Jab debate is growing more wretched by the day

Which COVID mutation will you inhale at your local shops on April 14, 2022, Nick Bailey (Letters, 13/4)? The answer will determine how happy you should really be with your recent AstraZeneca vaccine.

If it’s the UK variant, good news — you have 70 per cent protection against getting infected. However, if it’s the South African variant, you’ve brought a knife to a gunfight — 10 per cent protection, according to a recently published trial. By comparison, the Pfizer vaccine gives much better (but still not perfect) protection against all variants.

The AZ vaccine is like insuring your house against burglary, but not fire or flood; Pfizer by comparison is comprehensive cover.

The dangerous irony is that the new federal government rule (Pfizer for under-50s, AZ for over-50s) gives our most-protective vaccines to our younger healthier citizens, who are at miniscule risk of dying from COVID anyway; but less-protective shots to our older citizens, who have a much higher risk of death or serious disease.

Given that there seems no alternative, it is reasonable to press on with the AZ jabs: some protection is better than none. However, the government must now release its plan to top up our immunity with further shots before we throw open our gates to the world.

Dr Anthony Pane, Brisbane, Qld

Adam Creighton’s columns are normally a delight to read, but his latest, “Getting back to our BC (before Covid) world” (13/4), is a disappointment.

Creighton implies that once vaccinated, a person should no longer need to wear a mask, and he puts great stress on vaccination passports as a way for people to prove that they are vaccinated and hence virus-free.

The inference is that a vaccinated person does not carry, and cannot transmit, the virus. A search of credible sources reveals that this is not true; the vaccinated person’s immune system is strengthened so that if he/she catches the virus then serious illness is less likely to occur, but the virus can still be present in the vaccinated person, and transmission, though possibly reduced through reduction in viral load, is certainly not eliminated.

Martin Sirovs, Upper Kedron, Qld

Adam Creighton’s optimism is a tonic for fearful times. That gloomy Scottish essayist Thomas Carlyle described economics as “the dismal science”. If true, then one exception to that norm is your economics editor, now Washington correspondent. His latest offering brings sense and sensibility to a wretched pandemic vaccine debate: sense by his valiant efforts to bring a much-needed risk-assessment perspective to COVID-19 and sensibility by his unselfish acceptance of a vaccination, thereby “helping in a small way to put others at ease and to bring an end to this awful (COVID) chapter”. May Creighton’s efforts help toward the joyful restoration of our half-forgotten BC days.

John Kidd, Auchenflower, Qld

Scott Morrison will lose the next election unless he can get the vaccination rollout going and make it more equitable. I am 82 years of age and have emphysema, my wife is 83 and has high blood pressure. Our medical practice, which would not take vaccination bookings prior to Easter, informed us the first appointment would be August 5. This is after winter. A local pharmacy had booked us for today, but then rang to inform me that the vaccine did not arrive this week. So we are rescheduled for next Wednesday. All we can do is hope the vaccine is delivered. Reading Adam Creighton’s article, it occurred to me that the Americans, who are often denigrated here in Australia, have done a great job in organising their vaccinations. Our Prime Minister and premiers need to get their acts together or beware voters at the next election.

Bob McNeil, Benowa, Qld

Once again, Adam Creighton covers a subject, this time vaccine passports, well and with common sense. He says, “The good news is that the free market can cater to everybody.” He may be right but I am not “holding my breath” concerning any rules with regard to vaccine passports that the states might make when compared with any made by individual businesses. Most of us agree that smoking is hazardous, but it is legal. However, businesses such as pubs cannot put up a notice saying “smokers are welcome here”. I can see something similar applying.

Dr A. Ian Wilson, Kings Park, SA