India’s Vaccine Interval Shuffle: A Tale of Mixed Signals
When the Indian government decided to stretch the time between AstraZeneca shots from 6‑8 weeks to 12‑16 weeks, it sparked a fire‑eye debate that left scientists scratching their heads. The move came just as vaccine stocks were thinning out and the country was racing against a surge in COVID cases.
The Official Story
On May 13, the Ministry of Health rolled out the new dosing schedule. “We’re basing this on real‑world evidence—mostly from the UK,” the officials said. NTAGI, the National Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation, was credited as the source, according to the press release.
But insiders from NTAGI were quick to point out a glaring gap: the group only had data for an 8‑12 week interval. No one had actually studied what happens when you push the gap to 12‑16 weeks.
Inside the Advisory Circle
- M. D. Gupte, former director at the National Institute of Epidemiology: “NTAGI suggested 8‑12 weeks, which aligns with WHO’s guidance. Anything beyond that is uncharted territory.”
- Mathew Varghese: “Our recommendation was strictly for 8‑12 weeks. After that, we’re flying blind.”
- J.P. Muliyil, member of the COVID working group: “The 12‑16 week target wasn’t discussed in any official recommendation.”
They all echoed one common sentiment: the ministry’s decision wasn’t based on solid data for the longer interval.
Government vs. Scientists: Who Took the Lead?
While the Ministry tweeted that “there was no dissenting voice among NTAGI members,” the advisory team quietly clarified that only 8‑12 weeks had consensus backing. In contrast, the government’s NEGVAC (the vaccine execution committee) shrugged off the controversy, stating they were simply following the “NTAGI’s lead.”
Real‑World Numbers: A Silver Lining?
South Korea’s early data showed that one dose of AstraZeneca or Pfizer was 86.6 % effective for people over 60. Some in the advisory group found this encouraging, but they still stuck with the cautious 8‑12 week window.
With AstraZeneca accounting for about 90 % of the 257.5 million doses administered in India, the decision impacts the country’s entire vaccination strategy.
Variant Concerns and Public Frustration
Critics argue the delay might weaken protection against the newer, more aggressive variants that have been shaking up the nation since April. In response, the government insists labs were tracking variants in real time and sharing data with local authorities.
Shahid Jameel, a renowned virologist who recently left the government’s virus‑variant panel, told reporters: “When a dangerous variant is circulating, we need to crank up vaccination, not hold back.” He urged the authorities to clarify why the gap was doubled.
The Bottom Line
While the Ministry claims the extended interval was scientifically justified, the advisory panel’s whistle‑blowing suggests otherwise—a classic case of “evidence” vs. “policy.” The real question is whether a longer gap will help or hinder India’s fight against COVID, especially under the looming threat of new variants.
