Is Blair’s three-month second dose delay idea really so bad? Yes, I am afraid it is

January 11, 2021

by Martin Odoni

Tony Blair is advising the Government on how to handle the Covid-19 pandemic.

Tony Blair.

That is… Tony Blair.

A lawyer.

A man with minimal training, and no serious qualifications, in science, let alone medical science or human biology.

Tony Blair is advising on the pandemic.

Please, let that sink in.

This Thatcherite lawyer thinks he can advise on medical matters?

Now, as any regular reader of this blog will know, I have little time for the former Prime Minister who, despite being a Labour man, oversaw one of the greatest, most damaging increases in inequality Britain has ever seen, during his decade in office. He deserves credit for tightening safety nets somewhat for people at the bottom of society, but his utter disinterest in combating inequality allowed enormous wealth and power to concentrate at the top. The effect of this has been to create a new uber-stratum that is so rich and has so much influence that they are now, effectively, free to behave in any way they choose, ignoring many laws. The oligarchy-in-the-making can simply buy its way around rules to a growing degree. Fines for law-breaches can be in the hundreds of thousands of pounds, but are meaningless, as they amount to a couple of hours’ wages. Meanwhile, these vast fortunes cause economic damage, as they slow the circulation of money around society.

And that is before even considering what a startling war-monger Blair proved to be.

Therefore, it is unsurprising that I oppose Blair being involved in any way in the country’s attempts to fight the pandemic. But my opposition is not just about, “If-Blair-says-it-do-anything-else.” My opposition, as implied above, is that Blair is unskilled in science, including crucially medicine. He has already demonstrated this in quite startling fashion.

Blair’s initial intervention in the pandemic, in the lead-up to Christmas, was a particularly inept bit of ‘Choice Economics’ (arbitrary statisitcal targeting) writ large. The vaccine developed by Pfizer needs to be administered in two doses, recommended to be approximately two-to-three weeks apart. But supplies of it are short and will be slow to arrive in the UK. Blair therefore publicly encouraged the Government to delay the second dose for people who have already had the first, and to reallocate the vaccines to people who have received no doses at all, spreading protection further around the population.

This is exceptionally ignorant advice, and anyone who has ever had to take a course of medicine prescribed by their doctor should be able to explain why. Particularly, doctors are always at pains when prescribing medicine to tell patients to make sure that they complete the full course of medicine within the allotted time period, and not to skip a single dose – even if they are feeling better days sooner.

The reason why is simple, Darwinian, natural selection. Early in the course, the medicine will be highly effective at combating the bacteria/virus strains most vulnerable to it. Within a few days, most of the ‘alien’ substances or microbes will have been destroyed by the immune system, thanks to the fortification of the medicine, and so, of course, the patient will feel a lot better before the course is completed. But there will almost certainly still be some of the invading substances, be they germs or viruses, left over. These are the ones that, by the freak of random mutation during the spread and reproduction of the illness, have a feature of some kind that offers partial resistance to the medicine. This mutation is likely to be slight at this stage, so continued exposure to the medicine should still be enough to kill it off, just more slowly. But if the medicine dosage is stopped instead, the mutated invader will not only still be there, it will be present in all the surviving remnants of the illness. Therefore, the mutated form with this bit of resistance becomes the dominant form, and as it starts to reproduce and re-spread, all of the new specimens will have that resistant feature. With each cycle of reproduction, the mutation is encouraged to develop further, and the disease becomes even more resistant to the medicine.

So, if the dosage is skipped for long enough, the mutation could continue to the point where the medicine ceases to be effective against it. (Notably, Boris Johnson’s father, after all the harm he has done to efforts against Covid-19, will not face that risk.)

And Blair, who I repeat knows practically bollock-all about medical science, is publicly writing in the national media asking for the delay in administering doses of the anti-SARS-Cov2 vaccine to stretch from three weeks to one quarter of a year. All because, in his Choice Economics-addled mind, part-vaccinating more people sounds better than properly vaccinating fewer. He misses that his proposal would encourage resistance to the vaccine to build up in the virus; if resistant versions of the virus become dominant nationwide, we could be back to square one within months.

I admit I am no Stephen Jay Gould myself, but I do at least understand the Principle of Natural Selection, and the phenomenon of Punctuated Equilibrium, enough to grasp the dangers of overlooking microevolution effects in medicine. Blair, as a Christian, has Creationist leanings, and that alone demands skepticism of his thoughts.

Why doesn’t a major Government try prioritising specialists in the relevant field of science?

Why consult Blair at all? (“Had enough of experts,” Michael Gove?) I fear the answer is pure cynicism. Blair has a history of very effective Public Relations. Controlling the public debate about the pandemic – and ensuring that Johnson’s Administration does not get any of the blame for all the countless needless mistakes it has made in trying to contain its spread – has always been the Government’s only real priority. Saving lives certainly has not.

Therefore, Tony Blair is “more useful” than someone who actually knows about medicine.

Oh, the state of this country…

13 Responses to “Is Blair’s three-month second dose delay idea really so bad? Yes, I am afraid it is”

  1. Terry Norman Says:

    Tory Blair bloody hell !! I wonder what his fee was ?

  2. A6er Says:

    The only phrase that springs to my mind barring expletives of course, is the one uttered by the Scottish character in Dad’s Army….”We’re doomed!”

    I didn’t think this Tory mismanaged pandemic could get any worse.

  3. finolamoss Says:

    Blair created an illegal war that killed millions so cannot be trusted ?

    • Martin Odoni Says:

      Not really discussing his wars, just the severe limits of his medical ‘knowledge’, and how dangerous it therefore is relying on his advice about the pandemic.

    • If the second dose is not given in three weeks after first the receiver of the first dose is susceptible to catching the mutant strain ???

      • Martin Odoni Says:

        Wellllllllllll… need to emphasise that there are a lot of unknowns in this, before we be overly precise or excessively certain. Too long a delay between doses makes a successful mutation likelier to happen and to become dominant. But it’s not guaranteed. For one thing, mutations are random imperfect copies of DNA, and most of them make negligible differences, and some can even be harmful to the mutant specimen’s chances of survival. But when we’re talking a three-month delay, a mutation that improves resistance to the vaccine becoming dominant is, at the very least, fairly likely.

        To repeat, I absolutely do not defend Blair’s war record, but that is neither here nor there. He just doesn’t know much about medicine, or indeed science more broadly, and his advice to delay second doses betrayed that ignorance. He may have been Prime Minister, but he was never a doctor, and so the media, and indeed the Government, should stop assuming his advice will be anything worth a damn.

        The lack of respect for proven, properly-trained and experienced scientists in the neoliberal world is enormously damaging. The same nonsense attitude that the man-in-the-street’s view on any subject is automatically as worthwhile as that of an academic actually educated in that subject, and having spent most of their adult life studying the subject, is absolutely ridiculous. And yet it plays a substantial role in the way modern society is organised. It’s what allows politicians like Michael Gove and Iain Duncan-Smith just to ignore or disparage experts, and do whatever they want to do instead.

      • finolamoss Says:

        Has the mutant strain been isolated as a separate killing disease,? as even C 19 isolated virus has not. And as no vaccine animal tests- which would/might show effect of a second C 19 infection, after a vaccine likely to cause worse infection, analogous to a second bee sting effect

      • Martin Odoni Says:

        Does it need to be?

      • finolamoss Says:

        How can you create an effective vaccine and effect or even necessity. if it is not ?

      • Martin Odoni Says:

        By testing effects of antibodies against it. Whether it’s identified separately or not won’t change the outcome of such investigations.

      • finolamoss Says:

        Therefore, what are they testing antibodies against ? This is what investigations are based on for their outcomes .

      • Martin Odoni Says:

        I’m sorry, I’m not sure I understand the question.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: