I mean, you can't really have too many. But yeah, at the end of the day, this thing is all but over after 75-100 million more get vaccinated. Maybe less. Let alone, 300 million more. Lets say it's only 75 million over the next 90 days(end of may). That should be easy to get, and the supply is there. That's 22% more of the population on top of what is already showing immunity. And personally, I think we get 75 million by the middle of April, let alone end of May.

Also, is this 300 million double doses? Or 150 million total for two doses? I always get confused by that.

guessing it includes J&J as well, which is a single dose. So probably somewhere between 150 and 300.

Kicking ass

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

Fore Left! said:

---

Pfizer is approved for 16 and up. The others are 18. But they are doing trials on 12 and up now, so I expect the approved ages will lower later this year. But I don't see the point in healthy teens getting it

---

Thanks, I think the question would be vaccinating the non-healthy youth,

Aston94 said:

---

Fore Left! said:

---

Pfizer is approved for 16 and up. The others are 18. But they are doing trials on 12 and up now, so I expect the approved ages will lower later this year. But I don't see the point in healthy teens getting it

---

Thanks, I think the question would be vaccinating the non-healthy youth,

---

By regulation emergency use vaccines are not available to minors. So the vaccines that want widespread usage will have to go through standard approval processes.

Good thing kids aren't a vector of transmission huh?

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

---

Prob $$. And like chicken pox parents and schools don't have to deal with sick kids for 3-4 days. Downside being immunity through small exposures will decrease across the spectrum as we rely solely on vaccination.

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

---

Yes vaccinations are better. Take the chicken pox. When I was a kid, people thought it was better to make sure kids got sick. Now we know the pox is responsible for shingles. My wife got shingles a year and a half ago. It ****ing sucks.

Furlock Bones said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

---

Yes vaccinations are better. Take the chicken pox. When I was a kid, people thought it was better to make sure kids got sick. Now we know the pox is responsible for shingles. My wife got shingles a year and a half ago. It ****ing sucks.

---

I guess. Not sure I completely agree with that when we are talking about illnesses that in the long run cause so little harm.

But let's carry on.

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

---

There is no reason to vaccinate children with a concoction that is NOT FDA APPROVED.

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

---

Yes vaccinations are better. Take the chicken pox. When I was a kid, people thought it was better to make sure kids got sick. Now we know the pox is responsible for shingles. My wife got shingles a year and a half ago. It ****ing sucks.

---

I guess. Not sure I completely agree with that when we are talking about illnesses that in the long run cause so little harm.

But let's carry on.

---

Which diseases cause so little harm? Measles, mumps, rubella? That's been a pretty good one to give to kids. TDAP. Yep that's a pretty good thing. As already mentioned, chicken pox should be given. Smart parents will get their kids the HPV vaccine.

Once trials are done to prove its safe on children, then kids can receive the vaccine.

I get the hesitancy because covid isn't deadly for children, unlike the other vaccines children get.

But, once it's proven safe I don't see why a parent wouldn't give it.

I came to this realization yesterday when my son got 3 shots all at once yesterday at the doctor.

He handled it fine even though he got stuck like he just enlisted. If he can handle 3 shots at once i'm sure he can handle one once it's proven safe.

Furlock Bones said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

---

Yes vaccinations are better. Take the chicken pox. When I was a kid, people thought it was better to make sure kids got sick. Now we know the pox is responsible for shingles. My wife got shingles a year and a half ago. It ****ing sucks.

---

I guess. Not sure I completely agree with that when we are talking about illnesses that in the long run cause so little harm.

But let's carry on.

---

Which diseases cause so little harm? Measles, mumps, rubella? That's been a pretty good one to give to kids. TDAP. Yep that's a pretty good thing. As already mentioned, chicken pox should be given. Smart parents will get their kids the HPV vaccine.

---

Covid 19 in children.

Let me rephrase this.

If I understand this correctly Covid 19 is one of many types of coronaviruses, the vast majority of which are not particularly dangerous. But this variant is clearly an exception to that, particularly in elderly and people with various ailments. But it is not dangerous to children.

Is it true, or do we know, that part of the problem is the older populations did not develop immunities to it as we aged? And if that is true, does it not make sense to allow the younger generations to build natural immunities. To me that makes more sense than an annual shot, especially considering the logistical impossibility of worlwide annual forever and ever immunizations.

Not sure we know enough to answer that,

KlinkerAg11 said:

---

Once trials are done to prove its safe on children, then kids can receive the vaccine.

I get the hesitancy because covid isn't deadly for children, unlike the other vaccines children get.

But, once it's proven safe I don't see why a parent wouldn't give it.

I came to this realization yesterday when my son got 3 shots all at once yesterday at the doctor.

He handled it fine even though he got stuck like he just enlisted. If he can handle 3 shots at once i'm sure he can handle one once it's proven safe.

---

We posted at the same time, but see my post above.

Is vaccinating children the right thing in the long term? Or is allowing the human race to develop natural immunities over time a more rational long term answer?

Great question, I know it's not harmful for my son to get COVID.

But, if it's not unsafe to get the vaccine what's the issue?

You also raise a question I really struggle with, natural immunity to an extent is important for kids. It's why I gave my son peanut butter at 4 months, or I'm happy when he gets sick and well (sniffles).

It's the main struggle I have.

Furlock Bones said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

---

Yes vaccinations are better. Take the chicken pox. When I was a kid, people thought it was better to make sure kids got sick. Now we know the pox is responsible for shingles. My wife got shingles a year and a half ago. It ****ing sucks.

---

The chicken pox vaccine doesn't stop shingles. In fact you need a booster as adult to avoid shingles. One of the arguments against the chicken pox vaccine is that due its widespread use, fewer adults come into contact with chicken pox and thus our natural immune system is not stimulated, a natural booster if you will. So shingles is becoming more common in adults because we don't have those small contacts that our immune system practice to fight off. Instead we rely on boosters which are many still do not receive.

tysker said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

---

Yes vaccinations are better. Take the chicken pox. When I was a kid, people thought it was better to make sure kids got sick. Now we know the pox is responsible for shingles. My wife got shingles a year and a half ago. It ****ing sucks.

---

The chicken pox vaccine doesn't stop shingles. In fact you need a booster as adult to avoid shingles. One of the arguments against the chicken pox vaccine is that due its widespread use, fewer adults come into contact with chicken pox and thus our natural immune system is not stimulated, a natural booster if you will. So shingles is becoming more common in adults because we don't have those small contacts that our immune system practice to fight off. Instead we rely on boosters which are many still do not receive.

---

Shingles comes from already having the virus in your system. It does not flare up due to contact with the virus.

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

---

Yes vaccinations are better. Take the chicken pox. When I was a kid, people thought it was better to make sure kids got sick. Now we know the pox is responsible for shingles. My wife got shingles a year and a half ago. It ****ing sucks.

---

I guess. Not sure I completely agree with that when we are talking about illnesses that in the long run cause so little harm.

But let's carry on.

---

Which diseases cause so little harm? Measles, mumps, rubella? That's been a pretty good one to give to kids. TDAP. Yep that's a pretty good thing. As already mentioned, chicken pox should be given. Smart parents will get their kids the HPV vaccine.

---

Covid 19 in children.

Let me rephrase this.

If I understand this correctly Covid 19 is one of many types of coronaviruses, the vast majority of which are not particularly dangerous. But this variant is clearly an exception to that, particularly in elderly and people with various ailments. But it is not dangerous to children.

Is it true, or do we know, that part of the problem is the older populations did not develop immunities to it as we aged? And if that is true, does it not make sense to allow the younger generations to build natural immunities. To me that makes more sense than an annual shot, especially considering the logistical impossibility of worlwide annual forever and ever immunizations.

Not sure we know enough to answer that,

---

The vaccine targets this specific coronavirus. There will be others that make the leap from animals to humans as has happened with SARS and MERS. Given the history with SARS, MERS, and COVID, we might face a new one every 5-10 years rather than annually like the flu. I suspect the difference between kids and adults is not about previously developed immunity, but rather general health and resilience of youth vs elderly.

I suspect we don't really have to get this shot annually but we don't have the data to show that yet (no one has had the shot for a year). Flu vaccine is a very different thing as each year there are new flus to target. Plus, the flu vaccine targets a region of the flu that differs between flu strains. There is work on a more universal flu vaccine and if that works out, we probably put an end to the annual flu vaccine as well, but that will likely be 10 or so years down the road.

Thing is these things only take off like this one when there isn't the natural immunity in the population, so it isn't a matter of should we wait for natural immunity vs vaccine. The more people that get the virus, the more chances the virus has to mutate to a new strain. vaccination reduces the number of people that will get it and thus the number of chances for mutation to something different.

tysker said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

agsalaska said:

---

Furlock Bones said:

---

FratboyLegend said:

---

Aston94 said:

---

tysker said:

---

PJYoung said:

---

---

Given that those under 18 wont be taking these first vaccines, that seems like way, way too many...

---

The vaccines are not recommended for those under 18?

---

Not generally. Where have you been? Pfizer is 18+ and Moderna is 16+.

---

I know for a fact Pfizer is currently trialing their vaccine in 12-17 year olds.

---

So this I do not understand. Why would we want to vaccinate children. Dont we want children developing natural immunity?

Or is that wrong.

---

Yes vaccinations are better. Take the chicken pox. When I was a kid, people thought it was better to make sure kids got sick. Now we know the pox is responsible for shingles. My wife got shingles a year and a half ago. It ****ing sucks.

---

The chicken pox vaccine doesn't stop shingles. In fact you need a booster as adult to avoid shingles. One of the arguments against the chicken pox vaccine is that due its widespread use, fewer adults come into contact with chicken pox and thus our natural immune system is not stimulated, a natural booster if you will. So shingles is becoming more common in adults because we don't have those small contacts that our immune system practice to fight off. Instead we rely on boosters which are many still do not receive.

---

Chicken pox virus hangs out in the body after an infection. Years later when immunity wanes a flare up happens causing shingles. If you vaccinate as kids, they shouldn't end up with the virus hanging out to cause them shingles. The old people getting shingles vaccine never had the chickenpox vaccine.

We haven't had the chicken pox vaccine long enough to know if the kids that got the vaccine will get shingles or will need a booster when they are older adults.

You are right about the decreasing exposure reducing the natural booster that repeated exposure causes.

Good discussion and an interesting long term delima with children. Hopefully in the end we make our decisions based on science and not politics and or fear.

Off to work.