Did LDS leaders get the vaccine because of preferential treatment?

[Lem]

Did you read the OP? Age is not the issue:

When it comes to giving vaccines, there are two possible strategies:

1. Vaccinate the most at-risk to reduce deaths at the "end point."

2. Vaccinate those who are most likely to spread the virus to those who are at risk.

Since we have done a terrible job at tracing and figuring out who is most likely to be transmitting it (not to mention it would appear "unfair" and thus foster outrage among the least informed), most states are focusing on vaccinating the end points (i.e. those most likely to be hospitalized and/or die).

Once that strategy has been taken, the most important thing is speed, not equity. Get shots into as many arms (of at-risk people) as quickly as possible. The only low-risk people that should get shots are those that are frequently in close, prolonged contact with at-risk people. Anything that delays that is prolonging the pandemic and increasing the number of deaths.

That being the case, there is no rational reason to object to any at-risk person getting the virus, even if they're leaders of the Mormon Church.

The objection in the OP was not to at-risk persons getting the vaccine, the objection was to the confusion between church and state in Utah, resulting in ALL lds church leaders and their spouses, en masse, jumping to the head of the line. If there's a good reason for that, that does NOT involve violating the separation between church and state, I'd love to hear it. At the moment, it's not looking that way.

[cinepro]

That’s exactly the question being posed Lem. How did they as a group to the front of the over 70’s queue? Those 70 year olds in Utah still waiting for their lucky number to come up deserve an answer.

No they don't. Vaccine doses are limited, so there is no inherent benefit or harm to society from any individuals in the same risk profile getting (or not getting) a vaccine. As long as the vaccines are getting distributed as quickly as possible to the most at-risk people, the highest benefit is being realized.

Instead of wasting time worrying about which people are getting vaccines, the concern should be why there are still vaccines that haven't been administered. It looks like Utah has had 427k doses delivered, but only 325k administered. So there are 100k doses sitting in freezers. Vaccination clinics should be open 24 hours a day until they're all gone.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covi ... tribution/

If someone is more bothered by people not wearing masks than they are about unused vaccine doses, they're worrying about the wrong thing.

[cinepro]

The objection in the OP was not to at-risk persons getting the vaccine, the objection was to the confusion between church and state in Utah, resulting in ALL lds church leaders and their spouses, en masse, jumping to the head of the line. If there's a good reason for that, that does NOT involve violating the separation between church and state, I'd love to hear it. At the moment, it's not looking that way.

If the people who got the vaccines were in a high risk group, then there is no rational objection. From a public health perspective, the most good has been done. It doesn't matter what Church they go to.

Certainly, if their healthy, 25yo kids were also getting vaccinated, then we'd have a problem. But if you're saying "this high-risk person got one of the limited vaccines, but this similarly high-risk person didn't", there's no reason to object from a rational, public health perspective.

And if the vaccine was able to be given more quickly to the first person than it would have the second person, then the preferable choice was made.

[Lem]

And if the vaccine was able to be given more quickly to the first person than it would have the second person, then the preferable choice was made.

And if the vaccine was able to be given more quickly because of the standing lack of separation of church and state in Utah, thus constituting that the choice was based on unethical, possibly illegal behavior, then I disagree the preferable choice was made.

Discussing this issue is not limiting vaccine distribution, nor is it logical to argue for not discussing it simply because there are also other important issues.

You've responded several times to posts, without actually addressing the issue the OP indicated was problematic, and that I continue to mention. Justifying an in-place, unethical and unlawful influence by the lds church after the fact, by arguing it allows for speed, in my opinion is like arguing that at least arson allows for faster re-building of better structures.

What is your opinion about the separation of church and state issue?

[cinepro]

And if the vaccine was able to be given more quickly because of the standing lack of separation of church and state in Utah, thus constituting that the choice was based on unethical, possibly illegal behavior, then I disagree the preferable choice was made.

From a public health (and scientific) standpoint, given two people of similar risk, the pandemic will end most quickly (and create the most public good) by giving the vaccines out the most quickly (assuming an "end point" strategy). Any other consideration (including their religion) is anti-science.

You've responded several times to posts, without actually addressing the issue the OP indicated was problematic, and that I continue to mention. Justifying an in-place, unethical and unlawful influence by the lds church after the fact, by arguing it allows for speed, in my opinion is like arguing that at least arson allows for faster re-building of better structures.

What is your opinion about the separation of church and state issue?

I'm not familiar with Utah's laws regarding vaccination priorities, so do share. What law was broken?

And I'm not justifying any vaccinations based solely on speed. I was just pointing out that could also be a factor. Certainly, if it were discovered that a tray of vaccines could have been administered, say, on a Monday, but were held until Friday so some GA's could get them, that would bad, and I would object. But not because of the religion of who got it, but because of the delay.

So to be clear, I see religion as totally irrelevant. The only concern should be public health and ending the pandemic as soon as possible. If a state said they had a bunch of vaccines but could only get them administered over the next four weeks, and a church said they could do it in five days by giving them to their high-risk members (and administer them to people in the same risk group), then I would say "give them to the church." It could be Scientology, Mormonism, Catholics, Muslims. I wouldn't care. The speed is the only relevant issue.

And like I said, if this bothers you more than the fact that Utah has 100k unused vaccines sitting in the freezer, you're worrying about the wrong thing.

[Lem]

And if the vaccine was able to be given more quickly because of the standing lack of separation of church and state in Utah, thus constituting that the choice was based on unethical, possibly illegal behavior, then I disagree the preferable choice was made.

From a public health (and scientific) standpoint, given two people of similar risk, the pandemic will end most quickly (and create the most public good) by giving the vaccines out the most quickly (assuming an "end point" strategy). Any other consideration (including their religion) is anti-science.

You've responded several times to posts, without actually addressing the issue the OP indicated was problematic, and that I continue to mention. Justifying an in-place, unethical and unlawful influence by the lds church after the fact, by arguing it allows for speed, in my opinion is like arguing that at least arson allows for faster re-building of better structures.

What is your opinion about the separation of church and state issue?

I'm not familiar with Utah's laws regarding vaccination priorities, so do share. What law was broken?

And I'm not justifying any vaccinations based solely on speed. I was just pointing out that could also be a factor. Certainly, if it were discovered that a tray of vaccines could have been administered, say, on a Monday, but were held until Friday so some GA's could get them, that would bad, and I would object. But not because of the religion of who got it, but because of the delay.

So to be clear, I see religion as totally irrelevant. The only concern should be public health and ending the pandemic as soon as possible. If a state said they had a bunch of vaccines but could only get them administered over the next four weeks, and a church said they could do it in five days by giving them to their high-risk members (and administer them to people in the same risk group), then I would say "give them to the church." It could be Scientology, Mormonism, Catholics, Muslims. I wouldn't care. The speed is the only relevant issue.

And like I said, if this bothers you more than the fact that Utah has 100k unused vaccines sitting in the freezer, you're worrying about the wrong thing.

So, again no comment on the problem of the separation of lds church and state in Utah, the topic under discussion. Got it.

[IHAQ]

Looking at the reports of long queues in Utah of 70 year olds waiting for a vaccination, it’s very clear the Church Leaders were all afforded a priority over other 70 year olds. Not only that, they didn’t have to stand in line for hours on end to get it. Have the elderly leaders of other religious denominations been privileged in the same way? And has there been any explanation as to how the vaccination “lottery” is being managed?

19th January

“I’m glad our turn has come to have this vaccination,” President Oaks said Tuesday morning. “We’re very hopeful that the general vaccination of the population will help us get ahead of this awful pandemic. It’s hopeful, like the light at the end of the tunnel. There is relief and appreciation involved for those who have invented the vaccine and for those who have caused it to be generally available on a sensible priority system.”

https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.or ... 19-vaccine
A sensible priority system...once the privileged few have had theirs.

I suppose the underlying message is “Get a vaccination because prayers, priesthood blessings and fasting won’t prevent Covid unless you do...” On the other hand, vaccinations don’t require prayers, priesthood blessings and fasting to make them effective.

[cinepro]

So, again no comment on the problem of the separation of lds church and state in Utah, the topic under discussion. Got it.

I'm not sure what you're missing. I've said it several times. I have no problem with any 70yo getting the vaccine, regardless of their religion. Once it is decided that certain people in a risk pool should get the vaccine, my only concern is how fast they can get it.

And as others have pointed out, to the degree that there may be reluctance on the part of some LDS to get the vaccine, if leaders publicly getting it shows confidence in the program and leads to more people in that risk pool getting it quicker, then that would only be another great reason to give it to them.

And of course, we're talking about eight vaccines out of 33 million given nationally, and 325k given in the state of Utah. Even if I were to take offense at perceived favoritism for Mormon leaders, I would gauge my outrage by the level of the offense.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

It’s weird that cinepro is just waltzing by Lemmie’s point, that she was gracious enough to make a few times now, and just keeps repeating himself. This is MG-tier trolling.

- Doc

[cinepro]

Looking at the reports of long queues in Utah of 70 year olds waiting for a vaccination, it’s very clear the Church Leaders were all afforded a priority over other 70 year olds. Not only that, they didn’t have to stand in line for hours on end to get it. Have the elderly leaders of other religious denominations been privileged in the same way? And has there been any explanation as to how the vaccination “lottery” is being managed?

If Utah is anything like California, there are some places with long queues, and others where you're in and out in 30 minutes. I've heard plenty of stories of both, but the news seems to focus on the places with long waits. I suspect your view of the process is skewed.

You're also missing the larger point on this, in that someone decided that vaccine distribution would most certainly not take into account things like the quality of a person's life or whether or not they "deserve" it. I mean, it seems odd to complain that geriatric LDS leaders got vaccines when people like OJ Simpson, and Gitmo detainees like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed are also getting them before hundreds of thousands of elderly and people with pre-existing conditions. And I'm guessing the people at Gitmo didn't get their appointments through a fair-and-square "lottery" system.

A sensible priority system...once the privileged few have had theirs.

I suppose the underlying message is “Get a vaccination because prayers, priesthood blessings and fasting won’t prevent Covid unless you do...” On the other hand, vaccinations don’t require prayers, priesthood blessings and fasting to make them effective.

I'm still not sure how the leaders were "privileged" when the priority system specified people >70, and they're >70. If they were 25 and got the vaccine back in December, then you might have a point. But you're complaining about some >90 year olds getting the vaccine after vaccines were made available to... >90 year olds.

I think the Church has for decades been at peace with the fact that prayers and priesthood blessings don't cure communicable diseases and that vaccines are a fantastic gift to humanity. To the degree that members have gotten the idea that vaccines are harmful and should be avoided, I think the messages (both overlying and underlying) are a good thing, even if it risked having people irrationally judge the situation.