It seems to me that ATAGI has been on a power trip ever since the COVID vaccines came to market. They assumed that a policy of eliminating all possible risks and side-effects from the vaccine was more important than getting the vaccines into as many Aussies arms as possible given the non-existence of COVID in the country. However, what these think tanks like the ATAGI and AMA fail to take into account is the emotional trauma the lockdown Australia has been in since March 2020 has had on all of us. Let's face it, the country was locked down since March 2020, sure shops have remained largely open, but when it comes to travelling domestically or internationally that has been all off the cards for many. Some of us have not seen our relatives in several years right now and the way things are going with the vaccine roll out it may be several more years before this lockdown ends. They also assumed (incorrectly) that we will always be staying at this COVID-zero state when as we've seen in the past several weeks that's frankly not a reality be it in Melbourne or Perth, Sydney or Brisbane, Darwin or Gold Coast. Why is it virtually every other country in the world has accepted AstraZeneca (with few provisos), yet we're still dinking around trying to figure out how to administer vaccines?
I am perplexed by ATAGI's sudden appearance in the spotlight. Its terms of reference do not contemplate such a public facing role. It is a mere technical adviser to the Minister for Health. In particular, ATAGI's terms of reference do not contemplate announcements to the public. The correct process, as a matter of law and convention, is that the advisor should advise the Minister of the Crown, the executive should consider the advice and develop policy, and then the executive should engage with the public.
The Australian vaccination programme has been a dismal failure, for several reasons. First, and this is one where I don't necessarily lay all of the blame at the government's feet (but nevertheless it appears that it has suffered from an appalling lack of thinking on these matters), the strategy of the eggs in not enough baskets was foolish. Having a local vaccine manufacturing capability is great, but building multiple redundancies into any widescale logistics programme is sensible. There was nothing stopping Australia from taking the same position as did Canada and ordering vaccines from multiple manufacturers. The Australian government is a monopsony purchaser of pharmaceuticals that are part of the PBS, and commands significant purchasing power with global pharmacos.
Secondly, using GPs as a primary vaccine administration route was profoundly idiotic. A mass vaccination campaign requires a mass logistics programme. Mass vaccination centres, staffed by every available medical (doctors, nurse practitioners and nurses) and paramedical (pharmacists, med and nursing students, paramedics) professional, current and retired, anyone who is capable of delivering an IM injection. Setting up legal structures to provide indemnities etc are the mere strokes of parliamentary pens and are not material impediments.
Thirdly, a better booking and record keeping system needed to be developed and rolled out. Make it super easy for everyone to book their appointment - web, telephone, in person.
Fourthly, if the people don't come to you, go to the people. Mobile immunisation vans sent off to remote communities, etc etc.
And before anyone says "it can't be done", it has been done - by Canada. A country comparable to Australia in foundational structures, wealth, population size (greater than Australia, in fact), public health system and issues such as remote communities.
The handling of AZ was appalling (and I've said it before I think, so was Canada's). The clotting issue has not been given any sort of proportion or sufficient contextual explanation, particularly when you have this situation in play (see:
British Medical Journal Article):
At first I could understand why Australia went into a lockdown the way it did, it protected communities and businesses. But one has to wonder at some point, are these measures of keeping the lockdown whilst dragging one's heels when it comes to vaccination actually starting to hurt businesses? When is enough, enough for Qantas? Have they not suffered enough having lost well over a year of international flights? What about the hoteliers, tour operators, and restaurants that could count on tourists landing in Sydney, Adelaide, Melbourne, and Brisbane like clockwork in January?
I agree completely. In the early days it was sensible. But the problem was no thought to the medium to longer term future was given. No thought was given to how to inform people that things would not and could not stay like that forever. The pandemic was used for ulterior purposes. They may have been successful purposes, but it is disgusting that happened.
Frankly, I think it is high time we regulate how the AMA and ATAGI communicate with the public. Just as you wouldn't sell a packet of cigarettes without warning labels cautioning you on the health effects of the product, nor should we allow these "experts" to spew their beliefs without a disclosure that what they are saying are opinions and should not be construed as medical advice. Many Aussies have incorrectly assumed that what the AMA and ATAGI say is gospel and must be followed like a hard and fast rule. In reality, it is one expert's feelings on a subject.
Your Trusty,
KangarooFlyer88
Regulating communication by the AMA with the public falls into the difficult basket. As a private association, so long as its communications are not otherwise prohibited by the laws of the land (defamation, restrictions on pharmaceutical and medical services advertising, anti-discrimination and anti-vilification laws, etc), it can say what it likes.
ATAGI is different. As a government established advisory group, the government can define what it says to whom. As I mentioned, its terms of reference do not contemplate a public facing role. I've attached them so folks can see for themselves that the terms of reference are quite limited indeed.
