Or (c) I will tell everyone that I'm waiting so that more at-risk people can have access it to first, but secretly I'll be happy others are field-testing it for me...
The incentives seem to align: if I were a front-line at-risk worker I'd be much more accepting of possible risk than in my present situation of staying at home all day.
Speaking as someone who already has some (but not all) well-understood vaccines contraindicated and has to figure out which category covid vaccines will fall in...
(d) telling myself that (c) is how I feel is how I assuage my feelings of disappointment at being old enough decision makers believe I'm likely to behave responsibly, but young enough + no apparent extra risk factors enough that I'm likely to be near last to get access.
Or (d) I will wait to see if Corona mutates so much over the next year that the vaccine is a yearly process.
Edit: I feel like some people didn’t notice the mink culling in Denmark which was caused by fears that version of the virus would make the vaccines useless.
So if the strains change every year because the virus mutates so much then the current strain wouldn't be so common. It's basically what happens with the flu. Also a new strain can be more infectious, which I believe was the case with the mink strain.
I think the implication is, if it's available to you, the at-risk people have already had a chance to get it. At least that's what I've heard from the rollout strategy.
I'm not aware of any localities or nations that are just dumping the vaccines off at a pharmacy and letting people do what they want. Everywhere has a roll-out plan, with healthcare workers and high-risk individuals prioritized over the totally healthy mid-20's athlete. So (b) in your list isn't really a concern. If you have access to it, you should get it.
I agree. This is a bad poll that can be used to derive whatever meaning you want to derive from it. There’s no reason we can’t have fifteen more specific options listed.
Is it no because you don’t need it because you already had the virus? Is it no because you’re allergic to vaccines? Is it no because the virus is a hoax?
It might be a good idea to get the vaccine even if you've already had COVID. There's not been any CDC recommendations about it, but here's what they do say.
> There is not enough information currently available to say if or for how long after infection someone is protected from getting COVID-19 again; this is called natural immunity. Early evidence suggests natural immunity from COVID-19 may not last very long, but more studies are needed to better understand this. Until we have a vaccine available and the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices makes recommendations to CDC on how to best use COVID-19 vaccines, CDC cannot comment on whether people who had COVID-19 should get a COVID-19 vaccine. [1]
Suffice it to say, I'll do whatever the CDC recommends. I've already had COVID, so I'm guessing I'll go last. But at the same time, I'll get the vaccine if it is recommended.
Everything I've read has suggested that people who've had COVID should still get the vaccine anyway, as it could act as a booster. And that, whether through natural immunity or a vaccine it looks likely that we'll need to get it 'topped up' after awhile.
Has there been medical advice anywhere that people who've had COVID don't need to get vaccinated?