Well, I have read some more about this Covid solution for the immunocompromised and evidently there was one thing I misunderstood about the new protections.
I thought when they said it was "prophylactic" that you would take it to protect yourself before you stepped out in the world.
Now I see that "The treatment ... can only be issued after a person has been exposed to the coronavirus. (This means you can’t take it without knowing you’ve been exposed to the virus, say, because a close contact, such as someone in your household, has become infected.)"
Seriously? My first instinct is to go nuzzle with some Covid-infected person so that I can go to the hospital and get a massive dose, six times higher than normal. Then I suppose I would have to marry the infected person so he'd be a "household member," but then I could get the meds and eat at a restaurant and go on vacation.
I will not be the only one who feels this way. This is a bad idea.
UPDATE; I am wrong. I am confusing two separate "prophylactic" measures, the one authorized on Dec 8th and another one. The AstraZeneca one authorized on the 8th is truly protective and doesn't require exposure -- unless you need to make a case for it, which you will, because there isn't nearly enough of it.
I would guess that this is because at least at this time, they don't have enough to give to all the immunocompromised people, so they're prioritizing those who have been exposed. Either that or it is too expensive/risky to just give to all the immunocompromised people. No clue. But maybe later on everyone can have it?
Posted by: KC | December 14, 2021 at 12:55 PM
KC - that would be nice. I doubt if it's money, it's just too low a percentage to consider.
Posted by: TheQueen | December 14, 2021 at 09:43 PM