New Vaccines and Who Should Get Them First

 So three companies have highly-effective vaccines against the novel coronavirus. There is a worldwide need and the burning question for them and the politicians who guide them is this:

Who gets vaccinated first?

Many writers have written treatises on the topic, so mine will be short. Some have suggested giving the vaccine to the most vulnerable first; the elderly, those with significant health issues, and preexisting conditions have been suggested.

I disagree.

While saving a life--any life--is highly desirable, the already-sick and elderly are not the first group of people that should be given the vaccine first. Why, you ask? Because they are neither likely to spread either the disease nor increase resistance to it.

No, the people who should be given the vaccine first are the social butterflies and those who insist on attending large gatherings where mask-wearing and social distancing are not seen as necessary. Vaccinating them will help spread the resistance and will allow a faster 'herd immunity' than would happen with any other single group.

So find all the authoritarian cultists around the world, young people who think they are not going to "get" the disease, and those who want to crowd into a bar with other non-wearers. Vaccinate gig workers and those "essential" workers who have no choice but to continue working in places with patrons who might not wear a mask or see the value in protecting others lives. Definitely give the vaccine to health care workers and those on the front lines of protecting us.

After they have been vaccinated, they will go out into the world - remember, this a worldwide suggestion, not just for us - and not be part of the super-spreader group they were before. The active virus will not be transferred and fewer people will get sick faster.

Then the vaccine can be given to those people like me who don't go anywhere and who avoid crowded spaces. The economies will improve and life can begin to return to something recognizable as 'normal.' Doing anything else merely slows the process.

Think about it.

From whence the readers? And why must they be that way?

Over the weekend, I read a regular blog by one of my favorite writers, Claire Berlinski, who wrote that she saw an unusually large, sudden increase in her readers. She wondered why, so she did some checking.

It turns out they came from an unusual and unexpected source.

Former Speaker Newt Gingrich has been a regular reader of her work for years and mentioned her blog, “Claire’s Invariably Interesting Thoughts,” on Fox News. She now has many readers from that dark side of the spectrum. Well done, Claire. May they stay long enough to read at least one of your blogs, interesting and thought-provoking as they are. I have my doubts, but one never knows.

However, in keeping with the head-in-the-sand approach to the novel coronavirus and its deadly disease, COVID-19, taken by many on the right, plus Speaker Gingrich's and the new readers from Fox News's "lack of concern," she also wrote this telling bit:

"The novel coronavirus is now the leading cause of death in the United States. If you fear that you or one of your loved ones will die from this virus, it is not irrational at all.

"In April, more Americans died from Covid-19 than from accidents, chronic lower respiratory disease, cancer, or heart disease. Particularly if you live in New York State or New York City, you would be insane to be unconcerned..."

How hundreds of thousands of infections and almost 80,000 deaths in the USA alone fails to raise concern in even the most isolated, jaundiced individual is beyond me.

If you want to read some of Claire's musings that attracted a former Speaker of the House, point your web browser to: https://claireberlinski.substack.com/