Dr. Kwan, I am wondering if you would reconsider including specific “projection” dates for meeting the vaccine target threshold (i.e. your current 2040 projection).

I’d like to respectfully point out a few reasons why you shouldn’t keep doing this, at least for now.

Thread 1/7 https://twitter.com/jkwan_md/status/1344660398562299904

First, it’s not a good faith best effort to estimate when vaccine coverage will be achieved.

We all know that vaccine supply and vaccination efforts are nascent and will ramp up dramatically.

Other doctors have pointed this out.

2/7 https://mobile.twitter.com/DocJeffD/status/1344444000854413312

In addition, the procurement efforts led by @AnitaOakville and her team will not only lead to much more Pfizer and Moderna supply over Q1 and Q2, but hopefully J&J, Novavax and perhaps others starting in Q1, which would accelerate the timeline further.

3/7

Because the capacity to roll out vaccines will certainly improve over time, your “projections” will consistently skew very pessimistic until the vaccination effort is fully supplied.

I’m not sure that’s helpful to morale.

4/7

I also don’t think that the 2040 estimate is a good faith best effort to calculate the arrival of herd immunity, which will come through a combination of infection and vaccination much, much sooner than that.

Hopefully mostly through vaccination!

5/7

Twitter rewards activating emotions — anger, fear, anxiety. I don’t think we ought to be adding to them with 2040 projection dates that we know have no basis in reality. It only feeds cynicism and despair.

Randy’s tweet is so important:

6/7 https://mobile.twitter.com/horsepharmer/status/1335934300341088256

I just think that we need to be pulling in the same direction for the most important health campaign of our lifetimes.

By all means, let’s advocate to speed up rollout. But let’s do it with an optimistic, forthright spirit.

7/7