Subject: [113attendees] test - 270

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 19:54:45 +0100

Test

I am not a medical specialist.

Hi,

In the rather complex process of admittance of entry in Austria I think
there is a problem in the number 270.  This 270 is the following:
> Two-dose vaccinations are currently valid for 270 days after the
> second or any additional dose.

I think '270' is wrong.  Because where I live that number is rather 180. 
  Because, my vaccination certificate generated in July 2021 expired today.

https://www.austria.info/en/service-and-facts/coronavirus-information/entry-regulations

The interpretation of that number is important.

Mixing people with 270 and others with 180 expiration sounds like those 
with 270 might transmit the virus to those with 180, and a little less 
the inverse.

Maybe it is not that important.

Alex

---

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2022 22:01:46 +0100

I have found the official site that decides the '270' rule in Austria (9
month).  It is a government URL:
https://www.oesterreich.gv.at/en/themen/coronavirus_in_oesterreich/pre-travel-clearance.html

It says: "The second dose of vaccines and any subsequent vaccination
will be recognised for up to 270 days after they are received."

The law text in Austrian language is
https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfrage=Bundesnormen&Gesetzesnummer=20011574

This number '270' is different than the one in my country - '210' (7
months).  In French it says "Si j’ai reçu 2 doses de vaccin, je dois
faire mon rappel au plus tard 7 mois après ma deuxième injection." at
the France government URL
https://solidarites-sante.gouv.fr/actualites/presse/communiques-de-presse/article/evolution-du-pass-sanitaire-quand-faire-mon-rappel-pour-avoir-un-certificat-de

(there is another problem in France in that they specify 7 months but
implement 6 months in tousanticovid, but that is a local problem; also
there might be a potential problem at international level where certain
papers go to as low as 6 weeks, i.e. 1 1/2 months, if I remember correctly)

Alex

Le 19/01/2022 à 19:54, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit :
> In the rather complex process of admittance of entry in Austria I 
> think there is a problem in the number 270.  This 270 is the 
> following:
> I think '270' is wrong.  Because where I live that number is rather 
> 180. Because, my vaccination certificate generated in July 2021 
> expired today.
> 
> Mixing people with 270 and others with 180 expiration sounds like 
> those with 270 might transmit the virus to those with 180, and a 
> little less the inverse.
>

---

From: Alexandre Petrescu <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2022 13:04:01 +0100

I learn today that that '270' number is way off mark i flooked at from 
other than just my perspective.  To remind, it represents the number of 
accepted days between 2nd dose and 3rd dose (booster).

In an article in Science on the web it is said that in USA that number 
also varied a lot (6 month, 8 and settle on 5, i.e. 150days).  The same 
happened in France but the change was: 9 month, 7, 6, 5 and back to 6 
which was implemented.

This number of days tells how much the protection from vaccine might 
last.  So one would like that number to be as low as possible, but not 
too low to not create other problems (EMA currently recommends against 
too often vaccination _after_ 3rd dose for the public at large; EMA 
updates on Feb. 3rd)

In this sense, that 270 number is a complete aberration and IETFers 
should not rely on it.

I would go as far as telling that someone shoudl inform Austrian 
government about this problem and modify the rules of entry accordingly. 
  It's not normal that some people vaccinate a 270 days interval while 
others at 180 days.  It might create a risk of transmission.

Alex

Le 19/01/2022 à 22:01, Alexandre Petrescu a écrit :
>> think there is a problem in the number 270.  This 270 is the following: