breathtaking. declaring population-based distribution of vaccines to low/middle-income countries unethical but ignoring global allocation & WHY they’re getting 3% now;20% of pops vaccinated in 2021 via covax.
No! This is not an ethics frame work... nytimes.com/2021/05/24/opi…
No! This is not an ethics frame work... nytimes.com/2021/05/24/opi…
How can you consider ethics while ignoring rich countries? Authors treat “nations expecting to have extra doses, including the United States and Britain” as arbiters of ethics as they vaccinate young and heathy people, refuse to share doses or knowledge? No....
No. The ethics prob is NOT attempts to avoid a crisis and cover all HCW in LMICs. Show me the ethical framework in which High Income countries hoarding vaccines should decide who needs the left overs they have more... no.
to be clear: argument👆here is Malawi should not have been given vaccines to cover 3.6% of adult population b/c when they received vaccines *18 days* before they expired they were only able to administer 80% of them.
To say this misses the forest for the trees is generous.
To say this misses the forest for the trees is generous.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
