Jab dissonance mustn’t translate into hesitancy
PremiumThe ICMR has sought to reassure us that post-jab covid infections are very rare. Yet, many seem unsure of vaccine efficacy. We need clearer data. And mutations kept under close watch
If panic sets in, it can make any situation a lot worse than it already is. Unfortunately, the turn taken by the covid pandemic in India appears to be doing just that. The alarming spike in infections and buckling of our health infrastructure under their weight have caused trepidation of a kind unfelt before. Word of a new triple-mutant variant of Sars-Cov-2 in West Bengal, one that is also believed to carry mutations found in the dreaded South African and Brazilian strains, has heightened anxiety over the efficacy of vaccines formulated before the virus began altering its genetic make-up. This week was replete with instances of fully-vaccinated folks testing covid positive. To be sure, one’s body takes some time after a second dose to develop antibodies that resist covid, and the purpose of vaccination is to prevent illness, not provide foolproof insulation from the pathogen. Yet, dissonance over the immunity offered by vaccines has grown. On Wednesday, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) sought to quell doubts. But some of these persist, with hair being split over this jab versus that for one strain or another. Such confusion must not translate into jab hesitancy.
According to the ICMR, it is very rare for the virus to defy the protective shield of a jab. By this state-run research agency’s findings, of the 1.7 million-plus people who got the two prescribed doses of Covaxin, which it co-developed with Bharat Biotech, only 0.04% or so tested positive; and of the 15.7 million-plus who took both their shots of Covishield, made by Serum Institute of India, just about 0.03% did. Its single-dose numbers also suggest just a tiny likelihood of catching the bug post-jab. This dataset, however, is drawn from a statistical collation, rather than from a clinical study designed expressly to check how well our vaccines work against specific mutants. Surely, not all jab recipients were tested, so the percentages cited are too rough to be conclusive. They also jar with casual observations in several social circles. As for the laboratory studies done by the ICMR and National Institute of Virology, little has been made public so far. Nor is it clear if these findings would be available for global peer review. Apart from an Indian double-mutant, the South African, Brazilian and British variants of the virus were examined, as the ICMR stated. It also said—sans data elaboration—that Covaxin was found to work “well" against these. This statement was taken by some as a sign of Covaxin’s superiority over Covishield, whose ability to fend off the South African strain recently ran into a controversy.
TRENDING STORIESSee All
While an open market for vaccines may soon grant people their preferences, there is no information at this juncture that would let definitive calls be taken on what can shield us better from which variant. True, genomic research does point to the freak chance of Sars-CoV-2 evolving beyond the reach of current jabs, but whether this has occurred remains uncertain. Nevertheless, the haze that hangs over the issue demands both clearer communication by the ICMR and high alertness on various mutations, so that we do not fall behind the curve of scientific knowledge and vaccines can quickly be adapted, if need be. We do not know if and when newer strains will emerge. What we do know is that vaccines, by and large, are effective. They sharply reduce one’s overall probability of falling prey to covid-19. This is reason enough to get jabbed.
Click here to read the Mint ePaperMint is now on Telegram. Join Mint channel in your Telegram and stay updated with the latest business news.