well, apparently college kids are superspreaders so why not? There is actually a theory out there that vaccinating places like nursing homes first is not the way to go. We should be vaccinating those who are out and about and spreading the virus.
@TVBingeWatcher2 wow. Schools in session every day! That is unusual. Are kids going half days to reduce density? If not, then those schools are snubbing their noses at Covid guidelines. Of course, if schools are in person, then K-12 teachers should be prioritized. We arenāt reallly in school here so I donāt think just vaccinating the teachers will get us back. Kids (especially teenagers) could still catch Covid among themselves and spread it through the community if they arenāt distanced enough at school.
Iāve read that vaccination theory, also ā stop the pandemic by immunizing the super-spreaders instead of HCWs and the elderly in congregate settings, first responders, etc.
That would be politically distasteful, because it would be rewarding the ones who misbehaved.
In the big scheme of things, students going to sleepaway schools should not be a national priority.
My feeling is that Our #1 priority should be preventing deaths of those most vulnerable. Not vaccinating those who chose not to follow guidelines. That is preventable in every case. Itās rewarding those who are resistant to following the advice of all medical professionals.
We should help those who are unable to help themselves, those who help people who are sick or are important to our national security.
I didnāt say to immunize college kids before hospital workers, police/firemen, other front line workers. Of course, anyone who has to go to work and canāt stay home should be prioritized. But not all college kids have been breaking the rules. Politically distasteful or not, there are medical professionals who suggest moving people up the line who have been spreading the virus.
I will be interested in if/how the roll out prioritizes those with underlying conditions. Will one have to prove they have x.y.z condition in order to get a vaccine? What about obesity? Will that get people to the front of the line?
If you look at the priority list, after the vulnerable, essential works, etc are the 18-30 year olds before the healthy 30-60 year olds. So there is somewhat of a āput the superspreaders higher upā.
Trying to figure out where my husband fits in. He is an overweight, maybe obese 62 year old with a genetic heart condition HCM (partially why he is overweight, as intense exercise has been pretty much out). he had prostate cancer a few years ago as well . I hope he fits into the over 60 with multiple conditions and can be in group 1b.
States will determine their own vaccine priority list, and from what Iāve heard so far my state is not putting 18-30 year olds before older people. Iām glad if that is true.
@CTTC It seems to me that most states are prioritizing 18-30 over 30-60 years old. I think on a national scale it actually makes more sense because it is more effective at stopping the virus from spreading, and arguably, would prevent more deaths.
It will definitely vary by state. Right now Colorado has college students living in dorms or other congregate living in group 2A. Thatās ahead of those over 65 as well as those with underlying health concerns. Of course, itās all subject to change.
What āpriority listā? As of today, the Feds (CDC) have only put out priority #1. Others to come later this month.
That said, many states are drafting their own lists, which is clearly in their purview. (ālaboratories of democracyā thingy) But I assume that theyāll revise them once the feds come out with priorities 2-xx.
There is a lot of criticism of the lists already. A district attorney wrote an OP ED about putting prisoners ahead of other at risk groups (elderly not living in group situations, medical conditions) and that caused the governor to drop them lower on the list, which caused a prison reform group to write an OP ED saying the prisoners need to be at the TOP of the list, etc. etc.
The issue with prisoners and hard-partying college students is that it is a bad look politically to prioritize them for seemingly rewarding bad behavior, even though vaccinating them may be protective of others (e.g. guards and others working in prisons and jails, college studentsā families and college staff). The fact that COVID-19 has significant external effects (i.e. the possibility of infecting others with a potential of death or long term disability) upends the usual political / moral / ethical order that many people go by (not just with vaccine priority, but also with personal behavior such as social distancing and masks).
What I heard locally is: rather than a generic āsave lives,ā vaccinating the more vulnerable first is meant to prevent/reduce hospital admits. That frees resources (in theory.)
Changing subjects, I just talked with my long hauler son and he told me he is feeling a bit better now. Heās still not normal, but has been going out hiking/walking again and can do more than before. He seemed more chipper about it than before too.
He said he thinks the colder air is helping as he feels better now than in the hot summer. I donāt know about that - perhaps the air being dryer? I dunno.
Iām just happy to hear he is improving or at least feels he is. Itās been 8 months now.
The people who work in prisons can be vaccinated with the high risk groups without those incarcerated being vaccinated. Iām not saying I agree or disagree with either argument, just saying it is already an issue.
CNN had a panel on tonight (with Fauci, of course) and some questions Iāve had were addressed.
Will there be an option to pick which vaccine youād like? Unlikely and Dr. F said it shouldnāt matter
What happens if the vaccine that has to be kept super cold gets warm? Not as effective.
How long to become effective? After the first shot, there is some protection after 14 days, but you really need the second booster. After that one (at day 28), it takes another 7-10 days.
Children? Dr. F thinks they should be able to get the vaccine late this summer after they extrapolated the results to other groups.
Pregnant women? Hold off for now.
I thought there was some good info.
On the local news tonight, there was a story about a new treatment that seems to be working. They only give it to people who have symptoms AND have a high risk condition such as diabetes, heart issues, asthma.
What about young people with serious health conditions?
Now that there is a vaccine on the horizon, I admit to a desperate desire for my 30 year old with two serious medical conditions, who lives alone and has been so isolated for months, to get a vaccine.
My mother is 94 and in a facility. They could vaccinate the staff and residents would be safe. (And will the very elderly immune system respond adequately?)
I also have health conditions and am over 65 but think my 30 year-old should go first.
We are all going to have emotional responses to these lists. I am trying to understand the strategy for vaccines that is based on public health, not individual, despite my own worries about certain individuals. The policy will target sources of super spreading rather than individual suffering.
I donāt know what this means. Only way for kids to get vaccinated is for Moderna and Pfizer (or any of the companies) to conduct studies in those age groupsā¦there is no āextrapolatingā an adult dose to a dose for an infant, or 5 year old, or 10 year old. Pfizer has already included some 12-17 year olds (UK gave approval for ages 16+ a few days ago), Moderna has only studied 18+ and the CEO has said they hope to get under 18s in studies āsoonā.