Did the 90% vaccination target cause dosing intervals to shorten?

Was the 6 week dosing interval change to 3 weeks in New Zealand related to the newly announced government goal to get 90% of the eligible population vaccinated in 2021?

The 90% vaccination target was a target of political success and not based on public health advice.

At the same time as the target (and an announcement that domestic vaccine passes would be used) the dosing intervals were reduced.

Dosing interval advice changes from 6 to 3 weeks in early October 2021

On the 12th of August 2021 then Director-General Ashley Bloomfield announced that the interval between the 1st and 2nd dose had been extended from 3 to 6 weeks for everyone. He gave as rationale that the extra 3 weeks gave a better immune response, and was in-line with advice in other countries.

However the Covid-19 Vaccination Technical Advisory Group (CV-TAG) recommended the longer interval due to safety concerns. The concerns were brushed aside publicly but were an on-going discussion point in the advisory group meetings.

In a 6th of October press conference then Director of Public Health Dr Caroline McElnay (she later quit when Bloomfield quit) announced that the interval had been changed back to 3 weeks.

But this ignores original CV-TAG advice to only require 1 dose in younger people, that the longer interval reduces myocarditis concerns and other side effects, and a longer interval may even generate a better immune response too. And isn’t that the point of vaccination after all?

McElnay said in response to a media question, “…that we make this decision…based on the advice we get from the technical advisory group. Their advice at that time was to move to 6 weeks, now the advice is 3.“

And in answer to another media question as to how the intervals had changed so quickly, “We have sought further advice from the technical group on this issue, because a number of health officials have said to us, that at this moment in time, when we want as many people as possible fully vaccinated, can people be vaccinated before the six weeks, and…the technical advisory group has come back and said that there never was any safety concerns…”

McElnay put the reason squarely on CV-TAG advice - but was that their advice? Was the brushing aside of the 6 week gap due to the new government goal of 90% vaccination?

CV-TAG meeting minutes don’t show any discussion of reducing dosing intervals

There is no evidence within CV-TAG meetings that they discussed it.

CV-TAG had a meeting on the 5th of October, the day before the press conference announcing the change. The Chair, Ian Town, gave an update at the start of the meeting to the group:

The Chair tells the advisory group ‘it has been agreed’ to change the interval between doses to 3 weeks instead of the recommended 6 weeks.

Who agreed?

There is no discussion by CV-TAG of changing the interval in this meeting - it was told to the advisory group by Town. Further down it notes there was discussion on whether a longer interval should be kept for under 30s due to side effects but this was brushed aside within the meeting.

Okay, did they discuss it in their previous meeting perhaps?

Well, yes. In the context of 12 to 15 year olds in their 12th of September meeting - they expressed concern that their advice wasn’t being followed on the 6 week interval. And agreed they needed to re-share their statement on the benefit of longer dosing intervals:

At the end they clearly state - there is no change to the current guidance of 6 week dosing intervals.

Yet in the following 5th of October meeting - the advisory group are told by the Chair the intervals for everyone who is eligible for vaccination are being reduced?

Did they discuss it outside their formal meetings? If they did it went unmentioned.

If something as important as dosing intervals was to change - was there a memo on it? Nope. It’s not mentioned in the meeting minutes, and it’s not listed as a memo on the Ministry of Health website or through OIAs.

Was the dosing interval moving from 6 to 3 weeks due to political pressure to reach 90%?

The 6th of October press conference announcement of the intervals dropping back. to 3 weeks, and the mention of getting people vaccinated quicker - coincided with the Ministry of Health deciding to hit it hard over September and October to maximise vaccine uptake across the population.

All of which also coincided with the government’s announcement of a 90% vaccination target in late September.

The gap in dosing intervals meant people would need to wait longer for a 2nd dose which would have impacted reaching the fully vaccinated 90% target.

On the 22nd of October the Prime Minister announced 90% was the target to release Auckland from it’s months of lock down restrictions in particular. How would it have played if people were still, due to the advisory group advice, waiting on the 6 week interval?

Criticism to move on from Covid and lockdown restrictions was growing daily. Weekly research was showing Aucklander’s were fed up with the ongoing restrictions and the government clearly used the 90% target as the stick to release those restrictions.

A Substacker got an official response to their questions which stated, “It is important to note that the decisions made in New Zealand’s response to the Covid-19 pandemic are influenced by a myriad of factors beyond advice from CV TAG. These decisions sit within the wider framework of epidemiological, economic, legal and political considerations.”

This clearly shows that medical and scientific advice could be, and was, ignored.

It looks like the dosing interval change, alongside the 90% vaccination target, was a political decision and not a public health decision.

End of post bonus - everyone’s favorite vaccine advisory group minutes

This is a history substack and in the interest of sharing the history - here is the collected work of some dedicated requestors to get CV-TAG minutes and memo’s in scattered and confusing OIAs:

• 2nd February 2021 to 23rd of March 2021 minutes are here.

• 13th of April 2021 to 31st of August 2021 minutes are here.

• 7th September 2021 to 5th October 2021 minutes are here.

• 9th of November 2021 to 20th of January 2022 minutes are here.

• 20th of January 2022 to 11th of October 2022 minutes are also now on the Ministry of Health website here.

• 19th July 2022 to 11th October 2022 minutes are here.

• 15th February 2022 to 21st of June 2022 minutes, including their terms of reference are here.

Memo’s of the group’s decisions are available on the Ministry of Health website and are also in OIAs.

• 4th of August 2021 to 3rd of November 2021 memos are here.

  These memos cover priority groups for 12 to 15yr olds, co-administration of Covid vaccines with other vaccines, guidance for vaccinating people who were incorrectly vaccinated, recognised vaccines at the border, extra doses for people who are immunocompromised, decisions on using AstraZeneca and temporary medical exemptions guidance.

• 17th of November 2021 to 21st of February 2022 memos are here.
  These memos cover updated recommendations for extra doses for people who are immunocompromised, vaccine mandates for the under 18s, recommendations for 5 to 11 years, update to recommendations on booster in pregnant people and immunocompromised, priority groups for boosters, more guidance on boosters, using Novavax, 2nd dose interval timings for 5 to 11 years and boosters in 12 to 17 years.