[Reno89519]

Okay, so really old people are most at risk. Fine, quarantine them, let them vaccinate if they wish, but leave the rest of us alone.

[cuban leaf]

Okay, so really old people are most at risk. Fine, quarantine them, let them vaccinate if they wish, but leave the rest of us alone.

---

Yep. that’s been my stance since we flattened the curve about 14 months ago. My wife and I are 67 and have not been vaccinated - nor have we had a flu shot. And we don’t do masks. We’re also quite healthy and, as people without health insurance and trusting the Great Healer for our health, we take personal responsibility for our health condition and go forward accordingly.

This thing is simply not so deadly that we need concern our federal and local governments with it at all.

[blueplum]

that’s not really what the author is saying, tho

Some may say, the seniors can ‘leave us alone’. (ie not be bothered with worrying about seniors)? But what the author is pointing out is that ‘leave us alone’ crowd, say an unvaccinaed 40yo’d for example, has a higher hospitalization/death rate than a vaccinated 65yo’d. People dismiss risk by focusing on age. But we don’t need to segregate younger seniors (or look at them as some sort of superspreaders out in public) if we understand vaccination puts them in a decades-lower risk group (morbities excepted). But at the same time not being vaccinated accelerates the risk to that of a higher age group (morbidities accelerating). So why is our focus on seniors and kiddies when we should be focused on those most likely to become infected and transfer that infection to kids/seniors? Those within each age group most likely to need a Plan A and a Plan B, and then focus testing on them, to catch any dumpster fires before they become forest fires. Whether it be vaccination or awareness of monoclonols and how/where to get them, etc. With 80% of seniors vaccinated, approx, it’s time to refocus on who is the real ‘most at risk’ instead of vaccinating or restricting the least at risk.