I seem to have hit a nerve with this. However, the vaccination campaign here in the city has been characterized right from the beginning by poor administration (remember the chaos at Luna park: "Hombres y mujeres de más de 80 años, principal grupo de riesgo en el marco de la pandemia de coronavirus, tuvieron que esperar durante horas bajo el sol, aglomerados, sin sillas ni agua", which was repeated at several other vaccination centres over the following days). The health minister had one thing to do on that first day: to be present in person and ensure the most hopeful event of the year was a success. This failure alone would be sufficient cause to remove him from his post.
But the vaccination campaign has also been characterized by poor decision-making, in particular the decision to extend the vaccination centres to include private health companies ("17% de las dosis son administradas por obras sociales y prepagas, sin control del Estado"), at the same time as the city government was continually whingeing about not having enough vaccines. Here's an analogy: imagine you're a director of strategic planning at the Hospital Italiano, you have 41 operating theatres, and there is a shortage of anaesthetic. How will you solve the problem? By creating more operating theatres? Of course not. The decision to create more vaccination centres simply creates more channels and more opportunities to lose track of the vaccine doses. It's inexplicable from a health or a logistical viewpoint.
I've commented previously on how Quiros says he's studying the COVID case number trends, and then announces openings and relaxations on the days of the highest case peaks. Even if you discount my idea that politics rather than health drive his policies, it shouldn't be too hard to set targets of how many new cases per 100,000 people, or a target r-number, rather than weaseling out of his responsibility to provide transparency by saying he's "studying the trends".
Also, the city campaign, after vaccinating the over-represented senior citizens and medical personnel, still lags the province's campaign even as the relatively fewer under 60s are being vaccinated. The age groups open later, unvaccinated seniors are invited to come without appointment later, and so on.
And finally, we have the invented controversy of the 2nd doses. Quiros has already tried this one before, when under-60s were to be the next age group to be vaccinated, and he seemed to have been forced into a U-turn then. Now he's trying it on again. Again, it's not driven by medical concerns, as one of the articles Gracielle quoted has it: "What has been recommended in many countries is to prioritize the first dose and defer the second to reach as many people as possible. Vaccination schedules are always completed". Even if under 40s are less likely to suffer serious consequences from COVID, they are the group with most mobility, through work, socializing, or whatever, so they are also the group most likely to spread the virus. By vaccinating these people, more people are protected, whereas vaccinating a less mobile senior citizen protects only that one person. But guess which age group is more likely to vote for Larreta and Quiros' party? There is published data for the last provincial elections if you have any doubts.
Maybe Quiros should have remained at the Hospital Italiano, there would be no shame in that, but as health minister he's a living embodiment of the Peter Principle, and for all his exaggerated pseudo-empathic grimacing at his press conferences, he's as untrustworthy as any politician. Perhaps I'm alone in my opinion, but I don't believe a word he says anymore.
