The New York Times is accused of spreading false information about coronavirus vaccination guidelines in the UK, after posting a misleading report on social media.
In an article entitled “Britain opens door for mix-and-match vaccinations, concerns experts”, New York Times Author Katherine J Wu claims that the UK “has quietly updated its vaccination playbook to enable a mix-and-match vaccine regimen”.
The editor of the British medical journal, Fiona Godlee, denied this allegation and requested the left-wing American newspaper to issue a “very visible correction” immediately according to the BBC.
Me. Godlee has the characterization of the New York Times reports as “seriously misleading and requires urgent correction” and that there is currently no recommendation from the government to “mix and match” different coronavirus vaccines.
Contrary to NYT’s claims, Dr Mary Ramsay, head of public health vaccinations in England, said: “We do not recommend mixing the Covid-19 vaccines. If your first dose is the Pfizer vaccine, you should not receive the AstraZeneca vaccine for you, second dose and vice versa. “
Dr Ramsay said that although there may be “extremely rare occasions” when the second dose of a vaccine is not available, or if it is unknown which vaccine the patient initially received, it may be better to take a second dose of give a different vaccine than not all “.
The UK Government’s Green Paper on Coronavirus Vaccinations states that ‘every effort should be made to ensure that patients receive the same vaccine for the second dose. It is further noted that: ‘For individuals who have started the schedule and who are attending vaccination at a place where the same vaccine is not available, or if the first product received is unknown, it is reasonable to take one dose locally available product to complete the schedule. ”
The NYT did not respond to the demands of the BMJ, but subsequently published a second article in which they reviewed their previous position. Other newspapers such as the Guardian and Reuters subsequently also reported the stories, but with reference to British government officials rejecting the NYT’s claims that the advice is an official policy, while doing so.
Ⓘ. https://t.co/2CFQ7a3cMP
– The Spectator (@spectator) 2 January 2021
The controversy comes as the UK government plans to launch the Oxford / AstraZeneca vaccine this week, following the Pfizer / BioNTech vaccine, which was launched in the UK in December.
Although both vaccines require two doses, they use different methods. The Oxford jab is based on traditional vaccine methods and the Pfizer / BioNTech injection used by a new mRNA technology.
The post on Twitter by The New York Times has been widely shared since it was published on January 1, with more than 3,000 retweets. Despite the shouts from British officials, Twitter did not remove the message or label it as misleading, apparently contrary to the misinformation of social media’s own coronavirus. policy.
The technical giant of the Silicon Valley has been quite active in censoring or labeling posts on the coronavirus that he considers misleading, especially posts from President Donald Trump, as well as from Breitbart News.
The report for the British magazine The spectator had fun with this contradiction, share the New York Times posted with the remark: “This claim is not based on facts and is shared by an unreliable source.”
‘Not since Nazi Germany have we seen anything NYT is guilty of, which is an established news organization that openly normalizes the idea of choosing who lives and who dies, not on the basis of race and skin color.
The Hippocratic oath disappears. “Https://t.co/Y9YEQIrr2D
– Breitbart News (@BreitbartNews) 19 December 2020
Follow Kurt Zindulka here on Twitter: @KurtZindulka