Glad to be at @IndianaRHA annual meeting hearing from @StateHealthIN Commissoner Dr. Box about 2020 #covid19 challenges and 2021 opportunities! “Hindsight is 2020- but the future is now!” #ruralhealth
One lesson learned (that I completely agree with) from Dr. Box - “the strategic National Stockpile was never designed/ intended to provide supplies to the entire country, for a prolonged period of time.”
We must figure out local redistribution and surge planning for future.
More from Dr. Box- “at this time last year we’d have been ecstatic to have been assured of one vaccine with 50% efficacy by this point in 2021. Instead we had 2 vaccines with >90% efficacy by December. This is a National success story. “
Dr Box gives a shout out to @GovHolcomb for listening to his health officials throughout the pandemic, and walking the line between protecting the public from #COVID19, and supporting the economy and supporting Hoosiers ability to go to school and to earn a living.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Some have asked for the “data” supporting my tweet. The risk of a correlating death after vaccination is less than 2/1000th of a percent. (And that’s all reported deaths but correlation doesn’t = causation). The correlation actually ⬇️ the younger you are. cdc.gov/coronavirus/20…
About 2600 people under age 30 have died in US from Covid. As best as I can find (hard to get a breakdown of such rare events) that’s 100s to 1000x the number of correlated deaths after vaccine in that age group. Hence risk of vax clearly less than risk of Covid. Even for young.
This is all in the context of continuing viral spread. Because risk from Covid is obviously directly related to risk of being infected in first place. IF we get Covid under control, the risk/ benefit ratio could change. But right now risk of infection still high in places.
States like Alaska, FL, & WV initially led the way in vaccinations, while some said they wouldn’t trust a rushed “Trump vaccine.” Now those same states resist a “Biden” vax effort.
Politicization- by everyone- has hurt our chances of broad immunity. cnn.com/2021/06/04/hea…
I’ve often said, you can win an election by appealing to 51% and shaming the other 49% but you can’t beat #COVID19 that way. And you can’t decide one day to flip engagement and trust on like a light switch. This is going to take a while, and there has to be earnest effort.
We’ve waited too long to see true & aggressive outreach (workplaces, primary care offices, churches) vs lottery and beer giveaways.
I’d love to see Biden in more conservative states praising the Govs + ones that are doing well. And less talk of “red states” doing poorly…
B.1.617.2 - AKA the India variant- is coming. And it’s primed to disproportionately decimate black and brown communities (d/t lower #covid19 vaccination rates, urban + crowded living settings, and more prevalent comorbidities) if we don’t step up our vax game ASAP...
Why aren’t we seeing more tangible vaccine access and outreach efforts at federal, state, and local levels? Especially while in the midst of easing public protective measures? This is yet another example of privilege and institutional bias.
An important point about hesitancy in minority communities, and the idea that people who won’t jump through hoops to get one either really don’t want it, or don’t deserve it...
Many of us get claim summaries in the mail, barely looking at them before throwing them away. But they reveal the deep inequities and flaws in our system. This is one I recently received for my wife. You must look beyond the summary- insane as it is- to see the real problems. 🧵
$31,000 billed- for a single medication?! How is that reasonable? But insurance only paid 13 cents on the dollar. So what if you didn’t have insurance? Well you’d be billed the entire amount, which both insurer and healthcare institution tacitly agree is 87% too much...
You don’t have $31,000? Well a collections agency can buy your “debt” from the healthcare institution- who may end up with almost as much as insurance would’ve paid them anyway. The debt collector agrees to settle with you for half of what you “owe” ($15k), and keeps the margin.
Honest question that has bothered me for quite a while. When the headline or the framing of the article is more (or solely) about the interviewer and his/ her questioning than the responder and his/ her answers- is that really objective “news”?
Put another way, should the goal of “news” tilt towards “this is what person of interest X” thinks on the subject of the day, vs “this is the awesome question our reporter asked to own person X”? Because it frustrates me to see more headlines about the reporter vs the subject.
I mention this is because I’ve got friends on both “sides” who are blind to it. But you can go to the websites and see it clearly at any point in time. Do people really care about the pithy question- or the answer? And what does it say about us if we focus on/value one vs other?