE not for the Federal Govt to determine.
A non partisan view suggests that very few employers could legally require employees to be vaccinated.
Safe Work Australia, the federal work health and safety regulator, and the Fair Work Ombudsman, the agency responsible for compliance with federal workplace laws, have both made it clear that most employers can’t make you get a vaccine.
Safe Work Australia’s guidance says “most employers will not need to make vaccination mandatory” to meet their workplace, health and safety obligations.
The Conversation included one view that the Federal Govt has the ability to legislate to make compulsory vaccination possible.
The few exceptions where compulsory vaccination is required in the workplace are discussed in the article.
2 Likes
It is challenging…
One one hand, employers must provide a safe working environment where workers health and safety isn’t put at risk…including from COVID-19. In effect, employers have to implement reasonable and practicable measure to ensure any employee which has contact with another employer in a workplace could be at risk of being infected with COVID-19, and otherwise the workplace may not be seen as a safe environment to work.
The guidence says:
It is unlikely that a requirement for workers to be vaccinated will be reasonably practicable.
This is because of three factors:
- at present, public health experts, such as the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee has not recommended a vaccine be made mandatory in your industry
- there may not yet be a vaccine available for your workers, or
- some of your workers have medical reasons why they cannot be vaccinated.
Safe Work Australia has left the decision up to employers and the risk assessments in relation to their own businesses.
Yet on the other hand, it is ambiguous whether there is legal protection should a employer mandate vaccinations within the workplace to achieve this outcome.
It has been reported that the SPC’s mandating vaccinations will be challenged. When outcome is known, it might provide some clarity. It will also reduce the many different opinions being presented in the media to whether vaccinations are a measure to ensure a safe workplace or a health measure where employers have no right to intrude.
Only time will tell.
1 Like
If that were how the legislation has been interpreted there is a long list of community transmitted diseases that an employer would need to add to the list.
The exceptions where vaccination has been enforceable all appear to flow from government legislated requirements in one form or another in support of mandatory vaccination. EG Flu vaccination for Aged Care employees, Q-Fever vaccination or immunity for Meat Workers etc.
The greater risk to employers of unvaccinated employees may be the lost time and sick leave when an employee is unable to work. We have multiple near contacts with people all through the day. Just not in the work place. If it’s an accepted generalised workplace standard to require vaccination, it needs to be applied as a policy to the whole community, or it’s IMHO, a waste of time and effort.
If we can’t voluntarily get vaccinated to reduce the risk to our near workers and customers, the moral argument fails the most basic of pub tests.
2 Likes
When it is a pandemic and there are higher identified risks to the community as a whole. The community includes employees at their workplaces. Pandemics are generally different to common ailments (with exception of unique cases such as flu, Q-fever or even yellow fever for those working overseas in risk areas) which can occur in the community. Pandemics also need to be declared as they are done as a ‘human biosecurity emergency’ under the Australian Biosecurity Act.
It is also worth noting that many vaccinations in Australia are already in effect compulsory to all within the community. These are childhood vaccinations where there are strong disincentives (or financial big sticks) to encourage participation in the program. Mandating COVID-19 vaccinations could possibly considered in similar light.
I am a fence sitter in relation to whether vaccinations should be mandated. I hope that everyone has a conscious and not only looks considers their own interests, but the health and wellbeing of the whole community (including work colleagues) in relation to getting vaccinated.
Unfortunately there is a tide of misinformation/disinformation/politicking about vaccinations being used in Australia and their effectiveness and risks. This muddies the information waters and is very dissuading to many individuals who find it difficult to make the decision to get vaccinated. It is possible that such individuals may need more than just gentle persuasion.
2 Likes
I have a friend who needs a good slap around the chops. She read “somewhere” that there havent been enough studies done. She’s not anti-vax, but is refusing the covid vax. And she is in a really high risk group.
3 Likes
Australia still has a long way to go with 25% of the over 16 population fully vaccinated.
How important is it to be achieving high rates of vaccination?
Looking to how far the UK, population approx 67 million has progressed. Australia has a population of approx 26 million or 40% if compared to that of the UK. The UK has 76% of the adult population fully vaccinated. With a first dose take up of 89%. It looks to be heading to better than 90% of the adult population fully vaccinated
The UK is living with Covid-19 with similar vaccination rates to Australia’s current 70/80% targets. The current UK Covid infection and death rates are included in the following graphic of vaccination rates.
1 Like
I know a few younger people who are awaiting the Pfizer or Moderna on the basis that max efficacy of AZ is 12 weeks between jabs, so if they got it this week and doing it to best practice would not get the 2nd jab until early November. If they get an mRNA by mid-October it is the same end time, and after assessing the small risks with AZ vs comparative benefits they have made conscious choices.
3 Likes
The AZ Vax has been available here since March ‘21.
So many seem to be more afraid of the Vax than of the pestilent corona virus 
3 Likes
Yet certain age groups (<40s with no other ‘qualification’) have only been allowed to sign up a week ago so what was rolled out to others months ago? It did not exist for them.
3 Likes
Although that age group is at a lower risk of being hospitalised in ICU or succumbing to the virus, I think it’ll be beneficial when they also will get vaccinated.
2 Likes
So do they.
FWIW a family member had a moderately severe reaction to the AZ (a front line worker) and her partner is just eligible for AZ but has chosen to wait since the end case efficacy for mRNA is better and the risks regardless of how low for AZ, are lower, and the time to become fully vaccinated will be almost identical.
At least some younger people are making decisions based on grounded data not hysteria or conspiracies or misinformation, and you can chose to disagree with their conclusions, but it should be difficult to fault their logical process.
3 Likes
