I don’t doubt that one dose is enough to reduce hospital admissions to some degree , but let’s say dose one covers 70% of people whereas the second dose covers the takes immunisation up to 90% - I’ve no idea if this is how it works but I’m mathematician and this is how my head sees things.
The risk is that you’ve got 20% of the population who think they’re covered from dose 1, who will slip from mask wearing, social distancing and hand washing - however they aren’t protected as dose 1 wasn’t enough and will end up sick or potentially dead. At the same time as they continue the spread knowingly or not.
I just don’t see the point in doing another job so half arsed, especially when you’re dealing with the most vulnerable at the start.
I get there is a flip side to the argument that immunising more people less thoroughly to get it out quicker is what this is saying, but it seems strange to me to roll that out on mass without having done some testing on it over the next few weeks.