|
|
|
|
|
by kian
1933 days ago
|
|
I've been fairly disappointed with the analysis of first doses first. If someone were to recommend half-courses of antibiotics, I feel like a lot more people would instantly recognize what could potentially go wrong here (and for which we will have 'no evidence for' until it is too late). The assumption of first doses first is that partial protection is better than all or none - but with evolving organisms, this is a pretty tendentious assumption. It is not at all implausible that this strategy will select for vaccine-immune strains. |
|
Their argument seems to be that we have 2 months of evidence that hospitalizations & negative effects are strongly reduced even by single doses, and we can reduce world-wide virus numbers by getting more 2x single dose resistances rather than single person double doses.
In this view, the risk of resistant strains would actually be less with 2 people at ~85% resistance, than one person with 95%. This is because if everyone had 85% resistance the virus reproduction rate would be <1, and it would completely die out, so wouldn't have an opportunity to evolve stronger strains - which it currently does have due to being prevalent all over the world.