bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

The challenge of isolating the vulnerable is indeed real.

Early on in the pandemic, and even today, many people say something along the lines of "if you're too afraid to go out, then just stay home and let me live my life." It isn't so simple right? Or at the very least it is incredibly inconsiderate and callous.

---

If advising the vulnerable to take whatever precautions they see fit and leave the rest of us alone is "incredibly inconsiderate and callous", what would you call forcing restrictions on people who aren't at risk? Me living my life and providing for my family isn't selfish or callous. Telling me I can't do those things is.

I have a friend who is hospital admin and got the vaccine day 1. Also have several friends who are in the medical field ranging from icu nurses to sports medicine doctors. They've all posted a picture on Facebook of them getting the vaccine.

I have no issues with them getting it. But it is annoying that I see this then turn on the news and they're talking how dire it still is and that less than 5% of houston front line workers have gotten the vaccine. If front line workers are still in line why are hospital admins and sports medicine doctors already getting it?

I have the option to get one tomorrow if I want. Not patient facing but received an email asking if I wanted to sign up. From the look of the available slots left tomorrow and the ones that went unfilled the past two days, doesn't seem like there aren't enough vaccines to go around, but not enough people willing to take it.

Kind reminder, 90% of the fatalities are represented by 35% of the population. Vaccinate from the top and work down and this whole issue ends by June, and hopefully much earlier.

GAC06 said:

---

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

The challenge of isolating the vulnerable is indeed real.

Early on in the pandemic, and even today, many people say something along the lines of "if you're too afraid to go out, then just stay home and let me live my life." It isn't so simple right? Or at the very least it is incredibly inconsiderate and callous.

---

If advising the vulnerable to take whatever precautions they see fit and leave the rest of us alone is "incredibly inconsiderate and callous", what would you call forcing restrictions on people who aren't at risk? Me living my life and providing for my family isn't selfish or callous. Telling me I can't do those things is.

---

So there are quite a few people who refuse to wear masks and say that if you're so scared then just stay home. Do you think wearing a mask prevents you from providing for your family? It is mind boggling to me how something as benign as a mask that, at most, causes a little face itching or irritation (for most masks), would be dismissed as opressive or unAmerican, or whatever you want to call it, when it could potentially save lives. It could reduce viral loads and decrease severity of infections, it could have helped us have a more normal life so that you and everyone else could continue to work and provide for your families.

Another thing is large gatherings and parties. I suppose having fewer and smaller parties can affect the catering business, and party planners, etc., but for the most part asking people to cut down on their social life a bit wasn't going to prevent most people from continuing to provide for their families.

I never said you can't live your life and provide for your family. But I bet you could do those things in a way that was considerate to the vulnerable in our population.

I didn't say anything about masks, and nothing you said that I quoted had to do with masks. It was about isolating the vulnerable. I am not at risk and I've been behaving normally. That's not selfish. Telling me I'm selfish for gathering with adults who made their own risk decisions is selfish.

Fitch said:

---

Kind reminder, 90% of the fatalities are represented by 35% of the population. Vaccinate from the top and work down and this whole issue ends by June, and hopefully much earlier.

---

100%

we know where the deaths are happening. I know it's impolitic to say but if our mitigation is about deaths then old people before those termed essential workers. frontline HCW being a special category just because of how stressed they are as a population right now in terms of illness reducing the talent pool in another area of death mitigation.

I was with you on a lot of this, but then you had to show yourself with your "get these idiots out of their houses and back in the classroom" comment. Are you in Texas? I don't know a single teacher who is teaching from home unless they are quarantined due to exposure. The vast majority of teachers around the state are teaching face to face. Many of those who are teaching remotely from their classrooms are doing it because they were told to do so. A few are doing it because their doctors requested it.

I don't know what it looks like in Houston ISD or Dallas ISD, but in the suburbs, teachers are teaching at school.

I am in Arlington and we are teaching in the classroom. I am 72 and high risk. I did have the last week teaching virually only because of quarantine 10 days from close exposure. Only five days had to be virual because of the holiday break. We have had up to 41 teachers in quarantine at peak. This has gone down as more parents select stay at home. Our district allows parents to freely opt back and forth. It think it takes about three days to process the change. KIDS are bringing the virus to school and we have to quarantine.

FACT, at my campus over 70 percent of parents have opted for virtual only for their kids. We teach concurrent classes that have face to face students and kids online at the same time. IT is MUCH harder than teaching used to be and takes hours more prep time to set up meaningful, engaging, and standards based lessons in this format. There is no down time and it is tough to even find time to run to the restroom at work, much less the added 20 seconds for hand washing. We have to clean and disinfect all touch surfaces in the five minutes between each class, then monitor the halls to remind kids constantly to cover their noses.

We started at 55 percent at home, but with the virus upswing in the late fall, the exodus to at home learning was quick and noticable.

Almost no subs are available. Getting the vaccine would help hopefully by not requiring quarantine if exposed, and might bring our sub pool back (mainly retired teachers.)

cone said:

---

Fitch said:

---

Kind reminder, 90% of the fatalities are represented by 35% of the population. Vaccinate from the top and work down and this whole issue ends by June, and hopefully much earlier.

---

100%

we know where the deaths are happening. I know it's impolitic to say but if our mitigation is about deaths then old people before those termed essential workers. frontline HCW being a special category just because of how stressed they are as a population right now in terms of illness reducing the talent pool in another area of death mitigation.

---

Agreed. Would add that at this point it's obviously not just about deaths resulting from COVID, but the "whole package" of issues -- I found out just last week another work contact in his 40's went to the hospital -- but in terms of dispelling the fear of seriously [mortally] affecting family members, grandma and grandpa should be first in line...chances are the kids have already had it...

AgLiving06 said:

---

This was a study done by Israel that seems to show we should only be considering age above all else if we want the most bang for our buck.

---

Makes the most sense to me.

Silky Johnston said:

---

I have the option to get one tomorrow if I want. Not patient facing but received an email asking if I wanted to sign up. From the look of the available slots left tomorrow and the ones that went unfilled the past two days, doesn't seem like there aren't enough vaccines to go around, but not enough people willing to take it.

---

If I was you I would take advantage of that.

My wife took a poll of her patients which are all elderly and many of them don't want the vaccine which is shocking to me. It seems no like a no brainer to me considering their risk level. These are the same people who refuse to wear any PPE to protect my wife when she comes into their home or their nursing homes but expects that she does all the time.

Also, let's go back to the LTAC example i gave earlier. If you offered the vaccine to all the residents but not to the staff I am not sure people understand the optics on that for those who work there.

You are considered essential. You must wear VERY uncomfortable PPE all day. I don't think many people on here actually have to do this. You must do everything you can to protect these people who are most vulnerable.

And you busted your ass for 9 months to protect these people so one day so they can see their family again. Your administrators come to you and tell you that you won't be getting the vaccine for a few more months.

You may have an elderly parent living with you. You might have a child who is immunocompromised. You yourself might have multiple comorbidites. I don't know if many people have spent time in the facilities. Many of the aides and staff that work there aren't very well educated and aren't in the best health. This might be the only job that you can get and it puts food on the table. And if you quit this job you can't pay your bills.

This is the way that you see care givers abandon patients. These people have seen the general public have to little to no respect for this virus and now the powers that be say that you need to wait for 2 more months before you get some level or protection.

I don't know how many times I have to say this. The 80 year old who lives at home has the option of not going out. They may need some assistance in their homes. They should wear a damn mask as well as the person who has to come in the home. And have them wear a proper mask. Get them a KN95 or N95 mask. They are readily available. And if your loved one needs some, I will gladly mail them to them.

I thought masks didn't do anything according to the research so then why are doctors in the nurses in the hospitals wearing PPE? The general public has lost all respect to the healthcare community.

I can't tell you how many patients I have treated who don't think they should wear a mask when they come into my clinic but expect me to wear one the entire time. The hypocrisy is astounding.

I am not sorry that i think public facing healthcare workers should get the vaccine in the first wave. I am not sorry at all. The people who you should be mad at CONE are the politicians who supported the idea that the virus wasn't a big deal but somehow are first in line to get the vaccine.

Yea. They can be however they want. Old be people can be pretty ornery. And I get your argument.

Old people should be in the first wave. At the very least with the same priority as hospital workers.

Doesnt sound like getting a vaccine now or in the next two week is going to be a problem for either. My RN neighbor got hers today. So this is all just arguing to argue.

Longer video but Found this interesting. The headline is mostly clickbait but Zdogg goes into algorithms that failed fairly distributing vaccines at Stanford and variables on what should be considered to decide priority etc

There are a lot of opinions here as to how it should be prioritized. All with merit.
Does anyone know how it is being prioritized?
I.e. If I were 69 years old, have heart disease, asthma, etc. How do I get in line? I have not been able to see anyone with what the plan actually is and how to get in line. My wife has a compromised immune system due to autoimmune disease drugs. We are blessed to still live in our own home and do not need any assistance.
I do not believe people like us will be sought out. Any advice would be appreciated.

Have you reached out to your doctor? I think I'd start there. If you get any information, I'd love to hear it.

Good luck!

I don't have a doctor. Many of us olders don't. We go to urgent care when we are sick and stay away when we are well. It is pretty much how we were raised. I am hoping they have some sort of public vaccination sites where we can show proof of age. Get flu shots and such at grocery store pharmacy.

cone said:

---

I know some late-30s early-40s non-public facing healthcare staff that having already gotten the shot

ngl it pisses me off when I see them post about it on Facebook while 89-year-olds and grocery workers have to wait

---

It was reported on the National news that Texas was not using the priorities suggested by the CDC. Not sure how the state is allotting doses.

cone said:

---

aggiederelict said:

---

Should the nursing aide at a LTAC unit not get it right away considering they leave the facility and interact with the outside world? Where do we think people in these facilities are getting this from if visitors aren't coming in?

---

two things

- the nursing aide is, by all statistical measures, not likely to die from the bug. the residents of the LTAC absolutely are. so the people that die should get it first. the shot seems like a current homerun with regard to preventing any sort of severe course of the disease.

- we don't know if the current shots provide any sort of sterilizing immunity. so even if the nursing aide gets the shot, they still could be exposed and bring the virus in and around their patients. based on the phase 3, they won't get sick or show symptoms, but we don't know if it prevents transmission. more reason for the LTAC residents to get it first.

first principles - what's the objective? to preserve lives? how is that best achieved if all the data shows that the number one risk factor is age? or is it QALYs? in that case, why have we been laser-focused on the death counts?

---

I think you aren't considering which vaccination is more likely to help us get a handle on this. I would vaccinate the aide first as that person is more likely to spread it if they get it and the most good can be done.

TAMU1990 said:

---

Duncan Idaho said:

---

Still think it needs to go
nursing home residents and staff,
front line hospital staff (er, covid ward, doctors, nurses and cleaning crews, emergency services but not cops)
Front line Retail workers (I mean cashier's, not store management) who wore masks
Other old and high risk people

Everyone else on a first come first serve.

---

Cops should be with the front line/first responders. They have up close contact with all kinds of people.

Old people 70+ and High risk people are next. They are clogging up the hospitals and ER's.

Then it should be teachers/professors to get these idiots out of their houses and back in the classroom. Their mental craziness and purposeful protest to not work has hurt our children - some will never be able to catch up.

Then it should be done by age. The older you are the more likely you are to have problems.


Notice I didn't mention race. Democrats want to view everything through a racial prism.

---

Yet the risk of several symptoms and hospitalization is much higher so why if age is considered due to risk, is ethnicity not? If doses are released based upon risk, it most definitely should be a consideration.

bay fan said:

---

cone said:

---

aggiederelict said:

---

Should the nursing aide at a LTAC unit not get it right away considering they leave the facility and interact with the outside world? Where do we think people in these facilities are getting this from if visitors aren't coming in?

---

two things

- the nursing aide is, by all statistical measures, not likely to die from the bug. the residents of the LTAC absolutely are. so the people that die should get it first. the shot seems like a current homerun with regard to preventing any sort of severe course of the disease.

- we don't know if the current shots provide any sort of sterilizing immunity. so even if the nursing aide gets the shot, they still could be exposed and bring the virus in and around their patients. based on the phase 3, they won't get sick or show symptoms, but we don't know if it prevents transmission. more reason for the LTAC residents to get it first.

first principles - what's the objective? to preserve lives? how is that best achieved if all the data shows that the number one risk factor is age? or is it QALYs? in that case, why have we been laser-focused on the death counts?

---

I think you aren't considering which vaccination is more likely to help us get a handle on this. I would vaccinate the aide first as that person is more likely to spread it if they get it and the most good can be done.

---

we have no idea if the vaccination in and of itself prevents spread

in fact, if you get vaccinated, do not assume you cannot spread

as such, the people most likely to suffer and die statistically need the shot first. that is, if we are focused on preventing death.

bay fan said:

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

Duncan Idaho said:

---

Still think it needs to go
nursing home residents and staff,
front line hospital staff (er, covid ward, doctors, nurses and cleaning crews, emergency services but not cops)
Front line Retail workers (I mean cashier's, not store management) who wore masks
Other old and high risk people

Everyone else on a first come first serve.

---

Cops should be with the front line/first responders. They have up close contact with all kinds of people.

Old people 70+ and High risk people are next. They are clogging up the hospitals and ER's.

Then it should be teachers/professors to get these idiots out of their houses and back in the classroom. Their mental craziness and purposeful protest to not work has hurt our children - some will never be able to catch up.

Then it should be done by age. The older you are the more likely you are to have problems.


Notice I didn't mention race. Democrats want to view everything through a racial prism.

---

Yet the risk of several symptoms and hospitalization is much higher so why if age is considered due to risk, is ethnicity not? If doses are released based upon risk, it most definitely should be a consideration.

---

Is ethnicity an independent risk of serious disease?

There are several variables (e.g. rates of hypertension/obesity, living arrangements, etc.) which likely play a significant role in determining the impact of the disease on an entire sub-population.

cone said:

---

bay fan said:

---

cone said:

---

aggiederelict said:

---

Should the nursing aide at a LTAC unit not get it right away considering they leave the facility and interact with the outside world? Where do we think people in these facilities are getting this from if visitors aren't coming in?

---

two things

- the nursing aide is, by all statistical measures, not likely to die from the bug. the residents of the LTAC absolutely are. so the people that die should get it first. the shot seems like a current homerun with regard to preventing any sort of severe course of the disease.

- we don't know if the current shots provide any sort of sterilizing immunity. so even if the nursing aide gets the shot, they still could be exposed and bring the virus in and around their patients. based on the phase 3, they won't get sick or show symptoms, but we don't know if it prevents transmission. more reason for the LTAC residents to get it first.

first principles - what's the objective? to preserve lives? how is that best achieved if all the data shows that the number one risk factor is age? or is it QALYs? in that case, why have we been laser-focused on the death counts?

---

I think you aren't considering which vaccination is more likely to help us get a handle on this. I would vaccinate the aide first as that person is more likely to spread it if they get it and the most good can be done.

---

we have no idea if the vaccination in and of itself prevents spread

in fact, if you get vaccinated, do not assume you cannot spread

as such, the people most likely to suffer and die statistically need the shot first. that is, if we are focused on preventing death.

---

the logic of this is astounding. The vaccine is to allow your body to build up an effective response when you do become infected such that your body works overtime to kill the virus. If your body is killing the virus how then can you spread live virus?

Is death prevention possible? Sign me up.

Don't think the elderly should be first in line. I think individuals who must face the public every day. The more people you contact the higher risk you are.

Medical professionals, retail employees, etc.

If person A and C never interact with each other but both interact with person B we should be vaccinating person B and then expand as more is available.

it's not a matter of logic

not all vaccines provide sterilizing immunity

cc_ag92 said:

---

Have you reached out to your doctor? I think I'd start there. If you get any information, I'd love to hear it.

Good luck!

---

Thanks for the suggestion. My Dr. has no idea. That is part of my bewilderment about this. If nobody knows how it is supposed to go, how do we know how well the project is going?
By the way, I called my Dr the other day to see if I could get in to get something going for my seasonal allergy induced asthma. They said I needed to get tested for Covid. I did: negative. I called back and they said they would try to set up a zoom meeting because they weren't seeing sick (symptomatic) people. They werent able to get zoom going so I talked to the Dr on the phone and he prescribed drugs for the same thing he has treated me for this time of year for years. I feel like I am in the twilight zone. Might be if I get Covid.

Time to find another Dr. Trying hard not to be "Old man yelling at clouds".

It's probably not surprising that your doctor isn't sure yet about the vaccine, but the rest of that is frustrating. Sounds like you might need to look around for different care before you truly need it.

"Phase 1B: Contact your healthcare provider to see if they are enrolled to give the vaccine. And please check this page frequently for updates." DSHS doesn't seem to know a whole lot at this point.

Thank you 92.

AggieUSMC said:

---

Quote:

---

1a) politicians

---

That's not necessarily a bad thing. I think our elected leaders should be a priority when it comes to things like this. Besides, we're talking about a relatively very few people an it does not put a significant strain on availability to other priority recipients.

---

Pretty frustrating the politicians who refuse to wear masks and pretend Covid is no big deal are getting vaccines before people who are higher risk.

cone said:

---

it's not a matter of logic

not all vaccines provide sterilizing immunity

---

as an example?

Ragoo said:

---

cone said:

---

it's not a matter of logic

not all vaccines provide sterilizing immunity

---

as an example?

---

Quote:

---

Not all vaccines produce an immune response that is sterilizing, and neither do they need to to be effective at preventing disease. "Many vaccines are primarily intended to prevent disease and do not necessarily protect against infection," according to the World Health Organization (WHO). In this case, disease means the response of the body to a pathogen. It's the illness and all the symptoms of the disease.

For example, the inactivated poliovirus vaccine does not produce sterilizing immunity and is 90 percent or more effective. A vaccine can lessen the ability of a pathogen to produce a disease response without sterilizing it. If it does sterilize against a pathogen, it can prevent infection. For example, the human papillomavirus vaccine induces sterilizing immunity.

---

https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/501677-what-is-sterilizing-immunity-and-do-we-need-it

AggieDub14 said:

---

AggieUSMC said:

---

Quote:

---

1a) politicians

---

That's not necessarily a bad thing. I think our elected leaders should be a priority when it comes to things like this. Besides, we're talking about a relatively very few people an it does not put a significant strain on availability to other priority recipients.

---

Pretty frustrating the politicians who refuse to wear masks and pretend Covid is no big deal are getting vaccines before people who are higher risk.

---

Quote:

---

p

---

Yes, I know, not necessarily mutually exclusive.

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2020/12/22/covid-19-vaccine-u-s-sen-joni-ernst-gets-backlash-past-comments/4010812001/

cone said:

---

Ragoo said:

---

cone said:

---

it's not a matter of logic

not all vaccines provide sterilizing immunity

---

as an example?

---

Quote:

---

Not all vaccines produce an immune response that is sterilizing, and neither do they need to to be effective at preventing disease. "Many vaccines are primarily intended to prevent disease and do not necessarily protect against infection," according to the World Health Organization (WHO). In this case, disease means the response of the body to a pathogen. It's the illness and all the symptoms of the disease.

For example, the inactivated poliovirus vaccine does not produce sterilizing immunity and is 90 percent or more effective. A vaccine can lessen the ability of a pathogen to produce a disease response without sterilizing it. If it does sterilize against a pathogen, it can prevent infection. For example, the human papillomavirus vaccine induces sterilizing immunity.

---

https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/501677-what-is-sterilizing-immunity-and-do-we-need-it

---

Thanks for the example:
From what I can tell the way the mRNA vaccine works is that it forms spike proteins on healthy cells. Then as those cells dies the immune system attacks for digestion. The immune system becomes conditioned to attack similar organisms. So when the coronavirus enter the body with its spike protein structure the body immediately attacks it like it were a dead cell with spike proteins. This the virus is removed before an infection is allowed to occur. So therefore there does not exist in a vaccinated body virus to spread to an on-vaccinated body.

bigtruckguy3500 said:

---

AggieDub14 said:

---

AggieUSMC said:

---

Quote:

---

1a) politicians

---

That's not necessarily a bad thing. I think our elected leaders should be a priority when it comes to things like this. Besides, we're talking about a relatively very few people an it does not put a significant strain on availability to other priority recipients.

---

Pretty frustrating the politicians who refuse to wear masks and pretend Covid is no big deal are getting vaccines before people who are higher risk.

---

Quote:

---

p

---

Yes, I know, not necessarily mutually exclusive.

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/2020/12/22/covid-19-vaccine-u-s-sen-joni-ernst-gets-backlash-past-comments/4010812001/

---

Disgusting

garyt73 said:

---

There are a lot of opinions here as to how it should be prioritized. All with merit.
Does anyone know how it is being prioritized?
I.e. If I were 69 years old, have heart disease, asthma, etc. How do I get in line? I have not been able to see anyone with what the plan actually is and how to get in line. My wife has a compromised immune system due to autoimmune disease drugs. We are blessed to still live in our own home and do not need any assistance.
I do not believe people like us will be sought out. Any advice would be appreciated.

---

I spoke to our county health department and the way they made it sound was when they have vaccine available sign up will occur on their website. I'm sure there will likely need to be some supporting documentation for if you fall into age/risk factor to receive your vaccine ?