I agree Stadler, although the idea to do the most vulnerable first does make sense, however, just getting the vaccine into anyone is important and beneficial. While I may be question how my friend got his shots, I don't really fault him for getting them (or anyone else). Even Fauci had stated that limiting the vaccine to certain people is slowing down the process because it takes time to figure out who's eligible instead of just giving the vaccine to anyone. That's why NJ just stopped with doing only the elderly and opened it up to anyone with underlying conditions. Just get the shots into the people who want them as soon as possible. Also since the science is starting to show that vaccinated people are less likely to spread the virus, it's just as important to get a healthy person vaccinated vs. sickly in terms of slowing down the spread which then in return also helps the vulnerable people even if they haven't been vaccinated.
Actually, with that last piece, it almost makes more sense to vaccinate the healthy. Look at me and my parents; my parents are both first in line in terms of the qualifications (though they haven't been able to get an appointment yet). But they spend most of most of their days sitting in armchairs watching NCIS reruns. Me, though, relatively healthy, I'm working. I have a family. I have kids. I have more contact in a day with third parties than they do in a week. My kid, even more compelling, since she's in college. Between her school, her housemates, traveling home (frequently) and her work at home (she works for a restaurant) she sees more in a day that I see in a week, and my parents in probably a MONTH or more. I would gladly give my shot to my parents, and I am on the Publix website three times a week to get them in line (they live in a different state) but we've got to pick our criteria (and in this way, I see one fault in delegating this to the states, since the standards can be very different; for example, my state has no provision for "underlying conditions").
I have to admit that I have had the same thought. We have been doing most of the running around shopping for wife's parents. They live way out in the country and hardly see anyone. I thought it made more sense for us to get vaccinated before them so we could continue to help them. It's a moot point since they got their shots anyway but you're not alone in having that thought.
This brings up discussion about those living in Cities, which are congested with people, and those that live in Rural areas, less congested with people. And the self-reliance each of those people have. Rural people tend to have more self-reliance, as they will fend for themselves. While city folk, tend to rely on others for basic needs. There is a difference in attitude from a city person to a rural/country person.
So with this in mind. The more likely you are going to be around people, the more likely you will catch the disease they may have, if it is contagious.
It is impossible to get rid of a virus completely, if we did, we wouldn't need to take vaccines when we go to say Africa, or the Jungle in the Amazon. Yet, those people are still alive and surviving, albeit some are barely struggling, and that isn't our fault per se. Well, the amazon forest being depleted is our fault.
Would our Native race have still survived a virus if we were left to our own devices, which would have been our natural remedies? What makes one feel they are obligated to help the other, when the other doesn't want that help, and wants to be left alone? What makes them become the savior in saving humanity?
Topic: Coronavirus (Read 434330 times)
