None of the no mask jerks in that White House should get a vaccine before ANYONE else. They should be the last ones to get protected from the sh*t they have caused. I expected this. After all, they don't give a damn about doing anything to encourage wearing masks and stopping the spread. It's all about themselves. December 13, 2020 - 05:41 PM EST Trump White House staff among first to receive COVID-19 vaccine https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...staff-among-first-to-receive-covid-19-vaccine
How did you get signed up? Is there like a website they are setting up or is it just all who you know or through your employer? I’ve seen no communication yet on how you get on a list or whatnot.
Good for WH staff if true. White mouse in White House. This vaccine is really a special kind. 30 years ahead. I suggest young people (<45) not to do it.
I will get whatever is available except if it is the Chinese or the Russian in which case no thanx. By the time people in my age bracket get to get vaccinated there will be millions of others already who would have gotten it. (Healthcare workers, retirement homes, over 60s etc) so I dont worry about unidentified adverse reactions. It will be like the biggest phase 4 trial.
It isnt easy to get the MMR as an adult but vaccines in general is known to boost the immune system. Thats why we got the pneumoniococcus vaccine last month. An extra protection. Couldnt sleep for 2 days from the pain in my arm but that is considered completely normal.
Legit plan. What % of the Greek population would you guess fits into that category? I haven't even thought about that with regards to the US.
Just the over 65s is around 21% of the population. When I said millions I was thinking worldwide. The EU has bought all the same vaccines and has similar vaccination schedules and the average % of over 65s is around 19% in the block. So even if I by some miracle get to get vaccinated as soon as in late February or March that would be after almost 19% of 450 million people get it. (without including healthcare workers, schoolchildren or armies). At that point any unidentified rare adverse reactions would be already identified with such mass vaccination. I mean I am at the end of the queue priority wise but that has also its benefits.
I read this yesterday and it's an interesting argument. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/09/business/coronavirus-vaccination-auctions-celebrities.html Getting Everyone Vaccinated, With ‘Nudges’ and Charity Auctions A Nobel laureate proposes selling a small proportion of early doses to the rich and famous, and rewarding reluctant recipients to accelerate herd immunity. By Richard H. Thaler Dec. 9, 2020 The good news is that safe and effective vaccines from Moderna and Pfizer appear to be on the way soon and that more are likely to follow. The bad news is an usual combination: There won’t be enough vaccine on hand to meet initial demand, yet there is also a need to urge everyone to get shots. I have some suggestions: An unusual type of charity auction, a bit of technology and a few nudges can help. Who goes first? The problem that needs to be addressed very quickly is how to allocate the roughly 20 million (two-dose) vaccinations that may be available in the United States in December and January. Although states will be given the final authority, a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention panel recommends that the initial distribution go to two groups. The first are frontline health care workers; the second, residents of nursing homes, where a disproportionate number of Covid-19 deaths have occurred. These groups are worthy, but many others deserve high priority as well. These include teachers, food workers, people with comorbidities and those over 65. The dilemma is that as many as 140 million people may be in one or more of those categories, and even if everything goes smoothly, it will take well into the spring before they can all be vaccinated. (For an idea of where you might rank in the line, check this.) Given that supply chains strained to keep up with the demand for mundane goods like flour and paper towels early in the pandemic, the distribution of vaccines won’t be easy. All this means that demand will exceed supply for quite a while. Economic theory offers a standard method for dealing with shortages. It is, basically: Let markets work. This would mean that those willing to pay the most would get the vaccine first. Wisely, policymakers are not following this course. Nurses, other frontline workers and most nursing home residents could not win a bidding battle with billionaires. And, to be clear, they should not have to! Yet there is a small but useful role that prices might play in determining who gets priority in the second round of vaccines, after the first 20 million people have gotten their shots. At that point, perhaps sometime early this winter, suppose a small proportion of doses are sold in what would amount to a charity auction. Who might be the winning bidders? Very wealthy individuals and high-tech companies are likely to account for some of the demand, along with businesses that employ high-profile talent like professional athletes and entertainers. Just imagine how much the National Basketball Association, whose season will start around Christmas, would be willing to pay to ensure that none of its players or staff would be infected! The same goes for Hollywood studios and television production companies that are eager to go back to work. The prospect of selling off precious vaccine to celebrity athletes and entertainers, hedge fund magnates and high-tech billionaires may strike you as utterly immoral, exacerbating the inequality this disease has already inflicted. But before you dismiss this idea as outrageous, let me make three points. First, the very purpose of the charity auction would be to redistribute money from the rich to the poor. Think of it as a voluntary wealth tax. This money could be used to help people who have suffered most in the pandemic: those who have lost their jobs and face evictions, whose health has been permanently impaired, who face grievous hardship of all kinds. Depending on the prices and quantities, billions of dollars could be raised that could be spent to help those who need it most. Robin Hood in action! Second, be realistic. The alternative to this sort of legal market is almost certain to be a black or gray market for early vaccinations, which might be obtained by hopping on a plane to another jurisdiction, or via entrepreneurial intermediaries. As the bioethicist Arthur Caplan of New York University says: “Anything that’s seen as lifesaving, life-preserving and that’s in short supply creates black markets.” Deep-pocketed sports leagues have already managed to conduct daily testing with quick results. If the rich and powerful are going to find a way to jump the line in any case, why not make sure that the payments made to grease the skids go to a good cause? Third, one reason that the charity auction feels wrong is that it makes transparent what is typically opaque: Rich and powerful people in every society manage, one way or another, to obtain superior health care. Is that immoral? Perhaps it is. But it would be naïve to pretend that it doesn’t happen. And it would be a shame to let that naïveté prevent the transfer of much-needed money from the rich to the poor. Are the “facilitators” who would make the same thing happen in other ways more deserving? What’s more, celebrities are public influencers, by definition. If they make eye-popping payments for access to a vaccine, they could persuade thousands of others to seek inoculations. Nudges can bring herd immunity closer. At some point the main policy attention will shift from deciding who goes first to figuring out how to nudge reluctant people to go and get their shots — and not one shot but two, which will be necessary for the vaccines to work properly. What can be done to get the widest participation possible? Three words: Make it easy! That means making the process for the first shot smooth. No long lines! Then, at the time people are vaccinated, immediately schedule their second shot and urge them to make specific plans to come. Next, send them electronic reminders. These methods are well proven. To promote coronavirus vaccinations generally, I also suggest offering a perk to those who have been inoculated, one that could also help accelerate the economic recovery. At an appropriate time, give people who have taken both shots a Covid-19 “health passport” that certifies complete vaccination. Ideally, it would be electronic, stored on phones or on cards that can be swiped. In addition to the vaccine confirmation, it would need to include contact information and a photo ID so that it could reliably be used to gain admission to airplane flights, restaurants, bars, concerts, schools and college campuses. (The contact information is crucial for tracking people down in the case of possible health issues, and if booster shots are necessary. It must be national, because people move around.) This concept is recommended in a report issued by the Tony Blair Institute, which the former British prime minister leads. The report says the English Premier League is already in discussions to require such a passport for admission to soccer stadiums next season. Unfortunately, though, the existing federal plans in the United States call for providing those vaccinated merely with a paper document, a decidedly 20th-century approach that would not meet public health needs and that would be easy to counterfeit. There is a better alternative. Making a health passport work reliably and safely, with privacy issues resolved, would require some technology, legal expertise and political good will, but all of this is possible. After all, many states already were planning to upgrade driver’s licenses in the United States into so-called Real ID employing similar technology, but Covid-19 delayed that initiative. Unlike Real ID, the health passport needs to be made available to everyone, including undocumented immigrants and children, because everyone needs to be vaccinated. The states and federal agencies should cooperate to make this happen. Maybe at warp speed? Richard H. Thaler, a professor of economics and behavioral science at the Booth School of Business at the University of Chicago, is an author of “Nudge.” He won the 2017 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Follow him on Twitter: @R_Thaler
I can't imagine that getting the vaccine would have worse long term consequences than getting the virus
I can certainly imagine that. I wouldn't be shocked if something comes out in the future linking the vaccine to cancer, or something crazy like that. This thing was so hastily done, albeit by people way smarter than me, that we don't know everything about the vaccine her, and they're pumping it into people. Hell, we don't know everything about this virus, either. Though they've been experimenting on them for something like nine years, this is literally the first time a vaccine of this type has been used. And we don't understand the long term effects it will have on people. And we don't even think it will permanently keep us from getting the virus. In fact, that doesn't seem likely. I'm fairly young, and although I know people that have had serious issues with the virus (including one person that died...possibly two), I have age on my side, if I get it. On top of that, I'm extremely careful about what I do and who I come into contact with. I will, at the very least, not get the vaccine for a good while. There are far more people that need it sooner than I do.
I can't imagine the uproar from a portion of the population of the government came out with a plan to store personal medical data, coupled with passport information, and special admittances based off of that. It would be a huge uproar, and you'd have some wisely astute people pointing out that this is exactly what the CCP does with its citizens. Also, the same people that would benefit from this "charity auction" would be the same ones that would honestly tell you they'd rather have their lives than some sort of monetary hand me out. I found the article nothing more than a huge hypothetical that would never work in the really world. It's rooted in a world of roses. What I find more interesting are the fairly valid, and we'll informed opinions that we should be pushing the vaccine more on the under 65 crowds and less on nursing home patients. I don't know how I feel about any of what I just said, but what I do know is that those who are doing the right thing are going to have much less of a chance to contract this, especially as more people are vaccinated. Those that are not doing the right thing are largely in the under 55 crowd. I also know that someone has to be bringing this virus into the nursing home, and it's not typically the residents.
The vaccine is a strand of the viruses mRNA - the same fragment that you get infected with. It just codes for the surface antigen versus the whole virus. How might it be that a partial virus would cause cancer but the full virus doesn't? I understand caution. But I'd think a vaccine is a much safer bet that actually getting the virus.
Yeah I would do a HARD pass on the Chinese and Russian vaccines. The history for medical development, safety and efficacy in those places is terrible... and the governments are terrible.
Do we know that the virus can't cause something like cancer as a long term effect? There have been recent studies about how mRNA may actually contain cancer drivers. Bow, we starting to put a vaccine out, that's underresearched and studied for a vaccine that isn't fully understood, and the vaccine is splicing a half strand of that virus's mRNA that goes in and codes for your body to start providing antibody cells? I'm a skeptic, I'll admit. I think cancer is unlikely, I agree, but I could see a world where it could happen. This isn't dissimilar to how cancer happens. My point is that I don't think we could possibly understand the long term side effects of this. By saying that, I'm talking like 20 years down the road.
Sure the virus may cause cancer. Here's the thing - you are going to get infected by the virus at some point. It's never going away. It's going to circulate permanently.
