Evidence of meeting #24 for Health in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was naci.
A recording is available from Parliament.
8:05 p.m.
NDP
Don Davies NDP Vancouver Kingsway, BC
Fair enough. I'm just trying to figure out what it is we're basing it on.
This is my last question. Dr. Mona Nemer said the following with respect to that, which was that this “amounts right now to a basically population level experiment”. She said, “I think it's really important that we stick with the data and with the great science that gives us these fantastic vaccines, and not tinker with it.”
Is this a “population level experiment”?
8:05 p.m.
Chair, National Advisory Committee on Immunization and Professor, Université de Montréal
Know that during the pandemic everything is more or less a “population level experiment”. When we decide to do a lockdown and when we decide to do other things, we don't necessarily have the data. We have to make decisions based on incomplete data, and that's why you have experts who will generalize from what they know from other situations to try to make the best decision.
I agree that if we had that data it would be perfect, but waiting to have that data just makes it impossible to reopen the economy, try to vaccinate the population and get children back to school. At one point in time, not deciding or deciding to stick with the on-label recommendation is often much easier, but it doesn't mean that in the end it will end up giving us the best outcome for our population.
Trust me. If I were able to just stick to label, I would. My life would be so much easier today. But I don't think, and the committee didn't think, that was the best thing to do for the Canadian population, so we recommended to try to use the first doses for as many people as possible, and give the second doses when they come.
As we said, four months is the maximum interval. It doesn't mean that you stick to four months; it just means you can go up to four months to try to curtail the pandemic as quickly as possible and try to combat variants that are showing up a little bit across Canada.
8:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
That was actually just about an extra two minutes.
We'll start round three now, with Ms. Rempel Garner.
Ms. Rempel Garner, please go ahead for five minutes.
8:05 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Thank you, Chair.
Continuing on with Mr. Davies' comments, Ms. Quach-Thanh, do you have data that you're able to table with the committee showing that the benefits you just stated outweigh any potential risks associated with the four-month interval?
8:05 p.m.
Chair, National Advisory Committee on Immunization and Professor, Université de Montréal
There is a bulletin that was published last week from NACI with the pros and cons of that recommendation. We will be having more data in that statement when the provinces have published their data. At this point in time, they were provided to us, but under a confidentiality agreement, and we're waiting for those to be public to update that statement.
8:05 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Would you have made that recommendation if there had been more supply of the Pfizer vaccine?
8:05 p.m.
Chair, National Advisory Committee on Immunization and Professor, Université de Montréal
Of course not.
8:05 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
On January 7, the Montreal Gazette said:
The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use a new technology, and it can't be taken for granted that what has worked in the past will also work now.
“My gut feeling is that up to six weeks, I won't have any problems,” said Quach-Thanh. “After that, can I say that up to 12 weeks there are still no problems? I'm not sure.”
Is the four-month recommendation a “gut feeling”?
8:05 p.m.
Chair, National Advisory Committee on Immunization and Professor, Université de Montréal
It's based on the data we have from the U.K., from B.C. and from Quebec, where up to eight weeks we see that actually the effectiveness is quite good. As I said, we don't have data for up to four months in terms of effectiveness, but we have modelling data and we have expertise in immunology. It's really a decision that was very hard to make, but—
8:05 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
But you wouldn't be making that decision had there been supply of the mRNA vaccine.
8:05 p.m.
Chair, National Advisory Committee on Immunization and Professor, Université de Montréal
If we had had enough vaccines to vaccinate all Canadians quickly, or at least those most at risk, with two doses of vaccines, we would not have needed to extend the interval. That's for sure.
8:05 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
That's interesting.
You started talking about the Pfizer vaccine being used. You characterized the four-month interval as an off-label usage. Would that be a correct characterization?
8:05 p.m.
Chair, National Advisory Committee on Immunization and Professor, Université de Montréal
Absolutely.
8:05 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
I'll go to Health Canada.
Are there any contract implications for recommending the Pfizer vaccine for off-label usage in this manner?
8:10 p.m.
Director, Bureau of Medical Sciences, Therapeutic Products Directorate, Health Products and Food Branch, Department of Health
I'm not aware of any contract details. Those were dealt with by Public Services and Procurement Canada.
8:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
On that, I'd like to pause my time for a minute, Chair.
On a point of order, we did ask that Dr. Roman Szumski, the senior vice-president of the vaccine acquisition branch, appear before the committee as part of this motion. Could you tell me why he's not here tonight?
8:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
All of the witnesses requested were invited, but they weren't all able to attend.
I will also note that bells are going, so we need unanimous consent to proceed. I suggest that we might be able to squeeze in the rest of this round. I'll ask the committee if they wish to do that.
Is there any will to try to squeeze in the rest of this round before we suspend for the vote?
8:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ron McKinnon
I'm seeing general consent, so we'll carry on. If it looks like we're running too close to the wire, we'll pull the plug then.
Thank you, all. We'll carry on.
Ms. Rempel Garner.
8:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Dr. Quach-Thanh, do you know how many doses of the Pfizer vaccines we would have needed in Q1 in order to avoid the recommendations you made?
8:10 p.m.
Chair, National Advisory Committee on Immunization and Professor, Université de Montréal
You would have to ask the Public Health Agency of Canada how many people fell into the high-risk categories. They have that data. It's just that I don't know them by heart.
8:10 p.m.
Conservative
Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Nose Hill, AB
Ms. Elmslie, would you table that with the committee, preferably at a quicker pace, without me having to submit a motion to compel it here—let's say, in the next week?
8:10 p.m.
Vice-President, Immunization Branch, Public Health Agency of Canada
Yes, we will take that back to the department. Thank you.