[ub99]

Speaking for myself (as I am pretty healthy). My concern is not about dying as much as it is about developing long Covid and other not fully confirmed potential complications. Saying that, I think at this point in the US we should completely reopen and stop arguing about the measures. I am maximizing my chances of survival and staying healthy by getting vaccinated and wearing a mask. Many people don’t - and that’s their choice that is at this point we should not try to fight. The only thing we should accept is that unvaccinated Covid patients should have a lower priority in hospitals than patients with other conditions.

[dTal]

When you're operating at the level of a government setting policy for an entire country, you're no longer in position to view the world in terms of "personal responsibility". People, as a mass, are a fairly deterministic blob. "Reopening" sends the message that the pandemic is over. If you want to reopen, you need to accept that this will - directly, as a result of your decision - lead to avoidable deaths.

As for the other half of your proposition, I can see why it might seem appealingly logical - why should people who refused vaccination be entitled to medical care? - but I think it's ultimately inhumane. You don't know why they're not vaccinated. Maybe they weren't even offered it. Maybe they were in a disadvantaged life situation - there's a suspicious correlation between economic class and vaccination rate. Maybe they were prevented from getting it by oppressive relatives or partners. Maybe they were just being honestly cautious, and badly misjudged the relative risks. It's not fair to condemn people to death for those things.

[ub99]

I do believe there is away to send a more complete and nuanced message. We can reopen and keep communicating the fact that the disease is still here, people should be careful. I am not sure we really have an alternative. Covid might stay with us forever.

As to your humanitarian point - this can also be addressed with more nuance. A patient can explain that they are coming from a situation where they couldn’t get vaccinated. I don’t think it’s fair to prioritize the treatment of intentionally unvaccinated Covid patients who believe doctors are a part of a worldwide conspiracy. It’s a difficult ethical question - but we have to answer it nonetheless.

[unearth3d]

Wise response. I wouldn't be surprised if ~20% of any society/state/country is immune compromised in some way, most of those people work across their societies; letting covid run would force them to separate, and eventually end in poverty, this would weaken any society.

[SantalBlush]

Sure, if they're unvaccinated but still taking precautions to mitigate the spread to others and reduce the hospital workload, I'll certainly have more sympathy for them. How many unvaccinated people do you believe really do this?

[_red]

>punitive hospital policies

Why not also put fat people + diabetics at lower priority? Why is someone killing themselves by being 350lbs and having high-fructose corn syrup blood somehow more forgivable than someone waiting for FDA approval?

[ub99]

Are hospitals overwhelmed because of fat people in ICUs?

[enkid]

Except there are multiple states out if ICU beds because they tried this. Every person in the hospital with COVID is another person who can't use that bed to get medical treatment.

[ub99]

That’s what I meant in my last sentence. Unvaccinated Covid patients should have a lower priority. I haven’t heard of any hospitals trying that.

[iammisc]

Some states are out of ICU beds due to onerous restrictions on nursing supply, like vax mandates (my own state of Oregon for example)

[pessimizer]

And IMO it would be better the faster they all give it to each other. The longer it circulates between the non-vaccinated, who are interacting with the vaccinated, the likelier a variant arises that isn't affected by the vaccinations.

We don't want vaccinated people constantly catching covid, even if right now the symptoms are mild or nil 99.9% of the time.

[kodyo]

"My concern is not about dying as much as it is about developing long Covid and other not fully confirmed potential complications."

You and most people who are skeptical about the coronavirus vaccines share the exact same concern. But it sounds like you want them to be institutionally deprioritized because of theirs.

[ub99]

That’s not directly comparable. Antivaxx concern is not rooted in science or statistics. It’s rooted in conspiracy theories and anti-science.

In a similar way you could argue that questioning the last election is the same as worrying about the destructive rise of far-right rhetoric because both are rooted in the concern for our society. And therefore we should not institutionally ignore those who doubt the legitimacy of the election.

“Both sides” argument is not valid just because there are many people on both sides.

[howinteresting]

Yes, because one thing is true as shown by scientific evidence and the other is not.

It is really really important that public policy is based on scientific and other sorts of evidence. This is why the initial refusal of the CDC to back masks was so bad—it wasn't based on the evidence.

[iammisc]

Do you worry about Lyme disease, Epstein Barr virus or lone star ticks too? How much time do you spend?

Most Americans should be more worried about obesity and heart disease than long covid.