[Jim1921]

Originally Posted by Poseidon3290

Is it more than 0? If yes, then it's a problem that should have been addressed right from the start, not ignored.

1000's of younger folks got vaccinated this weekend, as it should have been from the start.

It also isn't just about people who went to the hospital, as we've seen this one leaves you damaged for a long time.

Under your plan to target younger people, you think it is okay for the 90% to die. Those 90% would also fill up the hospital beds, leaving little to no capacity for anyone else.

[Jim1921]

Originally Posted by boy3365

I'm not arguing about who should get the vaccine first. I was just giving CVS the credit for leading the charge on following the federal guidelines.

There are valid arguments for both sides, and either way you go, the risk gets is amplified in the minds of those who don't get picked first.

Vaccinate the older population because they are more at risk of dying. It's a legitimate argument.

Vaccinate people who will be in close quarters with others because they are likely get to spread it. Even if the 30 yo teacher/police officer/firefighter won't die or have long-term effects (and the "99.3% survival rate crowd rarely mention long-term effects), a precinct can't afford to be down 10 people at one time because they're stuck at home with a fever and cough for a week or two.

I know being in the middle isn't trendy and popular these days, but that's where I am.

It has been a year. Despite illnesses in first responders, we have yet to see precincts close. Further, it takes much longer to vaccinate all those that come in contact with the elderly vs all those that can come in contact and spread to the elderly. People need to stop being so selfish and political. We are talking about lives.

[Poseidon3290]

Originally Posted by Jim1921

Under your plan to target younger people, you think it is okay for the 90% to die. Those 90% would also fill up the hospital beds, leaving little to no capacity for anyone else.

No, I would have targeted essential workers of ALL ages first. Then after those people, the snowbirds from Canada and the wealthy elite who never had to interact with the public. Keep in mind this allows for the 65+ year old that still is working with the public to get it. It eliminates the 65+ year GOLF and tennis player who sits in his huge mansion on the water.

[boy3365]

Originally Posted by Jim1921

What percentage of teachers and firefighters have been hospitalized and have died, versus those 65+? Have you looked at the data from North Carolina where they looked at the risk of transmission in the schools and found the low risk? Have you compared states, such as Florida, that have allowed schools to hold class vs those in virtual lockdown, like New York and California? Are you noticing that there are no major differences in morbity and mortality between those states? Show me where you are seeing outcomes in teachers or firefighters that indicate they need to be prioritized over people that are 65+.

It looks like you added more to your post. And again, I am not arguing about prioritization. I was just giving CVS credit instead of implying that the retail pharmacies collaborated on following the federal plan. With all the stories I'm hearing about vaccine sites having more vaccines than interested people in some cases, I don't think arguing priorities is meaningful for the time being. We may be reaching that equilibrium between supply and demand sooner than anticipated.

Yes. Schools seem to be less impacted than thought, but that is not an "I told you so" from the crowd that said open at all costs last summer. Most schools likely started at less than 50% capacity and can do a better job of enforcing mask mandates and distancing rules than private businesses can with adults. Not that I expect anyone to remember, but I've said that on this forum before. The success is likely because they have reduced capacity and can more effectively enforce guidelines rather than the idea that a kid can't give the virus to an adult.

Schools in Europe have flipped flopped between opening and closing again.

[boy3365]

Originally Posted by Poseidon3290

No, I would have targeted essential workers of ALL ages first. Then after those people, the snowbirds from Canada and the wealthy elite who never had to interact with the public. Keep in mind this allows for the 65+ year old that still is working with the public to get it. It eliminates the 65+ year GOLF and tennis player who sits in his huge mansion on the water.

It looks like we at the point where we can almost do both now, so I'm just going to sit here and be happy about that.

[Ghaati]

Originally Posted by Jim1921

He was right to care about 65+ because they account for 90% of the deaths. Again, look at the data. Further, despite the non-stop fear mongering about Florida for the past year, look at the deaths per capita vs other states. Facts matter, not political spin.

People 65+ count for around 90% of deaths anyway. Old age has that effect on old people. They tend to die.

The people who needed it MOST, from the very first day the shots were available:

1) Health workers and hospital staff (including the cafeteria lady and janitor)
2) Anyone working directly with the public year-round: food service, grocery stores, gas station attendants, etc.
3) First responders, police/fire/ambulance
4) Anyone responsible for other peoples' children as a profession: social workers for DCF, teachers, day-care employees, school nurses, etc. etc.

After all THOSE people were treated with their FIRST shots, anyone over 65 who wasn't already in the above 4 categories should've gotten their first shots.

Then recreation and parks employees, camp counselors, public works department employees, anyone whose work brings them in direct contact with the public on a seasonal basis.

Then add parents or guardians of children too young to get vaccinated (under 16), and those kids' brothers/sisters over the age of 16.

Then everyone else.

[Jim1921]

Originally Posted by Ghaati

People 65+ count for around 90% of deaths anyway. Old age has that effect on old people. They tend to die.

The people who needed it MOST, from the very first day the shots were available:

1) Health workers and hospital staff (including the cafeteria lady and janitor)
2) Anyone working directly with the public year-round: food service, grocery stores, gas station attendants, etc.
3) First responders, police/fire/ambulance
4) Anyone responsible for other peoples' children as a profession: social workers for DCF, teachers, day-care employees, school nurses, etc. etc.

After all THOSE people were treated with their FIRST shots, anyone over 65 who wasn't already in the above 4 categories should've gotten their first shots.

Then recreation and parks employees, camp counselors, public works department employees, anyone whose work brings them in direct contact with the public on a seasonal basis.

Then add parents or guardians of children too young to get vaccinated (under 16), and those kids' brothers/sisters over the age of 16.

Then everyone else.

Everyone dies. Those 65 and older account for 90% of deaths and if not for COVID, they would have lived longer. Go look at the data on excess deaths. It was widely posted on the current events section of this board. It will take you significantly longer to vaccinate all those people on your list versus the elderly. You cannot completely isolate anyone outside a bubble. Look at what happened in the nursing homes.

[Poseidon3290]

Originally Posted by boy3365

It looks like you added more to your post. And again, I am not arguing about prioritization. I was just giving CVS credit instead of implying that the retail pharmacies collaborated on following the federal plan. With all the stories I'm hearing about vaccine sites having more vaccines than interested people in some cases, I don't think arguing priorities is meaningful for the time being. We may be reaching that equilibrium between supply and demand sooner than anticipated.

Yes. Schools seem to be less impacted than thought, but that is not an "I told you so" from the crowd that said open at all costs last summer. Most schools likely started at less than 50% capacity and can do a better job of enforcing mask mandates and distancing rules than private businesses can with adults. Not that I expect anyone to remember, but I've said that on this forum before. The success is likely because they have reduced capacity and can more effectively enforce guidelines rather than the idea that a kid can't give the virus to an adult.

Schools in Europe have flipped flopped between opening and closing again.

https://www.covidschooltracker.com/

Pick your state and then pick your county. Keep in mind most schools are either remote or 50/50... the numbers are still pretty high!!

FL:

Data End Date: 2/20/2021

Previous Week's Total Cases (2/14-2/20): 2,191

Cumulative Total Cases (09/06-2/20): 77,200


2100 kids got Corona virus this week in Fl. 77,200 total. If anything these numbers would be so much larger if everyone opened schools 100%.. people who scream KIDS DONT SPREAD IT, really just have no idea what they are talking about.

[Poseidon3290]

Originally Posted by Ghaati

People 65+ count for around 90% of deaths anyway. Old age has that effect on old people. They tend to die.

The people who needed it MOST, from the very first day the shots were available:

1) Health workers and hospital staff (including the cafeteria lady and janitor)
2) Anyone working directly with the public year-round: food service, grocery stores, gas station attendants, etc.
3) First responders, police/fire/ambulance
4) Anyone responsible for other peoples' children as a profession: social workers for DCF, teachers, day-care employees, school nurses, etc. etc.

After all THOSE people were treated with their FIRST shots, anyone over 65 who wasn't already in the above 4 categories should've gotten their first shots.

Then recreation and parks employees, camp counselors, public works department employees, anyone whose work brings them in direct contact with the public on a seasonal basis.

Then add parents or guardians of children too young to get vaccinated (under 16), and those kids' brothers/sisters over the age of 16.

Then everyone else.

Completely agree. But see, those people don't give DeSantis 250k donations, like the guy in Ocean Reef did.

[Jim1921]

Originally Posted by Poseidon3290

No, I would have targeted essential workers of ALL ages first. Then after those people, the snowbirds from Canada and the wealthy elite who never had to interact with the public. Keep in mind this allows for the 65+ year old that still is working with the public to get it. It eliminates the 65+ year GOLF and tennis player who sits in his huge mansion on the water.

And, under your plan, more people would die. Look at the reductions in infections, hospitalizations and deaths already happening in those age groups. Look at the data coming out of Israel. You think it is okay that a larger number of people die to get things prioritized the way you want and that if someone is wealthier than you or others, you are okay with them dying. Okay, so tell us, what is the cutoff for net worth?