Former Vaccine Taskforce Chief Clive Dix has said the “vaccines were not designed to end transmission”. In a key confession that demolishes the Government’s strategy behind vaccine passports and vaccine coercion, the former Interim Chair of the U.K. Vaccine Taskforce writes in the Telegraph that “the vaccines will not stop the spread of the virus in the short or medium term”.
The battle over Covid transmission was lost some time ago. I am afraid that the vaccines will not stop the spread of the virus in the short or medium term – but that is not a disaster. Indeed the vaccines were not designed to end transmission. It was evident to me at the time I helped with the procurement of doses, as interim chair of the Vaccine Taskforce, that the intention was to stop people from getting severely ill or dying.
Blasting the U.K.’s current booster strategy for “sacrificing the care of elderly diabetes for the very marginal benefit of boosting the antibody concentrations of the young and healthy”, Dix writes he fears that we will be “inadvertently causing a lot of human suffering”.
Given that young and healthy people not only have a very low chance of suffering severe Covid in the first place, but also already have substantial immunity from severe disease thanks to the first two jabs, I cannot see how boosting them is more valuable for public health than doubling our focus on the most vulnerable and cracking down on the backlog of chronically sick patients, such as those with hypertension, diabetes or even cancer.
Their narrative (before someone calls me a shill):
They upped one on us.
Counter this if you can fam
Former Vaccine Taskforce Chief Clive Dix has said the “vaccines were not designed to end transmission”. In a key confession that demolishes the Government’s strategy behind vaccine passports and vaccine coercion, the former Interim Chair of the U.K. Vaccine Taskforce writes in the Telegraph that “the vaccines will not stop the spread of the virus in the short or medium term”.
Blasting the U.K.’s current booster strategy for “sacrificing the care of elderly diabetes for the very marginal benefit of boosting the antibody concentrations of the young and healthy”, Dix writes he fears that we will be “inadvertently causing a lot of human suffering”.
Given that young and healthy people not only have a very low chance of suffering severe Covid in the first place, but also already have substantial immunity from severe disease thanks to the first two jabs, I cannot see how boosting them is more valuable for public health than doubling our focus on the most vulnerable and cracking down on the backlog of chronically sick patients, such as those with hypertension, diabetes or even cancer.