Rome, June 19, 2021 – Il first Draghi he explained it thus: “Everyone is free to do the second dose with AstraZeneca provided that he has the doctor’s opinion and informed consent “. In other words, freedom, yes, but not to harm oneself. In the circular issued yesterday by the ministry it is specified:” According to what is highlighted by the CTS, without prejudice to the priority indication of second dose with mRNA vaccine, inspired by a principle of maximum caution aimed at preventing the onset of VITT phenomena in subjects at low risk of developing serious COVID-19 disease and by a principle of fairness that requires to ensure all subjects equal conditions in balancing benefits / risks, if a subject under the age of 60, after receiving the first dose of Vaxzevria vaccine, even in the face of documented and accurate information provided by the vaccinator or by the operators of the vaccination center on the risks of VITT, refuses without possibility of conviction, crossing to the mRNA vaccine, the second dose of Vaxzev can be administered after acquiring adequate informed consent ria “.
To better understand the mechanism, we asked five questions to Filippo Anelli, President Fnomceo, the National Federation of the Orders of Surgeons and Dentists.
What should be done?
“We must restore the rules. It is in the doctor-patient relationship that the problem is solved. The mechanism put in place so far has not taken into due account the procedures followed in the administration of drugs. Doctors have always carried out the examination of a person, also on the basis of anamnesis, clinical history. And then they decide the type of therapy.
However, the indications have changed over time. There is no risk of confusion like this?
“Medicines do not represent static situations. The indications and recommendations vary over time due to studies, observations, surveillance. So doctors are used to knowing indications and contraindications. And then they decide freely on the basis of the characteristics of the individual. “Even the judiciary in the face of so many appeals has always said, the last word is up to the doctor. We must not generalize. First the examination on the patient then the decision. In the end, health is in the hands of the doctors. Draghi said it.” Since yesterday I have seen a glimmer of rationality in the question ”.
Isn’t it late to do the analysis in the hub, just before being vaccinated?
“The procedure should include making the 4 vaccines available to doctors. They decide on the basis of the analysis. The best thing would have been to go to family doctors. But Arcuri has chosen the path of hubs. Change today? It seems very complicated to me. Maybe when the situation is calmer we can think about it ”.
So who’s the final decision?
“To the doctor. And it must be shared by the citizen. Because the principle is sacrosanct. Nobody can administer a drug against the will of the person “.
But what if the doctor says no and the citizen disagrees?
“The person cannot be vaccinated. Because we are not talking about self-administration ”.
© All rights reserved