[opendoor]

Originally Posted by New Era

Certainly.

Almost nowhere with regular deliveries is holding back 2nd shots.

This is disinformation because regular deliveries are not happening. If regular deliveries were happening there would be no need to delay second shots. You've repeatedly stated there are no logistical issues with the distribution of vaccine nor the amount of vaccine available, which is not just demonstrably wrong but irresponsible to suggest.

Of course regular deliveries are happening. States are receiving allocations and deliveries of both vaccines every single week:

https://data.cdc.gov/Vaccinations/CO...uris/saz5-9hgg

https://data.cdc.gov/Vaccinations/CO...b7pe-5nws/data

And jurisdictions with far less regular or secure deliveries than the US are not holding back 2nd shots, so what I said was totally correct.

It makes no sense to keep half your doses in a freezer doing nothing when you're just going to get more the next week.

The vaccine is not arriving in a week. That is the point. The demand for the vaccine greatly exceeds the amount available. The Trump admin ####ed up and didn't order enough. They had the right to have their orders placed and filled first, but they under-ordered by tens to hundreds of millions. As a result orders from elsewhere are in the queue and causing delays in delivery and then distribution.

At this point US production is 100% destined for the US. There are no delays while doses are shipped to other countries. The US is seeing very consistent deliveries right now and in the last 5 weeks the US has received 9.4M, 8.4M, 8.3M, 8.6M, and 8.6M doses respectively. If you can point to specific evidence of states seeing large, 1+ week gaps in deliveries I'm all ears; but I've seen no evidence of that.

And in the event of a supply disruption (like Canada is seeing starting this week), you just delay the 2nd dose. The UK is delaying up to 12 weeks in order to cover more people.

Delaying or skipping the second dose is not a good idea, in any shape or form. The idea behind the second shot is to boost the immunity response and develop anti-bodies to fight off the virus. Scientists fear that delaying or skipping the second shot could work against the efficacy of the vaccine as it would allow for the virus to potentially build resistance to the vaccine or mutate like we are seeing in the UK. Funny how those concerns appear to be playing out with a more virulent mutation establishing itself in the UK where they have adopted the delay tactic. What does your doctor tell you when you get a prescription? Follow the damn instructions and take the medication as prescribed to its completion, even if you are feeling better!

No one is advocating skipping the 2nd dose. However delaying a booster shot (within a reasonable time frame) has virtually no effect on long term efficacy. And for some vaccines (AstraZeneca's and some others) it has shown to be more effective than a shorter interval. Also, the CDC recommendation allows the 2nd dose up to 6 weeks later for both vaccines.

And the US likely has the most stable supply in the world, so states holding back 2nd doses is asinine.

This is highly debatable if not just flat out inaccurate. The US is struggling with having enough vaccine and getting it into people's arms. This is the reality that every state is reporting. The logistics of this distribution are immense and many states are struggling with it. Those that have put a plan in place and have had success in distribution are running out of vaccine and demanding more, which is not being delivered.

As the links above show, the US is seeing remarkably consistent deliveries from both companies. Of course they're running out of doses, everywhere is because they're getting it into peoples' arms. That's a good thing. The idea that better distribution or coordination is going to create more doses out of thin air is flatly incorrect. The bottleneck right now is manufacturing, as it is everywhere.

The 21/28 day intervals for Pfizer/Moderna weren't determined through rigorous experimentation; the companies just went with the shortest intervals that they thought would work in order to speed up the trials and provide protection in the shortest time frame.

Yes and no. All of the trial testing has been on that cycle. That is why they have been able to claim a 95% success rate in the efficacy of the vaccine, because they administered it in a consistent and controlled way. They have no idea what the impact would be because they did not test in other intervals. They are hoping a delay would not have much impact, but scientists have warned of the potential for negative outcomes... like those in the UK where they are not following the recommended vaccine protocol and delaying the second shot. Again, scientists warned about the risks associated with delays in treatment, and those warnings are proving accurate based on the outcomes in the UK.

The Pfizer trial protocol was 19-42 days, so some participants received their 2nd dose up to 6 weeks after the first with no detected difference in efficacy between those who received their booster shot earlier or later. That's why most jurisdictions are comfortable going up to about 6 weeks for a 2nd dose where necessary. The UK is an outlier in that, but they are now primarily using the AstraZeneca vaccine where a 12-week interval proved to be more effective in the clinical trials than the protocol of 4-weeks between doses.

And speaking of dangerous disinformation... the B.1.1.7 variant was identified in September, long before vaccinations started. Trying to imply that the UK delaying their 2nd doses has something to do with that variant (as you did twice in this one post) is completely false and misleading. You might want to get a better handle on this stuff before talking down to people, telling them they don't have a clue what they're talking about, and accusing them of spreading dangerous disinformation.