I think it's highly unlikely that anti-vax and vaccine hesitant folks are paying much attention at all to Pfizer or the FDA. They're getting their misinformation from other sources.
I see your point. For example, I am ignoring the vaccine advice of my cousin in Trinidad and have turned down my other cousin's offer of Ivermectin. I do think that some of the anti-vaxxer influencers may use this as fodder to add fuel to myths they peddle, but they and their listeners probably were going to be singing that tune anyway.
Actually, I think my post was misunderstood.
I'm all for keeping the front line workers on the job.
My post was on one hand the message is the vaccines are great at protecting with only two doses. Then the other message is folks at high risk needed a booster. Just needed a clarification on the reasoning.
I agree. There seems to be a mixed message that people are safe except for some unclearly defined group. I haven't even seen the reasoning from the FDA that keeping workers on the job is the reason for boosters for some people. And they haven't yet defined who is the "high risk" and how that will be determined. Is it high risk for infection or high risk for severe disease? Health care workers are highly likely to qualify. But, what about people who work in bars and restaurants who are at higher risk to contract the disease but are in their 20s? What about teachers? Which teachers? Elementary school kids aren't eligible to get vaccinated yet. But, at least where I live, there seems to be a higher rate of infection among older kids. What about people who are obese and diabetic and appear to have a higher chance of being hospitalized or dying if they have a breakthrough infection?
The FDA will be making decisions about some of these things later this week, and hopefully that will provide some clarity. It also would be helpful if they explained why the age cut-off is different here than in the U.K. and Israel.