There is a sense of isolation and some boredom, but having been retired for a couple of years was some training for that. So sitting around, consciously sitting around, I think, has helped make it not so severe of a transition.
This was a pretty exceptional election so I'm, I don't know that for me, I would probably have been as obsessed as I was either way. But yeah, having been stuck at home, definitely gave us enough time to really obsess on the politics. Although on the other hand, it gave me time to be more actively involved in things like phone banking and active, actively participating.
Well, I think that Trump's failures have massively overshadowed my sense of safety and my sense of willingness to trust. However, having there's that, but then there's the science. You know, it isn't just a one-year development. The development process has been 10 and 20 years in the making. It's just that there's this less than a year application of what's been going on to actually - Oh, here's, here's, it's go time now. It's time to make it, to utilize this technologies that we've been developing for so many for a couple of decades now.
So hearing that helps to allay the fear that this is basically Trump's vaccine. An example is the threatening of the FDA had to be fired, approve it or be fired. That was completely unnecessary. They would have approved it that night or the day after. And all that does is ramp up the potential for perception that it was politically about motivated.
Wanna talk about the kids? Polio? (Now you go ahead) What I can remember of it. Basically, it was kind of an alarmist reaction, kind of an alarmist perspective. Because back then I had no medical training. The extent of my medical training had been that I was an instructor of the Red Cross first aid. So I was completely out of my depth, but the notion of being fed a live virus, though it was attenuated still was completely terrifying to me when there was an alternative. Had there not been an alternative, I probably would have gone along with it because it had been done for so long and had obviously there had been so much benefit to it, but because there was an alternative is why I put the brakes on it. I don't remember the details, but it was, it was during the visit that I discovered that it was a live virus. So it was either in the waiting room or in the actual treatment room. I don't remember but it, it, it did require some significant push, push back.
That's that's actually a big, big factor for me as is, like I had said about the polio vaccine, is that because there had been such a huge precedent that I would have allowed it to be given to my son because so many had gone before if that was the only alternative.
But now here we are with this vaccine because I'm probably halfway down the list. There's going to be enough people ahead of me that by the time it comes time for me, I suspect I will have seen enough people get it, that I will probably have enough evidence for myself that I'll probably be comfortable taking it. That that's what I'm anticipating at this point.
Yeah. It's a mistake to start with the elderly. Especially if there are adverse reactions with the elderly, then that's going to be a publicity that's going to tank the willingness of people to, to go forward with it. So I would, I would rather see elderly though, as though they're yes, they're at risk and yes, it's a humanitarian move to go there, I think that going there first is fraught with risk, extra risk that it could, uh, seriously impact the success of the rollout.
This country is so divided. It has been so politicized. And there are going to be so many people that if it was mandatory, just on principle, that it was mandatory, they would refuse it. I'm not even sure if making it mandatory would actually decrease the number of people that would take it in that regard.
But should it be?