Agency leaders said there was evidence to justify approval only for older people and those with medical conditions. Many others may not be able to get the shots.
Haven’t read the article, and assume there is some Republican fuckery here.
However, usually things like vaccines/medicine the question is risk vs reward. If you are likely to get it and have a severe case, then the risk of “untested” vaccine/medicine might be worth it. For healthy people the risk of “untested” methods usually isn’t worth it.
That being said, I think in this case its about politics and not risk vs reward.
Haven’t read the article, and assume there is some Republican fuckery here.
However, usually things like vaccines/medicine the question is risk vs reward. If you are likely to get it and have a severe case, then the risk of “untested” vaccine/medicine might be worth it. For healthy people the risk of “untested” methods usually isn’t worth it.
That being said, I think in this case its about politics and not risk vs reward.
Someone elsewhere pointed to the paper talking about it - yes, they intend to withhold approvals.