CDC Notifies States, Large Cities To Prepare For Vaccine Distribution As Soon As Late October

[Pyotr]

Looks like Gottilieb has changed his tune and is now far more positive than just a few months ago.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1363926622156582917

 

[jlwhitney]

I wonder where cases will go this week, today isn’t looking to be any lower or not by much than last Monday.

 

[Jonfw2]

I wonder where cases will go this week, today isn’t looking to be any lower or not by much than last Monday.

Last Monday was a holiday. Several states didn’t even report.

 

[jlwhitney]

Last Monday was a holiday. Several states didn’t even report.

Good point!

 

[Jonfw2]

Good point!

For perspective, 2 Mondays ago the number was 94,000.

 

[jlwhitney]

Looks like Gottilieb has changed his tune and is now far more positive than just a few months ago.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1363926622156582917

While it’s positive overall I think he is ridiculous trying to say restrictions may very well be needed in the fall and by Christmas holiday parties and such may need to be via zoom. By fall every one 16 and up should have the ability to get the vaccine and possibly 12-15. Kids under 12 aren’t really a huge worry as is.

bottomline personal responsibility needs to start taking back over sooner than later.

 

[Jonfw2]

While it’s positive overall I think he is ridiculous trying to say restrictions may very well be needed in the fall and by Christmas holiday parties and such may need to be via zoom. By fall every one 16 and up should have the ability to get the vaccine and possibly 12-15. Kids under 12 aren’t really a huge worry as is.

bottomline personal responsibility needs to start taking back over sooner than later.

YES. At some point society can’t stand still for people who choose not to be vaccinated.

 

[mrs. magoo]

I fully expect to be able to attend my son's college football games in the fall and I hope to be able to see some of daughters lacrosse games in person this spring. I have no problem wearing a mask when required and will continue to do so if it is mandated but I need to go out and have some semblance of normalacy. I was talking with my sister in law and since all of us adults (my brother (cop), sister in law (works in the court system), myself (teacher) husband (tests kids at his college) and father (over 75) have been fully vaccinated we will celebrate Easter together this year. None of our kids have been vaccinated all college age but we are confident enough to be able to gather in our small group.

 

[Jonfw2]

I fully expect to be able to attend my son's college football games in the fall and I hope to be able to see some of daughters lacrosse games in person this spring. I have no problem wearing a mask when required and will continue to do so if it is mandated but I need to go out and have some semblance of normalacy. I was talking with my sister in law and since all of us adults (my brother (cop), sister in law (works in the court system), myself (teacher) husband (tests kids at his college) and father (over 75) have been fully vaccinated we will celebrate Easter together this year. None of our kids have been vaccinated all college age but we are confident enough to be able to gather in our small group.

1. When obligated, follow the rules.
2. beyond that? Do whatever the —— you want.
3. go teams!

 

[Colleen27]

I wish more people felt the same as you do and stayed put in CA. My friend who is a realtor in Austin is selling multiple houses a day, getting ridiculous offers, sometimes house not even seen by the buyer. It's driving up prices tremendously. They are mainly leaving because they are fed up with the CA government, which will never change.

But it is like that everywhere right now, not just TX and not just because of a supposed outflow of Californians and New Yorkers (a narrative I think is largely media exaggeration). My son is trying to buy in Detroit, unquestionably one of the most historically troubled and depressed real estate markets in the country, and can't even get showings scheduled before the houses are under contract. Homes in my rural Michigan town are selling before they even list so you'd better have a well-connected real estate agent if you want to live here, and bidding wars are driving prices through the roof. I've got friends who have recently bought or are trying to buy in the SF Bay Area, Vancouver BC, rural Tennessee and northern Michigan and they're all complaining about the same things - housing stock well below demand, high prices, and fierce competition. If there is a significant migration underway, I think it is less from some states to others as much as from center-city apartments to suburban and rural-fringe single family housing.

 

[Jonfw2]

The UK just reported their smallest single day number since early October.

 

[DLgal]

But it is like that everywhere right now, not just TX and not just because of a supposed outflow of Californians and New Yorkers (a narrative I think is largely media exaggeration). My son is trying to buy in Detroit, unquestionably one of the most historically troubled and depressed real estate markets in the country, and can't even get showings scheduled before the houses are under contract. Homes in my rural Michigan town are selling before they even list so you'd better have a well-connected real estate agent if you want to live here, and bidding wars are driving prices through the roof. I've got friends who have recently bought or are trying to buy in the SF Bay Area, Vancouver BC, rural Tennessee and northern Michigan and they're all complaining about the same things - housing stock well below demand, high prices, and fierce competition. If there is a significant migration underway, I think it is less from some states to others as much as from center-city apartments to suburban and rural-fringe single family housing.

You're right. Most people in CA are just relocating from expensive cities to surrounding suburban areas in search of larger houses for less. No more people are leaving the state than have been for the last few years.

 

[huskies90]

Well, for starters I'd like the science that shows the following:

1. That OUTDOOR dining spreads coronavirus
2. That primarily outdoor THEME PARKS are a high risk setting
3. That movie theaters are safe
4. That swimming pools and playgrounds are a high risk setting
5. That hiking trails and beaches are a high risk setting (both things that were closed in CA for long periods of time last year)
6. That getting a haircut or your nails done is a high risk activity

There is no scientific proof for ANY of that, yet those rules were made using "science and data", allegedly. In fact, real world data shows that NONE of those things is an issue. Most of these are STILL restricted activities in our state.

Unfortunately it was (and still is) about what they can control and what is considered "essential" rather than what is reasonably safe. Private indoor gatherings, for example are probably the worst for spreading but very hard to control. Where as closing a playground or beach is easy to do. Meanwhile, outdoor sporting events with proper distancing are very safe compared to 500 people inside a Walmart but it is easier to say "we don't need sports" so they cancel it out of "abundance of caution"...

 

[huskies90]

Connecticut, which is currently 5th best in the country vaccinating, just dropped all their phases and went to age ranges - over 55, over 45 and over 35 thru mid April. I think this so smart to cut thru all the red tape and just get needles in arms. So I went from a non essential work from home worker under 55 years old which was originally slated for the last phase - targeting end of summer, to being eligible for my first shot on March 26. I hope more states follow this method. It is much more efficient and by default, you will likely get to the most vulnerable people faster anyway.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

by default, you will likely get to the most vulnerable people faster anyway.

Vulnerable is defined in multiple ways (death rates, hospitalization rates, rate of contraction, etc). Vaccinating by age is but one way to do it.

Here in my state the meatpacking workers (of which I've talked about) are in the current phase but won't get it quite yet. It may be of interest to you to watch Last Week Tonight from a few nights ago which highlights just why meatpacking and the like are at an increased risk of COVID (with a side conversation but a very important one about the working conditions and treatment meatpacking workers are often subjected to). Over 57,500 meatpacking workers have contracted COVID throughout the U.S.. In my state it's close to 4,000 in the cluster summary. In terms of cluster summary for my state it's the 2nd highest (albeit quite close to the 3rd highest) in terms of hospitalizations, it is also tied in the cluster summary for 2nd highest death rate (albeit 3rd is close by). LTC has far exceeded the others in those numbers by cluster summary (case rate, hospitalization and death rate) but they were selected 1st along with healthcare workers for a reason but still.

Different states have different needs. Some states need some sort of prioritization.

The reason why you were deemed to be far behind others is because you can work from home. You don't have to be exposed to the virus time and time again like others who have to be in constant contact with people (that's a practical statement). My husband works on power plants but can work from home, he's in the office right now but he can work from home. I consider my friend who is 33 who works in food/retail. If only going by age she'd be far far far down the list despite the fact that every day she goes into work and every day her coworkers go into work she stands a chance at being exposed. She's already gotten her first dose a few weeks ago thankfully...because of the very priority set up.

 

[huskies90]

Vulnerable is defined in multiple ways (death rates, hospitalization rates, rate of contraction, etc). Vaccinating by age is but one way to do it.

Here in my state the meatpacking workers (of which I've talked about) are in the current phase but won't get it quite yet. It may be of interest to you to watch Last Week Tonight from a few nights ago which highlights just why meatpacking and the like are at an increased risk of COVID (with a side conversation but a very important one about the working conditions and treatment meatpacking workers are often subjected to). Over 57,500 meatpacking workers have contracted COVID throughout the U.S.. In my state it's close to 4,000 in the cluster summary. In terms of cluster summary for my state it's the 2nd highest (albeit quite close to the 3rd highest) in terms of hospitalizations, it is also tied in the cluster summary for 2nd highest death rate (albeit 3rd is close by). LTC has far exceeded the others in those numbers by cluster summary (case rate, hospitalization and death rate) but they were selected 1st along with healthcare workers for a reason but still.

Different states have different needs. Some states need some sort of prioritization.

The reason why you were deemed to be far behind others is because you can work from home. You don't have to be exposed to the virus time and time again like others who have to be in constant contact with people (that's a practical statement). My husband works on power plants but can work from home, he's in the office right now but he can work from home. I consider my friend who is 33 who works in food/retail. If only going by age she'd be far far far down the list despite the fact that every day she goes into work and every day her coworkers go into work she stands a chance at being exposed. She's already gotten her first dose a few weeks ago thankfully...because of the very priority set up.

Our governor said 96% of deaths in CT are people over 55. NINETY SIX PERCENT. That is crazy. I don't disagree that there are people who deserve it way more than others. Like me for example. I don't mind waiting and you probably won't see me waiting in line on March 26. But I think all states would be much further along if we had simply done it by age. Very easy to prove and administer. CT was already 5th best getting the vaccine out. They could have just sat back and said we are doing great. I am proud of our governor saying we can do better. Let's see what impact this change has on CT's vaccine rate and hospitalizations over the next 2-3 months...

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Our governor said 96% of deaths in CT are people over 55. NINETY SIX PERCENT. That is crazy. I don't disagree that there are people who deserve it way more than others. Like me for example. I don't mind waiting and you probably won't see me waiting in line on March 26. But I think all states would be much farther along if we had simply done it by age. Very easy to prove and administer. CT was already 5th best getting the vaccine out. They could have just sat back and said we are doing great. I am proud of our governor saying we can do better. Let's see what impact this change has on CT's vaccine rate and hospitalizations over the next 2-3 months...

What you illustrate is the perfect example of why what strategy in one state won't necessarily be most appropriate in another. That's the difference. Your comment was you hoped other states followed simply on the basis of what yours is doing and that by default it would get to the most vulnerable. I countered that vulnerable means multiple things. I countered with an example of meatpacking across the U.S., gave stats for my state and a personal example. Different states have had different situations throughout this pandemic. And death is but one statistic to look at. I know people often forget those who don't die.

I find zero issues with how CT is doing, they should do what they see would be most appropriate to their situation...as should other states have that flexibility.

To give an example here's the case rates by age group of my state



ETA: If you think all states would be much farther along if by doing it by age groups and getting to the most vunerable then my state should have started with 16 and up. That would have gotten the case amount lower, the ability to interact with spread and likely would have trickled to the elderly. That thought process isn't novel though, others have talked about how we should have started with the younger generations before the older. So I suppose I actually could agree with you there but I don't think you'd agree with me in going with the younger group if you're only considering death rate.

 

[Heigh-Ho]

I fully expect to be able to attend my son's college football games in the fall and I hope to be able to see some of daughters lacrosse games in person this spring.

Have you had spectator restrictions for this past fall and spring? I think schools and colleges will feel more comfortable having more spectators come this fall or at least I hope that is the case.

 

[Colleen27]

Our governor said 96% of deaths in CT are people over 55. NINETY SIX PERCENT. That is crazy. I don't disagree that there are people who deserve it way more than others. Like me for example. I don't mind waiting and you probably won't see me waiting in line on March 26. But I think all states would be much further along if we had simply done it by age. Very easy to prove and administer. CT was already 5th best getting the vaccine out. They could have just sat back and said we are doing great. I am proud of our governor saying we can do better. Let's see what impact this change has on CT's vaccine rate and hospitalizations over the next 2-3 months...

But death isn't the only outcome we're trying to avoid. While death is most likely in older groups, middle aged people account for a not-insignificant share of hospitalizations, serious complications, and "long hauler" cases. A teacher at our local school, an overweight but otherwise healthy woman in her mid 40s, was in the ICU and ventilated with covid last spring. She didn't die, but she also hasn't fully recovered even after 8+ months. Hopefully by prioritizing people not just by age but also by profession, we can avoid other public-facing essential workers ending up in the same position.

My state is using a mixed model. Older people (75+ in the first tier, 65+ in the second) and those in congregate living are prioritized... but so are teachers and police and grocery workers and others who are in positions that are likely to be vectors for spread because of job duties that keep them in contact with the public or large numbers of people. It isn't significantly harder to prove or administer - there's no such thing as a school employee who doesn't have a district-issued ID or a cop who doesn't have a badge - and it arguably supports a more dramatic decline in cases by interrupting chains of contagion before they can become clusters.

I'm personally relieved that my 73yo mom is now fully vaccinated, but if she had gotten covid, I'm the only one she could have given it to. A teacher who gets it can spread it to a whole classroom or multiple classrooms of students, who can carry it home to their families, and so on. And by vaccinating teachers, we can do more to get schools back to functioning in a more normal way than if we wait until school staff is eligible based on age (in which case younger teachers, parapros, and other support staff would be among the very last to be vaccinated; almost half the staff at my daughter's school is under 40).

 

[DLgal]

Our governor said 96% of deaths in CT are people over 55. NINETY SIX PERCENT. That is crazy. I don't disagree that there are people who deserve it way more than others. Like me for example. I don't mind waiting and you probably won't see me waiting in line on March 26. But I think all states would be much further along if we had simply done it by age. Very easy to prove and administer. CT was already 5th best getting the vaccine out. They could have just sat back and said we are doing great. I am proud of our governor saying we can do better. Let's see what impact this change has on CT's vaccine rate and hospitalizations over the next 2-3 months...

It should have been an age based system all along, giving priority to people in higher age brackets first FOR A PERIOD OF TIME before moving to the next group. They could have continued allocating doses for older people whole still getting younger ones done.

So, like for the first 2 weeks, ONLY people 85+. Then, for the next 2 weeks, allocate 50% to 85+ but open 50% up to 75+. Two weeks later, 25% allocated to 85+, 25% to 75+ and 50% to 65+. And so on.

Our county is FINALLY doing it in a way that makes sense. They are allocating 30% to the most current phase (1B, which includes teachers, food service workers, child care workers) and the rest will continue to go to people in the other phases. In a couple weeks, they will allocate a specific percentage to people with high risk health conditions aged 16-64, while continuing to allocate for phase 1B. The rest will continue to go to people 65+.