The independent FDA advisory committee is made up of experts from across the country, and are not employees of the FDA. They don't represent a narrow view, quite the opposite.
Your perception is off again. I said why had Davey Boy had just cut and pasted a narrower view? That is in the headline.
endorses narrower use
They voted 16-2 against giving the booster vaccine to young people after debating the evidence. That is the truth.
Seems reasonable. I wouldn't go against their conclusions. Would you? Would you think you could be better credentialed to oppose them on any decisions?
The evidence is not there.
In their regard the data isn't enough for them to conclude. It's not lacking of evidence. I wouldn't go against their conclusions. Would you? Would you think you could be better credentialed to oppose them on any decisions?
The Israeli study they cited showed the vaccine booster is effective for those in the at risk groups.
Yes. It was spectacular according to Dr Peter English.
Food and Drug Administration advisory panel voted unanimously on Friday in favor of a booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine for people 65 and older and for individuals at high risk for severe disease, with the shot given at least six months after their initial vaccination.The vote came after the independent committee unexpectedly voted 16-2 against advising the agency to approve boosters for anyone 16 and older after hours of debate. Members' concerns centered on the amount and quality of data available to weigh the booster's long-term effectiveness and its safety in young people."
I see you picked up on my reasoning for Davey Boy only presenting the narrow view. There was more to the story that I didn't read due to not disabling ad blocker and tracking protection but sought from FDA website..
