Malta’s COVID vaccination programme
Further to my letter published on March 12, I feel compelled to write again about the complete lack of transparency in Malta’s COVID vaccination programme.
The order in which people are being vaccinated does not seem to follow any logic.
Nobody begrudges frontline workers being prioritised but when we read about construction companies and even court registrars demanding priority one cannot help but think powerful lobby groups are having a disproportionate impact.
It has been consistently proven that age is the single biggest risk factor with COVID. Meanwhile, those in public-facing employment are at no greater risk than the wider population in their age cohort, which is mitigated further by COVID safe protocols at work. Yet, prioritisation by age is not being fairly implemented, despite public declarations to the contrary.
Last month, we were told those aged between 60 and 79 would be called for their vaccination. Indeed, I have now had my first dose, yet many of my older friends are still waiting to for their call.
It would have been far better to break the cohort down into smaller groups, starting with the oldest first. It would certainly have been more efficient and stop all the unnecessary calls to 145.
Like Revel Barker, I too am perplexed as to who is ultimately running the programme. Someone, somewhere must be following an agreed protocol. Why can that not be made public so people know where they stand? The process also needs to improve.
Some people have received two sets of appointments while cancellations are not properly registered.
There is also a lack of transparency about the interval between first and second dose. Originally, Malta committed to offering a second dose three weeks after the first.
This is clearly not the case as I have to wait 10 weeks for mine, as do many of my friends, while my husband has only a three-week interval. This extended gap appears to have been introduced by stealth with no rationale to justify the policy change. Again, this confusion would be eliminated with more honest communication.
Furthermore, Chris Fearne was reported confirming second doses are being stored, to allay concerns about supplies. Surely, you would only increase the gap between doses if you were to maximise existing supplies to complete more first doses. If it is true that second doses are being stored, why not provide them at the original three-week interval?
Even the published vaccination figures are confusing.
The headline figure used is the total number of doses administered, with a footnote qualifying that some of these are second doses.
Thus, by April 14 a total 254,885 doses had been administered but 76,593 were second doses, meaning 178,292 people were vaccinated.
I do not know if this is a deliberate attempt to mislead or an innocent mistake but I have seen this headline figure being used in global league tables to imply Malta is further ahead in the percentage of its population vaccinated than it is in reality.
As I write this, it is worth pointing out that cases in Malta per million of population now exceed those in the UK (67,300 vs 64,231)!
I realise there are many other hot topics dominating the headlines at the moment but being as transparent as possible regarding the vaccination programme would go a long way to reducing anxiety and stress in these islands.
Janet Wojtkow – St Julian’s
Dingli cliff face
The dramatic chiaroscuro photo by Sharon Craig of a rock formation at Miġra il-Ferħa with a profile of a human face reminded me of something similar I had come across some 30 years ago, prompting a search among my myriad photographs of the west coast of Malta.
What eventually turned up was a feature on Dingli Cliffs under the Madliena chapel close to the airport radar dome.
There are yellow-red sandstone boulders between the upper and lower coralline layers, easily eroded by rain and wind.
One such formation is shown in the photo.
Filfla can be seen faintly in the background.
Edward Mallia – Attard
Letters to the editor should be sent to editor@timesofmalta.com. Please include your full name, address and ID card number. The editor may disclose personal information to any person or entity seeking legal action on the basis of a published letter.