Bear Pit: now the sole domicile of politics at LuLa

[Alan Klein]

And how many people would have died as herd immunity is reached. Seems like Sweeden's experiment has not worked.

I'm not suggesting anything; just making an observation. The point is that so many people might have it by then, especially due to Thanksgiving and Christmas gatherings, fewer vaccine doses will be required.  That makes vaccines more available to those who haven't gotten the virus yet. Plus, it will take fewer vaccinations to reach herd immunity due to the high rate of organic spread. 

Determining who should get the vaccine becomes another issue the government has to solve.  This is unlike the normal annual flu shot when it is assumed everyone is free of the virus and everyone can get vaccinated. 

[faberryman]

I'm not suggesting anything; just making an observation. The point is that so many people might have it by then, especially due to Thanksgiving and Christmas gatherings, fewer vaccine doses will be required.  That makes vaccines more available to those who haven't gotten the virus yet. Plus, it will take fewer vaccinations to reach herd immunity due to the high rate of organic spread. 

Determining who should get the vaccine becomes another issue the government has to solve.  This is unlike the normal annual flu shot when it is assumed everyone is free of the virus and everyone can get vaccinated.

The population of the United States is approximately 330 million. The number of confirmed cases in the United States is approximately 13 million, or approximately 4%. Herd immunity is achieved at approximately 60-70%. Draw your own conclusions.

Trump's plan for distribution is to parcel the vaccine out among the states pro rata based on population, and to let the states decide how to allocate their share.

[chez]

I'm not suggesting anything; just making an observation. The point is that so many people might have it by then, especially due to Thanksgiving and Christmas gatherings, fewer vaccine doses will be required.  That makes vaccines more available to those who haven't gotten the virus yet. Plus, it will take fewer vaccinations to reach herd immunity due to the high rate of organic spread. 

Determining who should get the vaccine becomes another issue the government has to solve.  This is unlike the normal annual flu shot when it is assumed everyone is free of the virus and everyone can get vaccinated.

How confident are you that once you get Covid, you are then immune for ever? How confident are you the virus won't mutate?

[Alan Klein]

The population of the United States is approximately 330 million. The number of confirmed cases in the United States is approximately 13 million, or approximately 4%. Herd immunity is achieved at approximately 60-70%. Draw your own conclusions.

Trump's plan for distribution is to parcel the vaccine out among the states pro rata based on population, and to let the states decide how to allocate their share.

There won't be 13 million by the time the vaccines are ready for injection after the holidays.  In any case, how will state governments determine who to give it to?  Will they test first to determine who has had the virus?  What dangers are there if the vaccine is given to someone who's had the virus?

[Alan Klein]

How confident are you that once you get Covid, you are then immune for ever? How confident are you the virus won't mutate?

Are scientists recommending everyone get the vaccine even if you had the virus?  Regarding your second question, if it mutates, then the vaccine probably won't work. They'll have to start over just like the annual flu shot. 

[faberryman]

In any case, how will state governments determine who to give it to?

Each of the states was required to submit its plan for distribution to the federal government weeks if not months ago. You could probably find them if you were interested.

[faberryman]

How confident are you that once you get Covid, you are then immune for ever? How confident are you the virus won't mutate?

We already have documented cases of people becoming reinfected. The last article I remember reading suggested that the best they could say was the anitbodies last at least six months. Perhaps there is some newer research.

[chez]

Each of the states was required to submit their plans for distribution to the federal government weeks if not months ago. You could probably find them if you were interested.

I would think first line workers and the elderly would be high on the list.

[Alan Klein]

Each of the states was required to submit their plans for distribution to the federal government weeks if not months ago. You could probably find them if you were interested.

I know the categories,  The CDC publishes which groups get the vaccine in which order.  My question is referring to what will states do with people who have had the virus already or don't know if they've had it.  What's the protocol if any that's being recommended to follow.  I don't recall seeing that on the CDC site.  Please don't tell me to look it up. We're having a conversation.  Facts and opinions are being posted.  We're brainstorming.  If we all just look things up, we could just shut down the forums and go to Google.  There would be no requirement for interaction.

[Paulo Bizarro]

There won't be 13 million by the time the vaccines are ready for injection after the holidays.  In any case, how will state governments determine who to give it to?  Will they test first to determine who has had the virus?  What dangers are there if the vaccine is given to someone who's had the virus?

For sure there will be more than 13 million, but still very far away from 198 million, right? I am sure the criteria for vaccination are avaiable someplace, at least in the EU it will be distributed pro-rated according to the population. In Portugal, we will get around 8 million doses initially, to vaccinate people who are most at risk, according to various reasons - profession, health, age, etc. In general, younger people will not be vaccinated.

If the health records are good, someone who has done the test and got positive and has not died will not be vaccinated. Of course there is the risk of someone who has been infected and asymptomatic will be vaccinated, but given that the majority of those are young people, and they will not be vaccinated anyway, no big deal.

[Alan Klein]

Ok I looked it up.  CDC says people "may" be advised to take the vaccine even if they have already been infected.  So apparently, "may" means they have no protocol yet.

FACT: People who have gotten sick with COVID-19 may still benefit from getting vaccinated
Due to the severe health risks associated with COVID-19 and the fact that re-infection with COVID-19 is possible, people may be advised to get a COVID-19 vaccine even if they have been sick with COVID-19 before.

At this time, experts do not know how long someone is protected from getting sick again after recovering from COVID-19. The immunity someone gains from having an infection, called natural immunity, varies from person to person. Some early evidence suggests natural immunity may not last very long.

We won’t know how long immunity produced by vaccination lasts until we have a vaccine and more data on how well it works.

Both natural immunity and vaccine-induced immunity are important aspects of COVID-19 that experts are trying to learn more about, and CDC will keep the public informed as new evidence becomes available.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/vaccine-benefits/facts.html

[faberryman]

Please don't tell me to look it up. We're having a conversation.  Facts and opinions are being posted.  We're brainstorming.  If we all just look things up, we could just shut down the forums and go to Google.  There would be no requirement for interaction.

Some people are just making stuff up. That is not helpful for having a rational conversation.

[faberryman]

Ok I looked it up.

Amazing.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Yeah, you're right. All those dead people are just lying down holding their breath?

I know you are too smart for such empty sarcasm.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

You love to spew crap.

And you like to be personally abusive without providing a justification. Which part of what I said is bothering you?

[Alan Klein]

Some people are just making stuff up. That is not helpful for having a rational conversation.

Giving opinions is not making stuff up.  I thought we beat that to death already. This is not a court of law where you produce evidence.  If I say Canon is better than Nikon, I don't have to prove it or provide links to tests that may have been made comparing the two.  A forum is just having a conversation. 

In any case, I was asking a question hoping to get others to join in who might have some facts on it.  If I would answer all my questions using Google, why would I even be here? It's bad enough Covid has locked us all up by ourselves so we can't get together with friends and families.  The forums are a way to communicate and be with people, something all photographers enjoy. 

[digitaldog]

Giving opinions is not making stuff up.

Sure it is. If I say my opinion is, you're an expert in the field of photographic exposure and print resolution, that's making stuff up and devoid of the actual facts anyone (everyone?) can see. I'm entitled to (but do not have) that opinion.
Or another slant could be.....
“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”
― Harlan Ellison
You are entitled to whatever kooky religious belief you have about politics, exposure or printing, I'm entitled to believe it's all rubbish and do so based on verifiable facts and data.

[faberryman]

Please don't tell me to look it up. We're having a conversation.  Facts and opinions are being posted.  We're brainstorming.  If we all just look things up, we could just shut down the forums and go to Google.  There would be no requirement for interaction.

If we looked up the facts first, then we could have a discussion about the facts. That would save us the time and effort of arguing about whose unfounded opinion is least likely to be true.

I'll tell you a little story. The summer before the 7th grade I had to read three books on the summer reading list. We were supposed to turn in book reports on the first day of school. I had broken my right wrist playing ice hockey. This was back in the day when they put you into a plaster cast up to the elbow. I couldn't write my book reports, so I got special dispensation to give my book reports orally the Saturday before school started. So I showed up right on time and everything went off without a hitch until we got to the third book, which coincidently I hadn't gotten around to reading. So the teacher started asking me questions, and I gave my "opinions" about what had happened. Well, that may have lasted about three questions before the teacher suggested I "re-read" the book and come back the following Saturday to discuss it. I learned several valuable lessons that day.

I wish more people would read the book before showing up here to discuss it.

[digitaldog]

By the time the vaccines are released, half the population might have gotten it and won't need the vaccines.  We'll already have "herd immunity", or near to it.

That's rubbish and shows you have no idea how "herd immunity" or the percentages needed actually work. Nor perhaps, do you care how many of half the population that may die or suffer long term effects after recovery would be. Your idea without a lick of scientific understanding, they won't need the vaccines shows utter ignorance on the basics of Epidemiology. Really, Exposure is a lot easier for the non Epidemiologist to grasp, stick with "photography" doctor Klein. Expecting you to actually read and study the basics of Epidemiology and "herd immunity" on a novel coronavirus is an impossibility EVERYONE should recognize.     

[digitaldog]

Please don't tell me to look it up. We're having a conversation.

"Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something". -Plato