Despite new federal limits on who can get a Covid-19 vaccine and the arrival of the cold and flu season, many Vermonters can still get a booster, though details surrounding Medicare reimbursement and federal recommendations remain uncertain.

In a late August post on X, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced the Food and Drug Administration approved Covid-19 booster shots, but only for those 65 and above or with existing health risks. 

Vermont state officials are now awaiting a recommendation from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which typically guides public health directives and insurers’ coverage, for those who want to get a fall booster shot.  

“Really the best thing that I can recommend is either to go online and see if you can set up an online appointment (for a vaccine), or call pharmacies in your area to see if they’re available,” said Julie Arel, the state’s interim commissioner of health.

In Vermont, pharmacies are moving forward with administering the vaccine. Kinney Drugs and CVS have the updated Covid vaccines in stock. Pharmacies order directly from the manufacturer. Providers — doctors’ offices and other clinics — often get vaccines through the state, which is not yet able to order the vaccines from the CDC. 

Kinney Drugs’ spokesperson Alice Maggiore confirmed that the stores can administer the 2025-26 vaccines to people above 65 and individuals between 12 and 64 who attest to having one of the qualifying conditions, as outlined by the CDC. 

CVS is able to vaccinate anyone over 5 years old, who attests to eligibility under the same CDC’s preexisting conditions list, or anyone older than 65, according to a company executive, Amy Thibault. 

The underlying risks outlined by the CDC range from asthma or a smoking history to mental health disorders, like depression obesity, or physical inactivity. Patients do not need a doctor’s prescription to confirm the underlying condition at Kinney or CVS, both spokespeople said.

Typically, insurers cover vaccines received in a pharmacy. Whether some private and government insurers will be able to cover the vaccines remains uncertain. Even if people can get the vaccine by walking into a pharmacy, it’s unclear if they will have to pay for it:  “It’s a little bit mind boggling,” Arel said. 

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Vermont, the state’s largest private insurer, plans to continue to cover the vaccine for any member, at no cost and with no prior approval, said Andrew Garland, a vice president and spokesperson for the insurer. Blue Cross Blue Shield of VT intends to do so through 2026, as well. MVP, the state’s other private insurer selling plans on the marketplace, also does not anticipate changes in its vaccine coverage policy, said Elizabeth Boody, a spokesperson for the company. 

What employer-sponsored insurers and providers like Tricare, the military health system, might be able to cover, is still unclear.

Since the FDA has already approved the vaccine for those over 65, it is likely that Medicare, which covers the same age group, will cover the vaccines. Dorit Reiss, a vaccine policy expert at the University of California Law, San Francisco, told NBC News that once the FDA approves a vaccine, Medicare has the authority to cover it.

Generally a Covid vaccine undergoes three steps for approval: First the FDA authorizes the new vaccines — which it did in August. Then a panel within the CDC called ACIP (short for Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices) issues a recommendation on the vaccine. It is scheduled to meet Sept. 18-19, to do so. This year many are holding their breath ahead of ACIP’s announcement, since Kennedy gutted the panel and replaced it with many vaccine skeptics. 

The state is weighing whether and how it will need to break from that typical process, and is currently exploring what Vermont statute allows for breaking with that process.

While it is quite common for providers to prescribe a drug outside of what the FDA has authorized them for, it’s not typical, however, for that to happen with vaccines. The FDA’s lack of formal guidance on what qualifies as an underlying condition leaves room for interpretation surrounding who qualifies for the vaccine.

“There’s some flexibility in there, but because it’s not as clear as usual, there is going to be hesitancy, in all likelihood,” said Arel. “And anytime there’s hesitancy, anytime there’s confusion, it’s going to lead to lower immunization rates. We really want to try to avoid that.”

The Department of Health is also looking to Vermont’s neighbors in the Northeast for direction, Arel said. In August, the department joined with other state health departments in the region to build a coalition ready to respond to shifts in federal guidance. Though the group has no unified recommendation, she says it’s something they are considering to help mediate the current disjunctive state of vaccine recommendations and approvals. 

“If as a region, we can become more aligned, it helps people across the whole Northeast region to feel a level of confidence in their state public health department’s decisions and how we’re moving forward,” she said.

In Massachusetts, Gov. Maura Healy required in-state insurance carriers to cover the vaccines recommended by the state’s Department of Public Health, even if they are outside of the federal recommendations. The state’s commissioner of public health also issued a standing order that allows pharmacists to issue Covid shots to anyone over the age of 5. 

In response, Arel said Vermont is watching its neighbors and looking into where state statute might allow for potential action. 

“Getting clarity and having a message be clear and simple, is going to be the most important thing we do,” Arel said. “Unfortunately, we are still working through all of that, but we are committed to finding our way through it and making it as simple and easy as possible.”

Read the story on VTDigger here: As feds tighten Covid vaccine rules, Vermont works to maintain access .

The United States is in the midst of a surge in measles cases driven by unvaccinated children. 

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reported 483 measles cases so far in 2025. If the current pace of spread were to continue, it would make this year the worst for measles in the 21st century. 

About 97% of cases have been in unvaccinated people or people with unknown vaccine status, the CDC reported. Three-quarters of cases have been in people under the age of 20. Seventy people have been hospitalized, and one school-aged child has died in Texas. Another death is under investigation.

Cases have been highest in Texas and New Mexico, according to the CDC. Vermont has been mostly spared thus far, with only one travel-related case reported by the state Department of Health. 

But health officials here are worried about one key statistic: The state’s measles vaccination rate for incoming kindergarteners has been below 95%, the critical “herd immunity” threshold that can prevent individual cases from becoming outbreaks. 

For the 2023-24 school year, the most recent year available, 93% of kindergarteners in public or private schools were up-to-date on their MMR vaccines, which provide protection against measles, mumps and rubella, according to health department data. Adults are also recommended to receive the MMR vaccine if they do not have evidence of vaccination or immunity. 

Even fewer, 91%, were fully immunized with all the required childhood vaccinations, which also include protection against diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, chickenpox, polio and hepatitis B. 

“If we have 95% of people vaccinated, it would stop the spread,” said Merideth Plumpton, the department’s immunization program director. “Right now in Vermont, we’re below that.”

The measles vaccination rate for kindergarteners in Vermont is similar to the nationwide one, according to a research paper from the CDC. But the state has the second-lowest measles rate in New England, above only New Hampshire. It’s also lower than neighboring New York state. 

While 93% may sound close to 95%, that gap makes a real difference when it comes to herd immunity, Plumpton said. The 95% threshold is effectively a tipping point where vaccinated people act as a buffer, keeping the 5% of the community from coming into contact with each other.

“It just means that if we have a case, the likelihood that it’s going to spread is pretty high, especially if the child goes to school or child care during their infectious period,” she said.

Among all school-aged children, the rate of vaccination was higher, about 96% for the MMR vaccine. But facility-level data, which VTDigger obtained from the health department, shows that the statewide vaccination average was only part of the picture — in reality, many schools are far below the average.

About 26% of K-12 schools and 23% of child care facilities did not meet the 95% vaccination threshold for measles, the department data showed. In three counties — Lamoille, Orleans and Washington — the percent of facilities that do not meet herd immunity rose above 33%.

Vermont requires children entering child care facilities or K-12 schools to receive five vaccines that protect against nine potential childhood illnesses. Students at residential schools, also known as boarding schools, and incoming residential university students are also required to receive the vaccine against meningitis. 

But children can be exempted from those requirements for three reasons: provisional admittance for children with upcoming vaccination appointments, a medical exemption approved by a health provider or a religious exemption where parents attest to “holding religious beliefs opposed to immunization.”

For the 2023-24 school year, only 0.2% of children were medically exempted, 3% were provisionally admitted and 3% were exempted for religious reasons, according to the health department. 

Plumpton said the lowest vaccination rates tend to be found in the state’s most rural areas. “It could be a combination of lack of access and attitudes towards vaccines,” she said. 

Independent schools, which includes private and religious schools, also tend to have lower vaccination rates than public schools, according to the department data. 

Vaccination hesitancy has been bolstered in recent years by anti-vaccine sentiment connected to the Covid-19 vaccine, Plumpton said. The Trump administration has also placed the longtime anti-vaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy in charge of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, one of the most powerful public health roles in the nation. 

Plumpton emphasized that most Vermont families still choose to have their children vaccinated. But it’s natural for parents to have questions about the vaccines they’re giving their children, she said. 

“As a parent, I want to make the best decision that I can for my child, and I can only make that decision based on the information that I have,” she said. “And we’re in an age where there’s information everywhere, so it’s really hard to know what the correct information is or where to go to get good, solid, sound, scientific information.”

She encouraged parents to check out reputable websites like Vaccinate Your Family and VaccineInformation.org, which both have thorough FAQs about the safety and efficacy of each vaccine. 

She also encouraged them to discuss their child’s vaccine schedule with their primary care provider or pediatrician. Vermont provides recommended vaccine doses for children and adults at no cost to health care providers. 

But her message to Vermont parents was clear: Measles is a highly contagious virus that can lead to severe illness and death, and “vaccines are the best defense against the illnesses that you’re getting vaccinated against.”

“They’re not going to prevent 100% of the diseases,” she said. “That’s not the way vaccines work. But they’re really highly effective at preventing hospitalization and really serious illness. And there’s a reason that we have these vaccines.” 

You can use the tool below to browse school and child care vaccination rates, or check out the Department of Health’s vaccination dashboard for a fuller picture by year and county.

Clarification: This story was updated to note an additional death under investigation.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Hundreds of Vermont schools and child care facilities do not meet herd immunity threshold for measles.

This commentary is by Dr. David Schneider, a long-time Rutland pediatrician who recently retired from clinical practice. He continues to advocate for meaningful health and care.

It is a testament to the good judgement and values of Vermont families that measles vaccination is prioritized. Childhood immunization rates are typically over 95% statewide. Our own Rutland County is in a very good place.

With the exception of some independent schools, our overall preschool and school-age MMR vaccination rate remains over the 92-94% threshold that has been shown to limit the risk of a community outbreak.

As a community cheerleader, I am sharing these comments to reinforce the need to immunize.

It is sometimes difficult to filter truth from the flood of circulating and dangerous misinformation. Injury from measles is genuine, extensive and avoidable. Transmission of this highly contagious, awful illness can be devastating especially to our susceptible neighbors who might be too young for immunization, or who are immunocompromised.

I belong to an aging crop of physicians who cared for many hospitalized children, so ill, during the measles epidemic of the late 1980s and 90s.

New standards for widespread measles immunization were intently developed and administered. The effectiveness of the immunization schedule was demonstrated. Twenty-five years ago measles was considered obliterated from the United States.

Today’s measles resurgence is the effect of lax immunization. Communities in some regions of our country are once again at risk and contending with unnecessary illness, agony and death. Consequences from measles illness can be severe and include brain swelling encephalitis, suffocating pneumonitis, and immune system suppression triggered by the measles virus.

Some children will die unnecessarily from the acute effects of the virus and rarely by the delayed progressive brain swelling of Dawson disease (subacute sclerosing panencephalitis). But timely immunization virtually eliminates the risks.

Please be wary of out-of-context misrepresentations of vitamin A use in measles prevention or treatment. Impoverished countries see benefit when vitamin A supplement is administered to those malnourished children with vitamin A and other nutritional deficiencies.

These studies are not relevant to, and must not be extended to developed populations such as the United States where vitamin A deficiency is nearly nonexistent. Taking additional vitamin A when there is no deficiency is useless at best. To be clear, excess vitamin A is dangerous. It is toxic!

Likewise, we all agree that it is a very good idea to be physically fit, minimize Twinkies, and to sleep restfully. Fruits and vegetables are great, but they simply do not prevent, nor cure, nor create symptom protection from measles.

The vaccine, by the way, has nothing in the universe to do with autism. The rate of autism is identical whether immunized or unimmunized. The distinction is only that unvaccinated children, whether diagnosed with autism or not, are at greater risk of contracting measles, becoming ill and transmitting preventable infections to others.

The measles vaccine, given as the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) is extremely effective and exceptionally safe. There are rare times the vaccine should not be given for medical reasons, for example with extreme allergy, or when a person is severely immunocompromised.

Please continue to engage with our tireless, wonderful community physicians and clinical practitioners. They will be candid, their trust well-earned. Let us continue to minimize the considerable risk of significant physical injuries to our children and our families: Please IMMUNIZE.

Read the story on VTDigger here: David Schneider: Injury from measles is genuine, extensive and avoidable.

No one dressed up for the Covid clinic at the Waterbury Ambulance Service Thursday, but the elation there rivaled other momentous occasions. 

Toddlers and babies cried, but parents practically cheered. For more than two years, families with children under age 5 had waited for a Covid vaccine to become available for that age group. The nation’s littlest people — and their families — were relegated to outdoor gatherings and masking, while vaccinated people were told they could let go of those precautions.

“It’s huge,” said Jocelyn Bahr of Jericho, mother of two. “I feel like our lives have been on hold and I feel like children in that age group were completely forgotten about. We decided to say that we didn’t have to wear masks, but kids in that age group were not vaccinated.”

On June 18, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended Covid vaccines for children ages 6 months to 5 years, the last age group to be approved. And on Wednesday, the vaccines became available to this age group in Vermont.

Bahr, an early childhood educator on summer break, said the clinic in Waterbury was her first opportunity to get a vaccination for her youngest son, Henry, 2. His 5-year-old sister, Josephine, was also there to get a vaccine booster. 

“Mommy could cry, too, I’m so excited,” Jocelyn Bahr told her sobbing children as she tried to soothe them. 

Like Bahr, Gregory Schorder and Marisa Ratigan couldn’t wait to get their 8-month-old son Ronan vaccinated. The Killington residents had closely followed news about vaccine releases, and began looking for a shot almost as soon as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention approved Pfizer and Moderna shots for young children, they said. 

To protect Ronan, Ragitan and Schorder have mostly stayed home, avoiding crowds and indoor gatherings. Vaccinating Ronan will again make it possible for the family to go to museums, restaurants and extended family gatherings. 

Ragitan sees it as a kind of reentry to society. 

“If they’ll have us,” she joked. 

About 220 young children had received their shot as of Friday morning, according to the Vermont Department of Health. Roughly 26,000 children in that age group are eligible for the vaccine.

Most parents likely will choose to have their young children vaccinated at their pediatrician’s office, predicted Monica Ogelby, immunization program manager at the Vermont Department of Health. Pediatricians have already received vaccine shipments, but some haven’t started offering shots yet. 

Ogelby said some parents plan to get their young children vaccinated on their next visit to the pediatrician, and some kids are in the process of recovering from Covid and can’t get the shot quite yet.

Lindsey Browning and her mom, Chris Caldwell, paused their vacation week briefly to get vaccinations for Browning’s 20-month-old twins, Nick and Amelia. When the thigh jab came, the twins each got their own soothing adult. 

As the sobbing stopped, mother and daughter reflected on the possibilities ahead. Nick and Amelia were born in the thick of the pandemic, they said. They’ve never visited a restaurant or gone to a museum. There were no playdates or mommy-and-me groups. 

Clutching brand-new vaccination cards for her toddlers, Browning suddenly thought of another first: A family trip to Georgia.

It will be Nick and Amelia’s first airplane ride.

Read the story on VTDigger here: As Vermont begins vaccinating young children against Covid, some parents see possibilities.

Updated Jun. 21, 3:55 p.m.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended Covid-19 vaccinations for children 6 months through 5 years of age on Saturday — and the state Department of Health has followed suit with preparations to roll out the vaccine in Vermont. 

About 26,000 Vermont children are now eligible to receive the Covid vaccine, according to a Saturday press release from the health department. Providers will begin to receive doses to distribute to children starting this week. 

This new age group is the first to gain eligibility for Covid vaccination without a rigorous state-run vaccination program in place. Gov. Phil Scott rolled back state-run vaccination clinics in March after the Omicron surge had waned. 

In Monday’s announcement, Scott called the federal recommendation “an important and welcomed step forward.” 

“Vermont has led the nation in vaccination uptake, especially among our youth,” he said. “I’m confident Vermont parents and caregivers will continue to step up in this new phase of our vaccination efforts.” 

Where can children get vaccinated? 

The health department will be distributing vaccines to children in this age range primarily by way of pediatricians, according to the announcement. Providers’ plans for administering vaccines may vary, the health department said, so “parents and caregivers should expect to hear from their child’s pediatrician when they are ready to begin vaccinations.”

The state also plans to host “a limited number of walk-in clinics,” the announcement said. State clinics now list availability for the Moderna vaccine for young children at clinics in 19 towns starting June 21 through the end of July. Clinics with Pfizer availability have yet to be announced.

Monica Ogelby, immunization program chief for the health department, told VTDigger earlier this month that the department’s distribution plan would prioritize populations disproportionately affected by the virus, such as people of color. The department also would take into account providers’ histories of vaccinating children and the number of children served by the practice. 

“In Vermont, we have worked for months to ensure every pediatric health care provider has a plan to assist their patients in this age group have access to this vaccine,” health department spokesperson Nancy Erickson said in an emailed statement to VTDigger on Monday. “It’s recommended that families contact their pediatric health care provider to learn more about how to get vaccinated.” 

The majority of pediatric health care providers who work with children 6 months old through 5 years old opted to carry the vaccine in their offices, while a handful of smaller offices chose to partner with larger practices nearby, Erickson said. 

Local WIC offices may also distribute the vaccine for families enrolled in the WIC program, according to the announcement.

Which vaccines are approved for younger kids? 

The Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna vaccines are both authorized for kids in the newly eligible age category, according to the announcement. 

The Pfizer vaccine for Covid is authorized for kids ages 6 months to 4 years to be administered in two doses, three weeks apart — then a third dose at least two months later. The Moderna vaccine is authorized for kids ages 6 months to 5 years in two doses, four weeks apart. 

Pfizer doses are one tenth the version administered to adults, and Moderna doses are one-fourth the adult dosage. 

My child recently had Covid. Should they still get the vaccine? 

As is recommended for older individuals, children who had Covid-19 recently might delay their next dose of the vaccine until three months after symptom onset, according to the CDC, or three months after a positive test, if the child was asymptomatic.  

Parents should seek the advice of their child’s pediatrician on when to begin vaccination.

Will pharmacies administer the vaccine?

Some pharmacies plan to administer the vaccines, according to the health department. However, pharmacies can only vaccinate children who are 3 years of age or older, and very few pharmacy locations appear to have solidified plans to distribute vaccines to the youngest Vermonters. 

• Kinney Drugs is still working through logistics and awaiting final guidance from the Vermont Department of Health before finalizing any tentative distribution plans for the youngest eligible age bracket, according to a spokesperson. 
• Parents can schedule appointments for their kids ages 3 to 5 years old at select Walgreens locations as early as June 25. Currently, however, no Walgreens locations in Vermont are listed online as providers of Covid vaccines for this age range. 
• CVS plans to administer Covid vaccines to children 18 months through 4 years of age at over a thousand of its “MinuteClinics” — but there are no MinuteClinics in Vermont. CVS will continue to provide vaccines to children ages 5 and older at locations throughout the state. 
• Smilin Steve Pharmacy Group elected not to vaccinate children in this age range, as they believe vaccinating children that young is best done under pediatric oversight, according to a spokesperson. 

Are the vaccines safe for young children?

Yes, according to federal health authorities. The recent CDC recommendation follows months of clinical trials and authorization by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

“Ongoing safety monitoring shows that COVID-19 vaccination continues to be safe for children,” the CDC says. “The known risks of COVID-19 and possible severe complications outweigh the potential risks of having a rare, adverse reaction to vaccination.”

Common side effects for children three and under include pain at the injection site, swollen lymph nodes, irritability, sleepiness and loss of appetite, according to the CDC.

This page will be updated when new details on vaccine availability at pharmacies and state-run clinics become available.

Correction: A previous version of this story misstated the schedule of doses for the Pfizer vaccine for children under five.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Covid vaccinations for Vermont children under 5 set to begin in days.

VTDigger is at risk of making itself a tool of the state government by reporting “the facts” of Covid-19, as provided by the state, verbatim — as “the facts” are framed statistically to minimize the political damage of the state’s failure to effectively manage the pandemic.

Here are some ways of taking the anodyne numbers the state is feeding the public, and adding context to make them newsworthy:

1: From the beginning of the pandemic — let’s say March 1, 2020, to July 1, 2021, when Gov. Scott abruptly “opened the spigot” completely (a period of roughly 16 months) — Covid killed 255 people in Vermont. In the mere seven months since then, Gov. Scott’s “raging full-on” spigot policy has killed an additional 259 people. 

Reporting the news needs to be more than stenography of statistics framed to minimize the effects of the state’s policy preference to favor the bottom line of its business owners over the lives of its citizens.

2: The state reports (and VTDigger dutifully repeats) that 98.8% of Vermonters 12+ years of age are partially or fully vaccinated. If ever there were a statistic more assiduously massaged to make the state look better than it really does, I have trouble imagining it.

Firstly, in this wave of Omicron, partial vaccination doesn’t amount to much. Studies show that full vaccination plus boosters generally mitigate the worst effects of Omicron. Partial vaccination is significantly less effective. 

The state should be offering realistic statistics on full vaccination (full meaning the full course of whatever vaccine, plus the recommended booster), and VTDigger should be doing whatever it can to get real, meaningful numbers about how many people are actually vaccinated to a degree that will mitigate the severe effects of the current mutation of the virus. After all, the governor has stated that Covid has become “a pandemic of the unvaccinated.” That cohort includes the partially vaccinated at this point, but the state is giving us the most rose-colored statistics, instead of the truth.

Second, children ages 5-11 are also eligible for vaccination. The state leaves this portion of the eligible population out of the statistics because it would significantly cut into that rosy 98.8% figure that is designed to lull the populace into thinking we’re not completely failing to manage the pandemic. 

If nationally available statistics can reasonably be applied to Vermont, the full vaccination rate for this cohort is about 25%. It seems pretty clear why the state would want to omit them from the top-line figure. While children rarely suffer the worst effects of Covid-19, they spread Omicron as well as adults.

It is understandable why we would want to report rosy vaccine numbers. If the real numbers were known, people might change their behavior. And in a pandemic, the way people change their behavior would tend to harm the bottom line of our business owners. 

It is understandable that when the spigot-fully-open policy leads to a major increase in the spread of a potentially deadly virus, and a concomitant doubling of the death rate, despite the vaccine, the state government would want to statistically minimize that fact. 

It is understandable that, having let the virus get completely out of control, the state government would want to actually just stop recording cases of it, because each new case is a further embarrassment, which is why (Education Secretary) Dan French is now doing whatever he can to halt testing in schools. It seems when the numbers look bad, the solution is not to change behavior. The solution is to stop recording the numbers.

As such, it would behoove the reader to approach such statistics with skepticism prior to making their personal risk assessments in these degraded times.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Scott Gillette: Damned statistics and Covid-19.

Rarely if ever has my brain felt so shell-shocked with cognitive dissonance as when I heard a Vermont Catholic priest describe himself as a patriot who would not follow his bishop’s directive that he be vaccinated against Covid-19 or wear a mask and submit to regular testing.

“Being more of the ilk of a patriot,” the Rev. Peter Williams said in a recent YouTube video, “I balk at any incursion into my rights as a human being and certainly a U.S. citizen.”

It looks from here like this pastor at churches in Springfield and Chester is 180 degrees wrong on what it means to be a patriot and what it means to be a Catholic or Christian. Both require enough humility to place oneself subordinate to the greater good, and Father Williams fails on both counts.

Let’s take patriotism first. There was a time when patriotism was defined as a willingness to sacrifice yourself — sometimes physically, sometimes merely your ego or personal preferences, for the good of your country. In two years, Covid-19 has taken about 840,000 American lives, twice as many as the 419,000 lost to the Axis powers in the four years of World War II. The coronavirus is easily the deadliest enemy the United States has ever faced.

Want a taste of real patriotism? Read or reread Cornelius Ryan’s 1959 classic “The Longest Day,” about the Allied invasion of Normandy. Today’s vaccine refusers complain of uncertainty about their long-term effects; now compare that with the uncertainty of the soldiers packed into small boats crossing the English Channel in the wee hours of June 6, 1944. They didn’t know if they were going to make it up the beach, but put those fears aside for the cause of defeating fascism. That was patriotism. 

Now today’s self-described “patriots” can’t roll up their sleeves and grin and bear it when a nurse says, “This is going to pinch a bit.” Today’s “patriots” love to talk about honoring our men and women in uniform, but not enough to emulate their acceptance of a battery of vaccines on entering the service and more for many overseas deployments. They’ll honor all the heavy gear donned by a soldier — the body armor worn in 120-degree desert heat — but can’t bring themselves to put a piece of cloth over their nose and mouth.

I can’t begin to describe the disgust, so I’ll let the Revolutionary War-era pamphleteer Thomas Paine do it for me: “The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman,” he wrote.

But for a former Catholic like me who has never quite gotten over his love for the church, Father Williams’ remarks cut even deeper.

One sign of a world turned upside down are the new definitions given to the words “sheep” and “goat.” A sheep, according to the online chatter of vaccine refusers, is someone who “obeys” the experts — the public health officials who are trying their best to use the science in which they are highly trained to guide us through this crisis.

Even weirder, the word “goat” now is an acronym for “greatest of all time,” and populates the headlines about Tom Brady every time he wins a Super Bowl. And sure enough, for many people today, whose primary concern is their own freedom and rights, they can look into a bathroom mirror — or a YouTube camera — and declare that, when it comes to “me being me,” they are the greatest of all time. All that is missing from this picture is some Christian humility.

There’s some literature with which Father Williams should be familiar that uses the terms “sheep” and “goats” differently from how they are used today. 

In the famous parable in the Gospel According to Matthew, Jesus uses the metaphor of a shepherd separating sheep from goats to signify His own sorting of the righteous from the sinner. 

To the sheep, who would be saved, He said, “For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in …”

To the goats, He said, “Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in … “

Now picture a parish priest, giving Communion to an elderly, immunocompromised parishioner. The priest is neither vaccinated nor masked. He imparts to her the body and blood of Jesus Christ, and a few thousand particles of coronavirus.

It almost makes one want to add another line to the Scripture: “For I came to you deeply vulnerable, and you cared more for your own rights and freedoms, and your own twisted view of patriotism, than for my well-being.”

On second thought, that wasn’t cognitive dissonance that flooded my brain on first reading of Father Williams’ comments. It was shock and outrage.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Dave Gram: A priest ignores the real meaning of sheep and goats.

We are all so over it. The daily grind of masks-no masks, handwashing rituals that make Lady MacBeth look like a wannabe, and tracking the 6-foot invisible human bumper. 

Then there are the endless social choices and daily adaptation that Covid-19 requires, or the rejection of mitigation measures, if that’s your position. The pandemic has impinged on every aspect of our lives. It has also brought the specter of illness and death into everyone’s individual awareness and communities.

Since March 2020, there has been an omnipresent cloud of stress, angst, frustration, grief and grinding uncertainty. Wake up another day and hit repeat. If your nervous system hasn’t adapted to vacillating between the set points of “pandemic fatigue” or “fight or flight,” you’re in a minority. 

Even folks who believe this is a hoax and/or choose not to wear a mask and/or get vaccinated are not exempt from the public friction and stressful, downstream impact. Like it or not, we’re in this together. My choices affect you and yours affect me. I don’t want you or your loved ones to die or end up with long-haul Covid-19, and I have the same hope for myself and my loved ones. 

Unfortunately, since the much more transmissible Delta variant became predominant in Vermont in July 2021, Gov. Scott and his team’s leadership decisions have failed to adequately address and contain it. This has put more of us at risk for Covid-19, as well as increasing public confusion and distress. It is also straining our medical and broader health care systems. What happened to our previously stellar statewide leadership? 

From March 2020 to June 2021, Gov. Scott, Dr. Levine and the team anchored themselves as clear-thinking, science-based, empathetic leaders, becoming the gold standard for leadership nationally. They took to the airwaves with calm candor, simple language (“turning the spigot”), and empathy (every death of a Vermonter matters).

While a minority of citizens were not pleased, and particular criticisms may be justified (for instance, school personnel should have been vaccinated sooner), the overall outcome was that Vermont led the nation in successful mitigation. Many Vermonters (and out-of-staters migrating to Vermont) felt more safe living here than in hotspot states, where public health interventions were not consistently implemented or blatantly rejected by their state’s leadership, thereby sacrificing citizens’ health and lives for political posturing.

In the past few weeks, Vermont has set record-breaking daily rates of infection, and according to The New York Times, we are now fifth in the nation for infection rates per 100,000 residents. Despite imploring, public requests from a wide range of Vermonters — including health care providers, public health employees, educators, legislators and vaccinated citizens with breakthrough cases that were less than “mild” — Gov. Scott has insisted that vaccination is the only necessary intervention, while encouraging “personal responsibility” regarding other mitigation measures, particularly wearing masks indoors. 

He has held fast to this position despite the CDC’s recommendation that all individuals, irrespective of vaccination status, should wear masks indoors in areas of high infection to prevent viral spread. 

Furthermore, Gov. Scott has stated it would be “an abuse of power” to reinstate a mask mandate and just offered “an olive branch” to the Legislature to create a pathway for towns to choose whether to individually impose mask mandates. 

While the latter may seem like a gesture of peace at the state level, the actual implementation town-by-town sounds more like an invitation to 251 mini-conflicts or wars. More substantively: Viruses don’t follow maps and towns shouldn’t bear the procedural and psychological burden of deflected state leadership. 

Equally or more troubling is that, in an unfolding pandemic, which by its nature means that science-based information is ever-evolving, best practices for mitigation and intervention are “of the moment,” as research data is derived as we live through it. 

There are things we will know in one or two years that we can’t today. With approximately 10% to 30% of Covid infections resulting in long-haul Covid-19, we have no way to conceive the short- or long-term implications or prognosis of those affected. 

From this article: “The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that more than 114 million Americans had been infected with Covid-19 through March 2021. Factoring in new infections in unvaccinated people, we can conservatively expect more than 15 million cases of long Covid resulting from this pandemic. And though data are still emerging, the average age of patients with long Covid is about 40, which means that the majority are in their prime working years. Given these demographics, long Covid is likely to cast a long shadow on our health care system and economic recovery.” 

There is also a serious concern that Covid-19 may increase early onset Alzheimer’s or result in a significant rise in the disease. For any adult daughter or son who has experienced becoming a stranger to their parent with advanced Alzheimer’s, this is a very troubling prospect. 

Neither of these long-term concerns are addressed in the state’s short-view reassurance that vaccinated individuals with breakthrough cases are more likely to experience mild symptoms that do not “typically” result in hospitalization or death. 

Thank you, Gov. Scott and the team, for stellar leadership up until July 2021. However, the Delta variant has been a game changer, and your leadership has not responded adequately. A call to “personal responsibility” is a reasonable invitation when we’re facing circumstances that have exclusively individual consequences. However, this is not exemplary, statewide leadership in a public health crisis that affects everyone, directly or indirectly, with long-term consequences on the horizon.

It also erroneously assumes that in a fractured, politicized media world, all Vermonters have both equal access to factual vaccination, medical and pandemic information and will act on this with the care of others in mind. 

Please reconsider. We are pandemic-weary in every way possible. And every Covid-related illness and death of a Vermonter still matters.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Deb Sherrer: What happened to Gov. Scott and the Dream Team?.

Orleans County has entered its fourth week of a surge that has often placed it highest in the state for its rate of Covid-19 case spread.

The county reported 419 cases in the past two weeks and about 1,300 cases since the beginning of the Delta surge, roughly doubling its cumulative case count since the beginning of the pandemic.

Orleans County has the highest Covid-19 rate east of the Mississippi River, according to New York Times data. Nearby Caledonia County and Coos County in New Hampshire also are among the highest concentrations of infections in the Northeast.

Orleans has a positivity rate of 9.3%, more than triple the statewide average, according to Centers for Disease Control data. It reports that there have been six new hospital admissions for Covid-19 within the past week in Orleans, although it’s unclear if that includes Orleans residents hospitalized in other counties.

Vermont releases limited data on the demographics of cases in specific counties. However, cumulative data shows Orleans residents ages 10 to 19 years old have been the biggest age group infected, while 20- to 29-year-olds are the leading age group statewide.

The state also does not report county-level data on cases among unvaccinated and vaccinated Vermonters. It does show that Orleans has the third-lowest vaccination rate in the state, above Essex and Caledonia counties.

Data from the Department of Health also shows the heavy toll of the virus on many of Orleans’ communities. Seven of the top 10 cities and towns in the state with the highest rate are in Orleans County, led by Lowell and Newport City. Lowell has more than doubled its cumulative case count in the past two weeks.

Barre City in Washington County, Washington in Orange County and Tinmouth in Rutland County also ranked in the top 10.

Check out the table above to see your community’s data, or use the Department of Health map to analyze geographic patterns in case counts.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Orleans County has highest Covid-19 rate in Northeast.

The United States plans to allow foreign nationals who are fully vaccinated against Covid-19 to cross its land borders starting in November, President Joe Biden’s administration announced earlier this month.

The United States’ land borders have been closed to nonessential travel since March 2020. 

Canada has allowed fully vaccinated Americans to cross the border since Aug. 9, but the U.S. has, until now, not been willing to reciprocate.

The new opening comes with additional restrictions for some travelers who have been allowed to cross the border for essential travel. Starting in January, those travelers — including truck drivers, health care workers and students — will be required to provide proof of vaccination. 

U.S. officials did not immediately say when in November the border would reopen to nonessential travel, nor did they describe what the border crossing process would entail. 

The Department of Homeland Security has not indicated so far that it will require any more from travelers than that they are fully vaccinated. 

Getting into Canada is another story.

Nonessential travelers, such as tourists or people visiting family and friends, must be fully vaccinated.

In addition, travelers over the age of 5 must provide proof of a negative Covid-19 molecular test result. Tests must be taken within 72 hours prior to entering Canada. Rapid antigen tests are not accepted. 

People who have already had Covid-19 and are symptom-free also may provide a positive test conducted at least 14 days and no more than 180 days before crossing into Canada.

Correction: An earlier version of this story gave an incorrect date for Biden’s announcement.

Read the story on VTDigger here: What you need to know about driving (or taking the ferry) to Canada and back.

Orleans and Essex counties continue to have the highest per-capita rates of Covid-19 in the state, according to Department of Health data as of Friday.

The two Northeast Kingdom counties both have reported more than 100 cases in the past two weeks per 10,000 people, more than double the statewide average of 44.

Recent cases by county: 

The latest town data shows that many of the communities in Orleans and Essex counties report the highest category of case spread in the state, defined as more than 80 infections per 10,000 people in the past two weeks.

At the same time, Essex County continues to have the lowest vaccination rate in the state. Only 62% of eligible Vermonters in the county have gotten at least one dose of the vaccine, according to the department’s vaccination dashboard. 

Caledonia County is second-lowest, and Orleans County is third-lowest with 76% of its eligible population starting vaccination. The statewide total is 89%.

In the spring, state vaccination efforts attempted to target the remote Northeast Kingdom region with additional clinics after residents raised concerns about the lack of options and the long drives to get to the vaccines. 

The department also publishes town-by-town vaccination data, but the information is more limited. The data has categories only for the vaccination rate, rather than exact figures, and many Northeast Kingdom counties are labeled as having “address uncertainty.”

Other communities have suppressed data because their population is so small that the department has privacy concerns, similar to how it does not report communities with fewer than 6 cases.

New VTDigger chart details

VTDigger’s town-by-town data table now includes the number of cases per 10,000 in the last two weeks, similar to how the Department of Health reports data on its map.

We made this change based on reader feedback that the percentage change in cases was confusing, and concerns that it may be misleading in communities with small populations.

This also allows readers to easily see which communities have the highest rate of viral spread, rather than us having to provide a complete list in the story. We’ve added counties for each town as well.

Check out the table below to see how cases have changed in your community, or check out the state map for a more geographic look at case spread.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Orleans and Essex counties, site of ongoing case surge, still have low vaccination rates.

Updated at 5:15 p.m.

Vermont is hoping to implement a new model that would test Covid-19-exposed students to keep them in school — but staffing that testing strategy may prove to be a challenge, said Dan French, state education secretary, at a press conference Tuesday.

The state’s Covid-19 mitigation measures in K-12 education have shifted as the Delta variant has caused a surge in cases and classroom closures. At first, Vermont recommended lifting masking orders in high-vaccination schools, only to reverse that measure temporarily within weeks after schools began the fall semester.

The Agency of Education then recommended weekly surveillance testing of students to limit cases while dialing back contact tracing. It’s unclear how many schools implemented that testing, but school officials and nurses said they struggled to get started with staff stretched thin already.

Now, the agency is pushing a model that would allow students to stay in school when exposed to Covid-19 rather than having to quarantine. This “test-to-stay” model is already in place in Massachusetts, and French said it would “reduce the impact on student learning and … reduce the time students spend out of the classroom as a result of Covid-19.”

Under this model, unvaccinated students with no symptoms who were exposed to a case would get an antigen test at the beginning of each school day until seven days had passed since their exposure. Symptomatic students must stay out of school. 

French said the test-to-stay arrangement would work in tandem with other testing strategies, including surveillance testing, take-home PCR tests for families to use and PCR response testing for schools to use if they want to, for example, immediately test a student with symptoms.

But he admitted that districts may find it difficult to staff these testing needs.

“The major bottleneck for implementing testing will be staffing,” French said. “I expect many schools will consider hiring additional staff or redeploying staff they already have on hand to implement the testing, so this will take some time to ramp up across the state.”

In Massachusetts, CIC, a testing provider, also provides staff to go into schools and provides antigen testing. But French said school officials in that state have found CIC to be “inadequate.” 

French added that school districts have “considerable” funding from the federal government for Covid-19 mitigation measures. 

He expects it will take a few weeks for school districts to get started on the new testing measures because of those logistical issues.

“But I can’t help but think this is going to be the solution that really strikes the appropriate balance between keeping kids safe but also keeping kids in school. … We have to work hard to figure these things out, and it’s going to be a state and local partnership to do that,” he said.

The Department of Health reported 107 new Covid-19 cases in K-12 schools in the past week, among students or staff who were infectious while physically in school. In total, the department has reported 651 cases since the start of the school year.

In all, 51% of Vermont schools have not had a single Covid-19 case this year, which means 49% of schools have had at least one case.

Better outlook for Covid-19

Vermont reported 1,166 Covid-19 cases in the past week, compared with 1,462 cases the week before. That’s the second straight week of falling Covid-19 cases, according to a presentation from Michael Pieciak, commissioner of the Department of Financial Regulation.

Pieciak said it was still too early to give a forecast for the coming weeks, and hospitalizations have remained relatively level even as cases have dropped. 

But cases and hospitalizations at a national level have dropped as well, an encouraging sign for Vermont’s coronavirus outlook, he said.

Cases remain far higher among unvaccinated Vermonters. The rate of Covid-19 cases among unvaccinated Vermonters is 4.3 times higher than the rate among fully vaccinated Vermonters, according to DFR data. 

The hospitalization rate for unvaccinated Vermonters is 2.7 times higher, although it’s fallen 30% in the past seven days while hospital stays for vaccinated Vermonters have declined 14%, the data shows. Pieciak said the hospitalization rate for Vermonters 70 and older has dropped as well.

About 2,700 Vermonters got their first shot of the vaccine in the past week, an increase from the past few weeks. In total, 88.3% of Vermonters 12 and older have received at least one dose of the vaccine.

On Tuesday, Vermont reported 92 new cases. Thirty-seven people are in the hospital with the virus, including 13 in intensive care units. In total, 323 people have died in the pandemic, including 42 people in September and one so far in October.

Scott comments on legislative Covid-19 action

Gov. Phil Scott has consistently resisted calls to impose new restrictions since the Delta variant’s arrival in Vermont, arguing that doing so would require reimposing a state of emergency. Asked Tuesday if he would support the Legislature acting to enact new measures themselves, the governor was emphatic: “No. Plain and simple — I don’t think it's necessary.”

“If they want to ... come back into session, and they want to introduce a mask mandate, they want to limit travel, they want to shut down bars and restaurants, they want to limit gatherings, they want to cancel Christmas, I mean, that’s up to them,” he said.

Scott said he already had the power to take these measures himself, but does not believe they are warranted.

“It’s called a state of emergency. That toolbox is there. And I have the key to it. So if we thought it was necessary and effective to have a mask mandate at this point in time, we’d open that toolbox,” he said.

Asked if he was concerned that Vermont’s easing of restrictions could have caused more deaths, Scott claimed that states that still have mask mandates “[don’t] look any different than our [data], in fact it’s worse than ours, so their mitigation measures haven't worked.”

The Legislature is not in session right now. And while Democratic leaders at the Statehouse have called on Scott to adopt more aggressive public health interventions, they have also indicated they are not likely to reconvene and enact them on their own.

Senate Pro Tem Becca Balint said Tuesday that Scott’s comments took her aback and appeared to come “out of left field.” She had engaged with the governor’s office in recent days about whether the Legislature could enable a mask mandate without a state of emergency, she said, but those conversations had not contemplated any broader measures or shut-downs.

“Why did he throw the canceling Christmas line in there? Like, what is that message to Vermonters?” she asked. “I feel like it’s a distraction. It is trying to throw shade on the work that we’re doing to try to keep people safe. It has nothing to do with the conversation at hand. And frankly, I expect more from this administration.”

Balint also reiterated legislative leaders have no plans to act on the matter unless Scott signs on to their efforts.

“I don’t understand why we would go through bringing everybody back, doing that, to have him veto it. Because I think he’s been clear he doesn't support our position,” she said.

House Speaker Jill Krowinski, D-Burlington, said she hadn’t even taken part in the most recent discussion. But she stressed the Legislature’s entreaties to the governor had focused on masking.

“We're not asking to shut down everything. We're saying let's use the one tool we know that can help protect people right now. So I'm disappointed with him, you know — I don't know why he would say something like that,” she said.

But, like Balint, she emphasized that legislative leaders believe it is ultimately on Scott to act.

“He has the tools to do it. He had the tools yesterday. He had the tools last week. I just don't understand and would love to know what is the threshold that needs to be met, that would trigger mandating masks across Vermont? Because these numbers are still deeply concerning,” Krowinski said.

Soccer controversy

A soccer game Sept. 18 between Winooski and Enosburg raised concerns about both physical play and racially abusive language. 

The Vermont Principals’ Association, an independent organization, oversees high school athletics in the state, and state officials were asked if that arrangement provides effective oversight.

“These types of issues, unfortunately, still need to be addressed,” French said. “You know, it’s all the adults involved. They need to take their responsibility to do what they need to do, and it is concerning to me that the referees are not acting or if the games are not receiving proper oversight.”

Scott said he hopes the principals association would work with state officials “to provide the best experience for kids.”

Lola Duffort contributed to this article.

Read the story on VTDigger here: State pushes school testing as tentative data shows Covid falling statewide.

The Vermont Department of Health reported 114 new Covid cases on Thursday, the highest one-day total so far in the latest surge of the pandemic.

It also reported an additional person hospitalized for Covid. In total, 25 people are hospitalized, including eight people in the ICU. 

One additional death was added to the data, bringing the state’s total to 264. Four deaths have been reported so far in just a dozen days this month, compared to two deaths in July.

It’s unclear how many cases, hospitalizations and deaths on Thursday were among vaccinated or unvaccinated people. The Health Department does not regularly report that data, although cumulative data for the past few weeks shows that vaccinated people are still getting sick at far lower rates than those who are unvaccinated.

Twelve of Vermont’s 14 counties reported new cases Thursday, with the highest total in Chittenden County, with 52 positives. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports five counties have high community transmission: Chittenden, Washington, Franklin, Orleans and Essex counties. 

Five other counties have substantial transmission: Lamoille, Caledonia, Addison, Bennington and Windham counties. 

That means, in total, 10 of the state’s 14 counties meet the threshold for the CDC to recommend that everyone vaccinated or not, to wear masks indoors.

As of Thursday, 84.7% of Vermonters age 12 and over have gotten at least one dose of the Covid vaccine. That includes 38,400 people who have started vaccination and 431,500 people who have completed it, according to the health department.

Correction: This story has been corrected to describe accurately the CDC's recommendation for universal indoor masking in high-Covid counties.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Vermont reports 114 Covid cases, one new death.

The Vermont Department of Health reported Wednesday that 10 people are currently hospitalized from Covid, the greatest number of such hospitalizations since May 27.

The state reported 51 new cases of the virus as well, bringing the seven-day average to 45 cases per day — the highest average since May 17. 

Cases have been rising steadily since early July. Yet thus far, hospitalizations had remained low and even declined slightly in recent weeks.

At a press conference Tuesday, officials pointed to the low number of hospitalizations as a sign that vaccines were preventing the most severe complications from the disease.

But reported hospitalizations often lag behind reported cases, as it takes time for people to get tested and develop severe illness that requires them to go to the hospital. People also remain at the hospital for weeks or even months, meaning that hospitalizations remain high after the peak of cases is over.

During the winter wave, for example, cases peaked on Jan. 11 with a seven-day average of 181 cases per day, but hospitalizations peaked on Feb. 7 with 65 people hospitalized.

The 10 hospitalized patients reported on Wednesday included three people in the ICU for Covid. The age distribution of newly hospitalized patients is unclear; in previous waves, older Vermonters had been more at risk of Covid, but more than 90% of Vermonters over 65 are now vaccinated.

On Tuesday, officials presented data showing cases were highest in the 20-to-29-year-old age group.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Vermont reports 10 hospitalizations, highest level since May.

The rise of Delta, a highly contagious variant of coronavirus, has led to an explosion in new cases almost everywhere in the United States. 

Almost everywhere, that is, but Vermont and its neighbors. With an almost 84 percent vaccination rate among eligible residents, there’s no doubt the Green Mountain State’s collective immunity has kept a significant case surge at bay. The state’s modest rise in cases has also meant that large gatherings sans masks are still allowed, but elsewhere, even corporations, cities and states are reimposing their own indoor mandates. 

Coupled with the CDC’s new guidelines for indoor masking and the revelation that Delta may be more contagious than previously thought, exactly how Vermonters should keep themselves safe isn’t as straightforward. VTDigger asked three infectious disease experts for guidance on this latest development in the pandemic. 

Here’s what they had to say.

What’s the deal with Delta?

The coronavirus is similar to the flu in that it can change or mutate. Its first mutation of note was when a member of the coronavirus family moved from being able to infect animals to spreading in humans. That new virus, SARS-Cov-2, was first documented in Wuhan, China. Since then, several different subtypes of SARS-Cov-2 have emerged.

The Alpha variant was first identified in the United Kingdom in fall 2020. Beta was first detected in South Africa in spring 2020, while the Brazilian Gamma variant was first detected in November. Delta, originally detected in India and now the dominant strain in the U.S., is the most concerning because it’s better than other strains at moving from person to person, said Gabriela Andujar Vazquez, an infectious disease specialist at Tufts Medical Center. 

Delta appears to cause more severe infections and is associated with higher rates of hospitalizations, with unvaccinated people being at higher risk. A CDC internal document released earlier this week also says Delta is more contagious than Ebola, SARS, the common cold, seasonal flu and smallpox. 

The three approved vaccines in the United State — Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer and Moderna — offer some protection from severe illness, but a small number of breakthrough infections have been documented in vaccinated people. But the vaccine does not appear to prevent viral shedding in vaccinated people with the disease, the CDC document said.  

Vermont Health Commissioners Mark Levine said this week that Delta caused a slight uptick in cases in the state. Unvaccinated people, he added, make up the bulk of new infections in the state. 

I’m fully vaccinated. Should I worry?

It depends. In general, fully vaccinated people in Vermont are relatively protected because nearly 84 percent of eligible residents in the state are immunized, said Tim Lahey, an infectious disease expert at the University of Vermont Medical Center. But Vermonters should still remain vigilant when coming in contact with vulnerable people.

“Personally, I do not wear a mask in the grocery store, and I do go out to eat,” he said. “But I have to wear a mask at work, where I’m surrounded by vulnerable people.”

A person’s general health may also affect the degree of immunity from the vaccines, Lahey said. People who have had a transplant, for example, take powerful immune suppressants that lower their overall resistance to all disease, including coronavirus. The same is true for people with autoimmune diseases or people who are otherwise medically fragile. 

Family members of people with these conditions, or family members who aren’t vaccinated, may also want to wear masks indoors to minimize the risk of transmission at home. 

Do I need a booster shot?

Not yet. Studies about the need for a third shot are still underway, said Aalok Khole, infectious disease doctor at Cheshire Medical Center in Keene, New Hampshire. 

Some studies are looking at vaccinating all adults, while others are focused on using a third shot to bolster immunity in vulnerable people, he said. For now though, he said, regulators have not yet approved additional shots for fully vaccinated people. 

With coronavirus on the rise elsewhere, can I still travel?

Sure, but with caveats. Other areas of the country and the world have much higher infection rates than Vermont, so vaccinated people are more likely to catch breakthrough infections there. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended this week that vaccinated people in communities with significant coronavirus spread wear masks indoors. The agency created a tool to help residents gauge the risk of infection at locales across the nation and the world. 

Khole, the New Hampshire expert, agrees.

When visiting communities with a lot of new infections, masking up in grocery stores, movie theaters and indoor concerts can offer another layer or protection. 

Some vaccinated people are asymptomatic but still contagious, so Lahey, of UVM Medical Center, said travelers should get tested when they return to Vermont. 

Are there vaccine-resistant variants out there?

Not that we know of. The vaccines the FDA has approved for use in the United States offer significant protection against all of the prevalent variants. However, the efficacy of these shots is slightly lower for the Delta variant. 
For example, Pfizer’s vaccine series is 93 percent effective at offering protection from the Alpha variant, and 88 percent effective against Delta. The Moderna shot is 72 percent effective, and a preliminary study that’s not peer-reviewed yet suggests the J&J vaccine may be less effective with the variant.

Correction: One instance of Vermont’s current vaccination rate has been corrected.

Read the story on VTDigger here: One size does not fit all: How to navigate the rising Delta variant.

The Community College of Vermont does not plan to require students or faculty returning to campus this fall to receive a Covid-19 vaccine.

The decision, announced last week in an email to faculty, puts the institution at odds with other members of the Vermont State Colleges System, including Castleton University, Northern Vermont University and Vermont Technical College. Those schools will require enrolled students to be vaccinated once the federal Food and Drug Administration grants full approval to Covid-19 vaccines, according to Katherine Levasseur, a lobbyist for the state colleges. 

“As a non-residential institution, CCV is following a slightly different policy,” she said. 

In last week’s email to faculty, Dean of Academic Affairs Deborah Stewart said the school would be “encouraging all CCV community members to get vaccinated if able.”

But, she wrote, the institution has historically refrained from requiring its students to be vaccinated. 

“As a non-residential college, we do not require proof of vaccination except in certain state-mandated programs,” Stewart wrote, “and we will continue that practice.” 

Faculty members may ask if others are vaccinated, but they may not ask to see proof of vaccination “or demand to know why they are not vaccinated,” according to Stewart. Faculty members also may not require students to wear masks in class.

According to Katie Mobley, the Community College of Vermont is approaching vaccinations differently than others in the state college system because it serves different students at its 12 campuses around Vermont.

“Eighty percent of our students are part time,” she said. “We aren’t really the space they’re spending their most time in.”

Jim Blynt, a part-time instructor of history and philosophy at the school’s Winooski campus, sees it differently. He called the college’s decision a sign of “incredible sophistry” that contradicts the statewide vaccination effort.

“On the one hand, we have a state government that is doing everything it can to get people to be vaccinated,” Blynt said, “and here’s the Community College of Vermont … doing the exact opposite.”

In recent weeks, colleges around the country have been rolling out their vaccination policies for the fall semester. The University of Vermont, the state’s largest higher education institution, announced last week that all of its students would be required to be vaccinated this fall once at least one of the vaccines receives final FDA approval. 

Bennington College, Champlain College, Middlebury College and St. Michael’s College are among the Vermont institutions that have already announced vaccination requirements. 

Blynt said he was looking forward to instructing one in-person class at the Community College of Vermont this fall. But, he said, it “now looks a little scarier than it maybe should be.”

As a part-time instructor, like the rest of the college’s adjunct faculty, Blynt does not receive health insurance through his employer.

“These are people that don’t even provide me with health insurance, putting me in a situation that could be dangerous to my health,” said Blynt, who is vaccinated.

It remains to be seen whether instructors who feel uncomfortable teaching unvaccinated students will have the option to teach remotely.

Elizabeth McHale, a spokesperson for CCV United Faculty, the school’s faculty union, wrote in an email to VTDigger that her members “should have the right to make the choices that are best for themselves and their families without penalty.”

Though some classes will meet in person, she wrote, “if a class can be moved online, and the faculty members feel more comfortable teaching remotely, then they should be allowed to make that decision.”

That option will be on the table for most faculty members, Mobley said. The majority of CCV students enroll in the three weeks before classes start, she said, which makes it difficult to predict where things will stand in the fall. 

“Are there faculty who may have wanted to teach online but we don’t have an available section? Possibly,” Mobley said. “But we’re still actively working that through right now, and will be until … classes start.”

Read the story on VTDigger here: Community College of Vermont will not require students or faculty to be vaccinated.

Throughout the pandemic, many people have asked questions about the future. Among the most popular was, “When will Covid end?” I would jokingly ask for a moment to find my crystal ball. 

In all seriousness, though, these were important questions, and I tried to provide well-researched and appropriately uncertain responses that would be both reassuring and realistic. 

Now, as Vermont’s vaccination rate nears 80 percent, I have a few thoughts about what we can expect over the next 12 months.

Summer. Cases are falling throughout the U.S., primarily due to vaccination. I anticipate they will continue to fall as more people become fully vaccinated.

Nearly all of the remaining cases occur in unvaccinated individuals. In addition to vaccination, we do know that cases fall in the summer, just as we saw last June, July and August. We can relate this decline to people spending more time outside. Warm weather may also have a direct impact at decreasing virulence or transmission of the virus, although this is not the experience in other countries with warm climates year-round.

Fall. The Pfizer vaccine should receive a biologics license, also known as “full approval,” by early fall. Moderna applied for full approval earlier this week, which will likely be granted later in the year, and Johnson & Johnson should follow shortly thereafter. 

All three vaccines are undergoing trials in children under 12. Pfizer plans to seek emergency authorization for its Covid-19 vaccine in September for children ages 2 and above. The studies of these vaccines are focused on safety, efficacy and optimal dosing. The scientists work to provide the lowest dose needed to achieve the desired result: immunity against acquiring Covid-19. 

Assuming there are no unexpected setbacks, we can expect those ages 2 and older to be eligible to receive the Pfizer vaccine in September or October.

Winter. The virus has not disappeared. There will be a resurgence this winter among those who are unvaccinated. It is unavoidable, because unvaccinated people have no protection unless previously infected. 

Note that the vaccination is expected to provide better and longer protection than natural infection does. Limited use of masks, less distancing, and more travel will contribute to increased infection rates in those who have not been vaccinated.

In Vermont, where most people will be vaccinated, the rise in cases and subsequent hospitalizations will be manageable. I anticipate that the medical staff here at Southwestern Vermont Medical Center will be doing quite a bit of dual testing for influenza and Covid-19, not necessarily to decide on treatment strategies, but rather, to determine quarantine duration.

In other parts of the country, however, there may be as little as 50 percent of the population vaccinated. These areas will see outbreaks. Hospitals will be dealing with high numbers of Covid-19 and influenza patients.

An extremely important concept for us to understand and accept is that schools and businesses that require vaccination will have a significant competitive advantage over those that do not. They will experience operations that are more efficient and less absenteeism due to illness.

2022. Results from Moderna’s clinical trial in children as young as 6 months are expected by the end of the year. If all goes according to plan, those age 6 months and older could be eligible to receive the Moderna vaccine by February 2022.

We know from history that all pandemics end. Covid will become endemic, meaning that it will continue to be prevalent in unvaccinated and previously uninfected individuals, through at least mid-2022 in the U.S. and much longer in other parts of the world. 

Whether this endemic continues to cause severe disease remains to be seen. Vaccination remains our best tool in mitigating the spread of COVID-19.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Trey Dobson, M.D.: Looking into my Covid-19 crystal ball.

Vermont is leading the nation in its Covid-19 vaccination effort and is likely just days away from 80% of all eligible residents receiving at least one shot, a threshold at which the state will relax nearly all restrictions still in place.

But that topline number hides variability about who is — or isn’t — getting jabbed. One particular standout demographic? Young adults.

Only about 53% of all 18- to 29-year-olds have received at least one dose of the vaccine, according to the Vermont Department of Health. That’s more than 20 percentage points lower than the vaccination rate (74%) for 30- to 39-year-olds, who became eligible for the shots just a week earlier. 

It’s also a fairly large slice of Vermont’s total population. More than 83,000 people in the state are between the ages of 20 and 29, according to data provided by the state.

Vaccination rates among the young are lagging nationally. That’s not entirely surprising, according to Robert Bednarczyk, an assistant professor of global health and epidemiology at Emory University, given how much worse outcomes have been for older populations.

“From my perspective, the big issue really — especially for younger folks — is just the perception around the severity of the pandemic,” he said.

But the young can still die, be hospitalized, or suffer lingering symptoms for weeks or months after being infected with Covid-19. And large populations of unvaccinated young people could be a major vulnerability from a public health perspective. 

“Knowing that the virus is still spreading, and knowing that these variants are out there — and how quickly we’re seeing the emergence of new variants — that is actually really concerning,” Bednarczyk said.

Vermont has shifted its immunization strategy in recent weeks in an attempt to make vaccines more accessible. Several clinics this week targeted the hospitality sector at inns and restaurants across the state. Walk-in, pop-up clinics were held over the weekend at recreation sites, including the Burlington Discover Jazz Festival, the Thunder Road stock-car track in Barre and several state parks.

“When it comes to young Vermonters, our strategy is to meet them where they are and make vaccination as easy as possible,” said Ben Truman, a spokesperson for the Vermont Department of Health. The state is also making a push to get on social media, he said, with advertisements on YouTube and an Instagram account. (A presence on TikTok, Truman said, is coming soon.)

But the young are also overrepresented in low-wage, frontline jobs that are unlikely to offer flexibility or paid time off. Anne Sosin, a public health researcher at Dartmouth College, said that while pop-up clinics and creemee coupon incentives don’t hurt, they may still be missing some of the barriers that are in the way. 

“We have to think beyond that,” she said of creemee-style incentives and pop-up clinics. “These are not structural interventions.” She also pointed to Kaiser Family Foundation research that suggests a lack of paid time off work is a particularly important problem.

Tim Lahey, an infectious disease physician and director of clinical ethics at the University of Vermont Medical Center, credited Vermont for making a concerted push to reach the most vulnerable and narrow racial disparities in its vaccination rates. 

“We have to keep on doing the same thing — but shifting the focus to essential workers and people in counties that have lower vaccination rates and sort of just keep on working on that,” he said.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Why aren’t young Vermonters getting vaccinated?.

Gov. Phil Scott wants to try for a speedrun through his own reopening plan, he announced at a press conference Friday.

The governor said the full reopening of the state — originally planned for July 4 — could happen as soon as June, if Vermonters hit a key benchmark for vaccination: 80% of eligible Vermonters with at least one dose of the vaccine.

Right now, Vermont is at 74.9%.

“Admittedly, this would be an ambitious goal for most,” he said. “And to be honest, most states won’t come close to reaching it. But I believe Vermont can show the country how it’s done.”

Scott said his team is still working on the details of how to implement his full reopening, like how and whether his emergency order would be lifted. 

Vaccinations have only been approved for people 12 and older, so the current vaccination rate is about 66% of the total Vermont population. If the state hits Scott’s benchmark for the eligible population, about 70% of the total population would be at least partially vaccinated.

Estimates of the rate needed for herd immunity vary, but often range higher than that, to 80% or 85%. Mark Levine, state health commissioner, said he wanted to take the focus off of the herd immunity level and instead show that the “impact of the vaccine has been substantial.”

“We’re recognizing that even in very vulnerable settings, a high vaccination rate of the residents still leads to really good immunity and low case rates, even in those who are unvaccinated in that setting,” he said.

Levine emphasized the power of vaccination to lower case rates and bring people back to their lives. “Just consider where we were more than a year ago, when the spread of the virus … required that we stay home to stay safe,” he said.

“Now because we have highly effective vaccines and rising vaccination rates …  we can give the opposite guidance for those who are fully vaccinated: Go outside. You can take your mask off, and there’s no need to physically distance,” Levine said.

In recent weeks, the state expanded its vaccination program to include more walk-in options and clinics held around the community, Levine said. “If you want it to be vaccinated and couldn’t be vaccinated, I can’t believe it would be because there wasn’t a location that would suit your needs,” he said. 

“But if you find that there is yet something else that we haven’t included, please call our call center and give your suggestion,” Levine said.

There are community clinics at places such as North Beach in Burlington, school-based clinics, EMS site clinics, pharmacy clinics, worksite clinics and clinics being set up at primary care providers, Agency of Human Services Secretary Mike Smith said.

Vermont is also planning a renewed effort to reach people experiencing homelessness and those on probation or parole, Smith said. Officials are also planning to go back to prisoners who initially refused the vaccine to see if “we can address their concerns,” he said.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Scott: I’ll lift all Covid restrictions when 80% are vaccinated.

If a federal advisory committee on Covid-19 vaccines tells Vermont it can resume Johnson & Johnson vaccinations, the state could resume giving them out as early as Tuesday, officials said at a press conference Friday.

The federal government told states to halt the distribution of Johnson & Johnson vaccines after reports of a rare blood clot complication that could develop a week after the one-dose shot. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention advisers are meeting Friday to discuss the reports, but it’s unknown at this point whether they will issue new recommendations for using the vaccine.

Gov. Phil Scott, however, said he hopes the committee will move quickly to approve the vaccine’s use. 

“If all goes well, if the feds give it the green light, we’ll be ready to start using J&J again next week, which will be helpful in a lot of ways,” he said.

He mentioned that the Johnson & Johnson vaccine could help the state to expand its options in the Northeast Kingdom. 

Health Commissioner Mark Levine said it could also offer more opportunities to vaccinate college students. The state recently expanded eligibility to out-of-state college students and part-time Vermonters.

Scott said officials still believe that even without the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, Vermont will still be able to meet its vaccination goal of 60% of the population receiving at least one dose by May 1

At this point, more than half the population has received at least one dose of the vaccine. 

State prepares summer programs

More than 400 summer program opportunities for Vermont’s children are available on the state’s website, many of them free or low-cost, Scott said.

Staffing for summer programs has proven difficult, he said, and he encouraged high school and college students to look for job openings on the website. 

Education Secretary Dan French said the state will cancel surveillance testing for K-12 staff in the near future, citing the vaccination program for staff. The state is instead forming a pilot program for testing children in summer programs.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Officials await word from federal government on J&J vaccine.

Weeks after Gov. Phil Scott and the Vermont Department of Health drew sharp criticism for barring out-of-state college students from Vermont’s Covid-19 vaccine rollout, the state is preparing to open vaccine appointments to those very students.

Part-time Vermont residents — including college students who usually live in other states — will be allowed to register for vaccine appointments as of April 29, the health department said Wednesday. To date, only college students who are also full-time Vermont residents, or who plan to remain in the state during the summer, have been eligible to sign up for shots.

In a press release, the health department said the new guidelines are based on the state’s vaccine supply from the federal government. 

The April 29 date could be moved up, depending on the availability of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, which was suspended last week, according to Jason Maulucci, Scott’s press secretary. 

Based on conversations with federal officials and other governors, Scott believes it is “quite likely” that Johnson & Johnson shots will be in use again soon, Maulucci said in an email Wednesday. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control will deliver an update on the vaccine’s viability this Friday. 

After Vermont opened its vaccine rollout to all residents over age 16 last weekend, out-of-state college students and other part-time Vermont residents were among the last adults in the state ineligible to receive shots.

Before Wednesday, Scott and health department officials maintained that allocating shots to college students from other states who will not be staying in Vermont could limit the number of doses available to full-time residents. 

Sixty percent of Vermont’s 38,000 college students were from outside the state in 2019, according to data gathered by the Vermont Higher Education Council.

Scott at one point credited the decision to a need to “take care of Vermonters first.”

The move left out-of-state students — especially students of color, who were briefly eligible to get the vaccine after the state opened its rollout to all people of color on March 30 — confused and disheartened. Experts questioned the public health strategy of barring a large portion of the state’s young population from the rollout. 

As officials have cautioned that Covid-19 variants are to blame for high rates of viral spread through the spring, young people have driven Vermont’s steady, high case numbers. But case numbers, including among young people, are beginning to slow, officials said at Scott’s regularly scheduled press conference Tuesday.

Meanwhile, some Vermont colleges are considering vaccine mandates for students — provided that the vaccine supply can handle such rules.

Maulucci said opening vaccines to all adult residents of the state will mark an important milestone.

“Now that supply allows for eligibility to be broadly expanded, the end of this difficult period is truly in sight,” Maulucci said. “And if Vermonters continue to do their part and sign up [for vaccines] — which they’ve done so far — we are on pace for a much more normal and great summer.”

Vermonters may schedule vaccine appointments through four websites: The health department, Kinney Drugs, CVS and Walgreens.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Vermont to open vaccine eligibility for out-of-state college students, temporary residents.

Prisons have been a hotspot in Vermont’s Covid-19 crisis. And yet, a surprising number of incarcerated people and staff members have refused vaccinations.

James Baker, Vermont’s interim corrections commissioner, said two weeks ago he wasn’t happy about the rate of vaccine refusal among incarcerated people — and now, things are even worse.

Figures released this week say 737 incarcerated individuals have received at least one dose of the vaccine, but 411 have refused vaccination — a refusal rate of 35.8%. Earlier this month, Baker reported 585 prisoners had received at least one dose of the coronavirus vaccine, but 206 refused it altogether — a refusal rate of about 26%.

Covid-19 has been a serious problem at Vermont prisons. At the Northern State Correctional Facility in Newport, an outbreak that began in late February produced 179 cases among incarcerated people and 24 among staff members. That outbreak is under control now.

In summer, 185 of the 219 Vermonters in a Mississippi prison came down with Covid-19.

Earlier this year, Baker said 591 prison staff members were offered vaccinations, but only 467 took the shot.

Prisoner rights groups, including the Vermont chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union and the state’s prisoners’ rights office, have been urging the state to make incarcerated people a priority for vaccination. They cite the tight spaces within prison walls that make social distancing difficult, if not impossible, and outbreaks that have occurred inside the prisons.

Falko Schilling, advocacy director for the ACLU of Vermont, said he isn’t sure of the specific reasons behind the refusal rates.

“We would still encourage people to get vaccinated if they have the opportunity, to protect themselves and those around them,” he said.

Josh Hoe, a policy analyst with Safe & Just Michigan, a nonprofit organization that has been looking at Covid-19 vaccination in prisons, said the refusal rate for incarcerated individuals around the country is around 25%.

While he doesn’t know the specifics behind the Vermont numbers, he said there are typically several reasons incarcerated people would refuse, including distrust of the prison system. He said some prison systems have been able to boost vaccination rates through education campaigns led by people who used to be in prison and by bringing in outside medical providers to administer the vaccination programs. 

The department will offer more clinics this week for incarcerated people who recently became eligible for the vaccine, said Rachel Feldman, the Vermont corrections department spokesperson.

“We’re working on numerous things to educate and inform and answer questions for the incarcerated population,” she said. 

The goal is to offer two doses of vaccine to every prisoner by May 13, Feldman said.

The Northeast Correctional Complex in St. Johnsbury has the highest refusal rate with 45%. The Chittenden Regional Correctional Facility in South Burlington, the state’s only women’s prison, has the lowest refusal rate at 23% 

The Northern State Correctional Facility in Newport, which had the largest in-state Covid-19 outbreak, has a refusal rate of 36%. 

Feldman said she could not say what exact factors are behind the refusal rates.

“We’re respectful of people’s medical privacy,” she said. “This is something that they can opt to have or choose not to have, the same as the general population can.”

Read the story on VTDigger here: More and more Vermont prisoners are refusing vaccinations against Covid-19.

After weeks of worrisome Covid-19 rates among young Vermonters, cases are on the decline, state officials said at a press conference Tuesday.

Cases overall in Vermont were down 24% over the past week, and the biggest drops were among people age 20 to 29, followed by those age 10 to 19. Their case rates remained higher than the general population, according to the state’s weekly statistical report.

“Our recent Covid-19 data provides a really optimistic picture for both the coming weeks, and also the coming months,” said Mike Pieciak, commissioner of the Department of Financial Regulation. “In the short term, the steady declines in our case rates give us greater confidence that we’re now moving in the right direction in Vermont.”

Young Vermonters age 16 to 29 recently became the latest age group to become eligible to register for the vaccine. About 47,000 have registered, or 40% of that age group, said Jenney Samuelson, deputy secretary of the Agency of Human Services.

Every adult in the state is now eligible for the vaccine. Half of Vermonters age 16 and older have received at least one dose of the vaccine, and 37% have completed the vaccination process. 

Dr. Mark Levine, state health commissioner, urged all Vermonters, particularly younger Vermonters, to sign up for the vaccine if they hadn’t done so already. “This is how we get back our lives together once again,” he said.

“I appreciate all your patience and understanding to get us here. This is a tremendous public health achievement,” he said.

Gov. Phil Scott said the vaccine would be “our ticket to the front” in the state’s race against variants of the virus. “Once you’re vaccinated, the risk of you getting sick is very low, and you can feel safe to do more of the things we’ve missed over the last 12 months,” he said.

Pieciak said the data showed the state is on track to meet its vaccination targets for reopening July 4. Officials are aiming for 50 to 60% of all Vermonters to have at least one dose by May 1. 

The state’s allocation of vaccine doses from Pfizer and Moderna are expected to remain stable this week, but pharmacies should receive a slight uptick in doses, Scott said. With the loss of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine while blood-clot issues are studied, he said, “we think we’ll be able to get by, but admittedly it’s going to be a bit of a struggle.”

The May 1 and June 1 vaccination targets were based on conservative estimates of vaccine allocations, Samuelson said, which makes her confident Vermont will be able to meet that goal. 

In response to questions about long wait times for appointments, Samuelson said the state is still dependent on the vaccine supply it receives from the federal government. She said the state has appointments available in mid-May in almost every county, and encouraged Vermonters to check the state and pharmacy websites regularly to check for earlier slots.

Pieciak said the high demand for the vaccine in Vermont is a good thing. “Other states are seeing their appointments go unfilled,” he said.

“Even though it’s frustrating in the short term, people should just understand it’s really a good thing,” Pieciak said of the clamor for vaccine appointments. ”It’s going to serve us really well in the long term, because it means Vermonters are stepping up to get that limited supply.”

Levine said he does not believe the Johnson & Johnson pause will lead to greater vaccine hesitancy in the long term, pointing to data that shows many people are still pressing to get the vaccine. But Scott said he is concerned that a lengthy delay could discourage people.

The federal vaccine advisory board is scheduled to meet this Friday to review the evidence of a rare blood clot complication in Johnson & Johnson recipients, Scott said. So far, only six cases have been reported among about 7 million Johnson & Johnson recipients.

“I feel as though [the blood-clot investigation] might galvanize those who were hesitant before,” Scott said. “… I believe that this is going to hurt the longer it goes, so that’s why I’m hopeful on that Friday, that they will be moving forward and lifting this pause.”

Census data shows that Vermont leads the country in the percentage of people who say they will probably get vaccinated, Pieciak said.

“We anticipate being so high here in Vermont that, when all is said and done, we just think we will be one of the most vaccinated states and one of the safest,” he said.

Many have cited the herd immunity threshold as an important target for the vaccination process, but Levine said that threshold is still unclear and not necessarily a “magic number” to combat the virus. 

“You won’t find a number, and you won’t find a consensus on the number amongst the public health community, the epidemiology community, or infectious disease and virology community. It’s really a broader range,” he said. 

Levine said that 70% immunity seemed too low, while 90% seemed too high, so he’s settled on talking about it at about 75% to 85%. But even 70% would be “so great,” he said.

Read the story on VTDigger here: Younger folks, ‘keep it up’: Declining cases led by Vermonters in their 20s.

Burlington Mayor Miro Weinberger urged the state Wednesday to expand vaccine availability to all Vermonters of color.

Vermont announced new vaccine eligibility for some high-risk groups on Tuesday, including new access for Black, Indigenous, and other communities of color. Beginning next week, any person of color who is eligible for the vaccine may now bring their entire household to get vaccinated.

At a Wednesday afternoon press conference, Weinberger called the guidance an “important step,” but said the state should do more.

“We have reached the point where we can offer [the vaccine] to anyone with a health risk factor,” he said. “I think race has proven to be a risk factor in this pandemic.”

Vermont’s vaccine rollout has drawn criticism for its wide racial disparities. Although 22% of white Vermonters are now vaccinated, just 10% of Black Vermonters, 13% of Asian Vermonters, and 4% of Indigenous Vermonters have received the vaccine so far, according to Department of Health data. 

The disparity persists even when age is accounted for: 56% of white people over age 65 have been vaccinated, versus just 45% of people of color who are over 65.

Critics argue the state’s choice of “age banding” as a vaccine strategy has systematically left out people of color, due to racial disparities in health and life expectancy.

“A vaccination program that prioritizes long-term care facilities and age 75 years and older,” wrote racial justice advocate Mark Hughes last month, “effectively excludes non-white Vermonters who are at disproportionate risk for contracting the virus and for more serious outcomes, such as hospitalization.”

On Wednesday, Weinberger called for the state to open vaccine eligibility for all people of color, regardless if they meet other eligibility requirements. He also voiced support for making essential city workers — like snowplow drivers and wastewater plant operators — eligible for the vaccine, too.

“The city is prepared to back this up and support this effort,” he said.

Weinberger also touted Burlington’s efforts to address racial disparities in the city, which include vaccine clinics for non-English speakers and specialized outreach teams.

Despite those efforts, communities of color in Chittenden County have had higher rates of Covid cases than anywhere else in the state. According to data released by the Department of Health last month, people of color in Chittenden County have 637 Covid cases per 10,000 people — more than twice the rate seen in communities of color in any other county.

In comparison, white people across Vermont have contracted Covid at a rate of 170 cases per 10,000. 

City officials also discussed case growth in Chittenden County on Wednesday.

The county, like the rest of the state, has had an uptick in cases in recent days, averaging 37 cases a day over the past week compared to 28 per day the week before.

Dr. Stephen Leffler, president of University of Vermont Medical Center, said 10 Covid patients are hospitalized at the medical center, an increase from seven last week, but down significantly from January numbers, which ranged between 15 and 25. 

The decrease was “so encouraging, and so important,” he said.

UVM also reported stabilizing cases among its students for a second week, after seeing rising numbers at the beginning of the semester. Last week, 31 students tested positive for the virus, the same as the week before. 

“I find great hope in where we are right now,” Weinberger said. “We’re preparing ourselves for the day, not too far away, when our lives will be able to expand again.”

Read the story on VTDigger here: Weinberger: State should open vaccinations to all Vermonters of color.

Vermonters who are fully vaccinated against Covid-19 can gather with other people who are vaccinated — in groups of any size, Gov. Phil Scott announced Friday. Those Vermonters can also gather with one additional household that is not vaccinated.

Previously, the rule was that vaccinated people could gather with just one other household, vaccinated or not. The governor’s new rule goes into effect immediately.

“For example, if eight fully vaccinated individuals want to gather, they can do so, and bring one other household that’s not vaccinated,” Scott said.

The governor said that next week, he expects his administration’s restart team will be ready to “open the spigot” even further, with another easing of restrictions.

So far, Scott said, 20% of Vermonters age 16 and up have had at least one dose of the vaccine, or 152,631 people; 61,234 have gotten their second dose. 

In Phase 5 of the state’s vaccination program, which begins next week, Scott said 75,000 more Vermonters will become eligible to get the vaccine, including teachers and other frontline workers.

Within a month, he said, a third of Vermont’s eligible population could be vaccinated.

Starting Monday, vaccination sites will open in seven school districts: Barre, Bennington County, Harwood Union, North Country, Mill River, Rutland City and Springfield.

Details of at least 28 additional school clinics are being finalized and should go online in the coming weeks, said Mike Smith, secretary of the Agency of Human Services.

However, Smith said Vermont’s allocation of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine so far has been less than expected, so extra doses of the Pfizer vaccine that didn’t end up being used in the effort to vaccinate people at long-term care facilities will be used to augment the supply.

Before Tuesday, it was thought that Johnson & Johnson would have 4 million doses ready to distribute throughout the U.S right away, Scott said. On Tuesday, he learned that number was actually 2.9 million doses, meaning that Vermont would not receive any of that vaccine next week, and only a very limited supply the following week, though he hopes the distribution will ramp up by the end of the month.

Additionally, Health Commissioner Mark Levine warned that there’s been a slight decline in testing in recent weeks, despite a big boost in testing for college-age Vermonters, as the University of Vermont changed its policies from once-weekly mandatory tests to twice-weekly testing requirements.

He said the overall decline isn’t enough to question the state’s test positivity rate, which he said is holding steady at a “manageable” 1.7% — but did urge Vermonters to continue to get tested.

Scott said once Vermonters with high-risk conditions and teachers, child care workers, police, first responders and corrections employees are able to get vaccinated, he hopes the state returns to an age-banding system, either in five- or 10-year increments, beginning with Vermonters age 60-65.

“It’s the simplest and most effective way that we have found,” Scott said of the age-banding strategy. “We’re seeing many other states’ governors call and ask how we’re doing what we’re doing. Many are going to age-banding after abandoning their strategy for other populations.”

But the vaccine supply is expected to expand rapidly, Scott said it’s possible that most Vermonters will get the vaccine “much sooner than we originally could have hoped for.”

Veterans in Essex

A walk-in vaccination clinic Friday at the Champlain Valley Expo in Essex Junction invited VA-enrolled veterans of all ages with existing medical conditions to get the vaccine.

The result was a huge traffic jam, as hundreds of vets showed up to get their shot, and at least some of them were turned away, being told only 400 doses of the vaccine were available, not enough for everyone who showed up.

However, Scott said those vets were turned away in error, and vaccine doses were in fact still available.

Wasted vaccine doses

Scott also responded Friday to a VTDigger report on how Central Vermont Medical Center wasted 99 doses of the Covid vaccine last month, because the hospital didn’t create a waitlist or find another way to use leftover doses.

Scott said that, until the article was published, he wasn’t aware of the hospital’s failure to implement a waiting list. The hospital is Berlin, where the governor lives.

“I have a very low tolerance to waste of anything, especially of these precious doses of the vaccine,” he said. “Had I known about it, we would have reacted differently.”

Smith said the report indicates the state needs to refine its inventory system so it gets alerts when this sort of thing starts to happen. However, he said, the amount of wasted vaccine in Vermont has still been only “a fraction of a fraction,” with 488 doses wasted out of 170,000 total.

The other sites that recorded the most wasted doses last month were the Department of Health district offices in White River Junction and Burlington, where 44 and 39 doses, respectively, went unused.

Smith said those doses either were not viable, or were dropped, which he said is far less concerning to him than what happened at Central Vermont Medical Center.

“This is going to happen, by the way, in a very labor-intensive sort of operation,” he said. “We are going to have mistakes, and I can understand that. What concerned me about Central Vermont was sort of getting to the end of the day and not having a procedure to put doses into people’s arms.”

Read the story on VTDigger here: Restrictions on gatherings loosened yet again for vaccinated Vermonters.

Vermont, with more relaxed Covid vaccine requirements than neighboring states, is vaccinating some out-of-staters. But some state health officials don’t see this as a problem. 

So far, 94,949 people have been vaccinated in Vermont, and about 6% — almost 6,400 — are nonresidents, according to the state’s Covid dashboard as of Thursday evening.

With states getting limited doses that are based on their populations, the asymmetry in state policies has raised concerns about how fair the system is. Vermont officials say that fear is unwarranted, and some hospital workers agree.

“Our supply and allocation is anticipated to be enough to meet our vaccination plans,” Ben Truman, a spokesperson for the Vermont Department of Health, said in a written statement. 

Vermont isn’t the only state drawing out-of-state people in search of a vaccine. Across the country, thousands of people are crossing state lines to get vaccinated, stirring up debates about what is ethical when there’s high demand and a very limited supply of Covid vaccines.

More than 50,000 people from out of state have been vaccinated in Florida, for example. At the beginning of February, Mississippi’s numbers were similar to Vermont’s, with around 5,300 people from out of state getting vaccines there. But that is a much smaller percentage of Mississippi’s total population of almost 3 million, compared to Vermont’s 626,000 or so.

Each state sets its own policy about vaccine distribution. In the Northeast, that means people are able to enter Vermont to get the vaccine. Some important differences in Vermont policy have created this situation.

According to the Vermont Department of Health, nonresidents who work in the state or whose primary care doctor is located in Vermont are eligible to get the vaccine in the state. And new arrivals who just moved here and intend to establish residency can get vaccinated, too. 

But across the border in New Hampshire, that policy isn’t reciprocated.

Some hospitals say this is a sensible choice that’s good for the health of Vermonters. They point to the goal of getting as many people vaccinated as possible, regardless of where they happen to live.

“If there are people from another state who are working here, they’re going to be interacting with Vermonters. We definitely want them vaccinated, too,” said Laural Ruggles, vice president of marketing and community health improvement at Northeastern Vermont Regional Hospital. The St. Johnsbury hospital is less than 10 miles from the New Hampshire border.

Ruggles said she was aware of a modest number of people coming from New Hampshire to get vaccinated at the community clinics run by Northeastern Vermont Regional Hospital, but “we don’t see it as a problem.”

Neither does the state Department of Health, which said the policy reflects its goal to “get as many people vaccinated as quickly and efficiently as possible,” according to its spokesperson.

“We view these limited cross-border allowances as being a reasonable accommodation, and as not having a practical impact on our main goal of getting as much vaccine to eligible Vermonters as possible,” Truman said of the state’s policy.

“This may differ from other states’ policies, and I can’t speak to their choices,” he said.

According to Ruggles, Northeastern Vermont Regional Hospital has taken measures to assist Vermonters with primary care doctors located in New Hampshire. They set up a call line to answer questions, but so far they haven’t received very many calls, she said.

Ruggles doesn’t think out-of-staters coming into the state should worry Vermont patients.

“I don’t think anybody has been turned away because of that,” she said.

New Hampshire’s lack of reciprocity 

Farther south in the state, at Mt. Ascutney Hospital and Health Center in Windsor, chief medical officer Joseph Perras said he was worried about a barrage of patients when he learned that New Hampshire wasn’t going to reciprocate Vermont’s inclusive policy.

Nearby Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center isn’t immunizing any Vermonters, even those who get their primary care there. The hospital’s website attributes the policy “to N.H. state allocation requirements.”

“We are unable to vaccinate residents from other states at this time,” the website reads. “There are no exceptions for patients who receive their health care in N.H., but live in other states.”

But according to Perras, so far, that surge he worried about hasn’t materialized, in part due to two large vaccination clinics across the river, in Claremont and Lebanon, New Hampshire. Those sites are close to Mt. Ascutney. Plus, New Hampshire rolled out public vaccine options a little earlier than Vermont, which may have helped alleviate the rush across the border.

Still, it’s an option that some patients have chosen. About 25% of primary care patients at Mt. Ascutney live in New Hampshire, and just under half of them have opted to get the vaccine in Vermont, according to Perras. So far, Mt. Ascutney has administered around 2,900 doses.

Perras said he’s of two minds on the issue. “As a physician, I think patients should be able to get their vaccinations at their usual site of care,” he said. 

But it troubles him that New Hampshire hasn’t reciprocated that.

“I think the state (of Vermont) would’ve certainly had a good case if they decided not to vaccinate anyone who lives in New Hampshire regardless of where they got their primary care,” he said.

“I can’t stress enough how conflicted I am over this issue,” Perras said.  

Perras pointed out other significant differences in the states’ approaches. For New Hampshire residents getting the vaccine in New Hampshire, Mt. Ascutney hospital had to send significant data to New Hampshire so patients could prove they were eligible to get vaccinated there.

The honor system

In contrast, Vermont is allowing residents and nonresidents to enter their own information on the website they use for registration. The state tracks that information, but no identification is required to make or go to the appointment.

While Mt. Ascutney is entering that information into its hospital databases, Laural Ruggles at the St. Johnsbury hospital said they’re leaving it entirely up to the state to track that information.

“We just know they’ve scheduled online or through the state. They just show up. We’re not doing any screening as far as out-of-state,” she said.

Perras said the Vermont philosophy is relying on patients to be honest about their medical history and sign up for the vaccination appropriately, as opposed to “putting patients through the wringer as far as attestations go and signing affidavits saying that you get all your care in Vermont.”  

According to Truman, the state asks questions when people make a vaccine appointment to determine their eligibility. He said if someone isn’t eligible, they won’t be able to make an appointment. Pharmacies have been asked to follow the same eligibility requirements, although they use a separate registration system.

But with broader conversations and cases of “vaccine tourism,” some Vermonters wonder if the state’s policies are too relaxed. While other states like New York are currently vaccinating anyone older than 65, waiting time to get a vaccine may be longer, which could be a temptation to come to Vermont. 

According to the New York Department of Health website, the state has received around 300,000 vaccine doses per week, while more than 7 million people are currently eligible.

“We know there may be some risk of people finding ways to get a vaccine in Vermont even when they aren’t eligible,” Truman said. “But that minor risk is worth taking to ensure more equitable access for people in Vermont.”

Read the story on VTDigger here: Out-of-staters are crossing the border to get vaccinated in Vermont.

Vermont offers a critical lesson for a nation grappling with stark inequities: protecting the most vulnerable not only mitigates the sharp disparities in Covid-19 infections and deaths seen across the U.S. but also contributes to improved outcomes at population level. 

The state’s expansive use of housing policy to shelter vulnerable Vermonters who could not comply with social distancing orders, aggressive strategy for responding to outbreaks in its long-term care facilities, support in responding to an outbreak among seasonal workers, and mobilization of pop-up testing in communities have all contributed to the state’s well-earned status as a model not only for the U.S., but also across the globe. 

However, the decision by Vermont’s leadership to abandon its plans to prioritize the essential workforce — the grocery clerks, teachers, transport drivers, factory workers, and others — for vaccination not only represents a departure from an approach consistently centered on equity but also threatens to limit the effectiveness of this campaign. 

Vermont has chosen an “age-banding” approach because it prioritizes those most at risk of death from Covid-19. On the face of it, this appears to be the most equitable approach. Its advantages are manifest as other states struggle with overly complicated prioritization schemes, haphazard rollouts, and line-jumping. 

Vaccinating older populations, our governor said, also reflects our commitment to those who have cared for us and brings an end to months of social isolation, denied grandparent visits, and fearful grocery trips. I felt no small amount of relief seeing a photo of my own mother receiving her first dose of the vaccine and joy in knowing of the long-anticipated reunion it would enable with my daughter. 

Yet, if age banding is an equal and efficient approach, it alone is not an equitable or effective one.

Equity, as Vermont has taught the country, requires prioritizing resources for those not only at greatest risk of severe illness or death from Covid-19 but also for those at highest risk of infection. Vermont’s data clearly highlights that essential workers are at higher risk for infection, as is the case across the U.S. 

Essential workers are also significantly more likely to transmit the virus to others in their households and community — and therefore play a critical role in shaping the overall trajectory of the pandemic. The overrepresentation of Black, Indigenous and people of color communities in the essential workforce is a significant reason that we see racial disparities in Vermont and nationally.

In Vermont, we also see hidden rural disparities across socioeconomic and occupational lines. Recognition of the importance of occupational exposure in driving disparities as well as transmission at population level was central to the deliberations of the national committees convened to prioritize the earliest doses of vaccine. The National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine Committee on Equitable Allocation of Vaccine for the Coronavirus underscored the primary role of structural — and not biological or cultural factors — in driving Covid-19 disparities. Notably, the committee cited consistent evidence on the role of occupation and housing in structuring Covid-19 inequities in its recommendation to prioritize the essential workforce. 

The CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice similarly voted 13-1 to prioritize essential workers in December. 

What is underappreciated about the frameworks from the national academies and the advisory committee is the leap forward that they represent in how to move from broad notions of equity to concrete approaches that align with public health effectiveness. By prioritizing those most at risk of infection alongside those at risk of severe disease, the guidance seeks to not only minimize death but also to disrupt transmission at population level.

In short, equitable prioritization that includes the essential workforce is not simply a reflection of our values as a state or our economic interests — it’s critical for slowing Vermont’s epidemic, particularly as vaccination efforts move beyond the long-term care facilities, where deaths have concentrated. The public health impacts of these decisions are not inconsequential, as the state continues to average more than 100 cases a day, with Vermont officials projecting similarly high case counts through March. 

Absent a shift in epidemiology, the state can anticipate upward of 3,000 cases per month, and concerns continue to mount over the emergence of more transmissible variants. This, combined with growing evidence that vaccines do indeed decrease transmission as well as data showing that somewhere between 10% and 30% of persons with Covid-19 may develop “long covid,” or chronic illness, means that several monthlong delays in reaching those most at risk of infection will have meaningful and potentially long-term impacts on population health. 

Vermont has already committed its existing vaccine supply to its current scheme; however, the federal government continues to increase allocations to states. The state leadership can and should use this additional supply to re-prioritize its essential workforce as a near-term priority as other states have done, not only as a reflection of its commitment to equity but also as good public health practice. 

“I am so proud to live in a state that has taken such good care of its most vulnerable,” a state agency leader recently related to me during an interview as part of our Dartmouth team’s ongoing research on Covid-19 and rural health equity. I too am grateful for the visionary leadership, strong policies and heroic efforts that have made equity not just a mindset but also a foundational part of the state’s performance in responding to the pandemic. 

For months, our essential workforce has carried us forward as state — and COVID-19 along with them. Now, we should carry through on our commitment to equity and bring it forward in the vaccination line. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: Anne Sosin: Vermont needs to vaccinate the essential workforce.

Vermont is now getting 22% more vaccine doses per week from the federal government than its previous allocation, Gov. Phil Scott announced Tuesday.

Scott learned in a call with other governors that morning that doses would increase another 5%, on top of an 8% increase announced last week by the Biden administration, which is working to boost the number of doses sent to states. Compounded, Scott said, the increase works out to 22%.

That means Vermont will get about 10,800 doses a week for at least the next three weeks, a time frame that Scott said will aid greatly in planning ahead for administering the vaccine.

“This is just preliminary information — hot off the press, so to speak — and we’ll have more details in the days to come, but suffice it to say this is good news for us here in Vermont and throughout the country,” he said.

The federal government would also provide two other sources of help to increase doses: Providing the tools to Vermont to get the extra dose out of Pfizer vaccine vials, and providing some vaccines directly to pharmacies in a pilot project.

“I appreciate the collaboration with the White House, and look forward to receiving more doses so we can vaccinate others as fast as possible, and start getting back to whatever normal is,” Scott said.

So far, more than 55,000 Vermonters have been vaccinated — 35,500 first doses and 19,500 second doses. 

Scott also learned on the call that Vermont would receive retroactive reimbursement from the Federal Emergency Management Agency for National Guard operations in 2020.

Previously, Vermont had been expected to provide 25% of the Guard’s funding, but that requirement has now been eliminated and the state will be refunded what it spent last year, which could mean millions of dollars per month, Scott said.

“We don’t know all the details and we’ll look into that and hopefully be able to update you on what that could mean, but safely say it’s millions of dollars that will be coming back to Vermont in some respects,” Scott said.

The Guard was used last year to staff the state’s medical surge sites. Mike Smith, head of the Agency of Human Services, said the National Guard could also be deployed to assist with vaccine distribution if the allocation rose past the state’s capacity under its original plan. 

About 9.7% of Vermont residents age 16 and over have received at least one dose of the vaccine, the Department of Health reported Tuesday. Smith said 34,000 Vermonters have registered to receive the vaccine under the latest Phase 2 plan, which includes all Vermonters age 75 and over.

Check out the Department of Health website to register for the vaccine or check out frequently asked questions in this VTDigger article. 

Cases up in Bennington County 

Covid cases in Vermont dropped for the third week in a row, but cases in Bennington County remain high, driving up hospitalizations statewide, officials said Tuesday.

The state reported 868 Covid cases in the past week, a 29% decline from the peak of a mid-January surge, according to a report from the Department of Financial Regulation. National cases are down 42% from their peak and regional cases are down 37%.

At the same time, Bennington County has been setting records in case counts, including the highest-ever total of 40 cases in a day on Jan. 30.  Department of Financial Regulation data shows that, if Bennington County hospitalizations were excluded, the total number of people hospitalized in Vermont would be declining, but that county’s numbers are driving the statewide total up.

The Bennington hospital, Southwestern Vermont Medical Center, is “coping well” with the new clinical load, said Dr. Mark Levine, head of the Department of Health.

He said the latest rise in Bennington County numbers could be attributed to several potential issues: Several multihousehold gatherings prior to the holidays led to outbreaks, and out-of-state skiers could have passed along the virus to workers in the community, although the skiers themselves would not be counted in the data.

“There have been, not only on the site of a ski resort, but in the communities that are part of the ski resorts, cases that show up in worksites and in restaurants, to the point where in one or two times, several of those had to close due to staffing issues,” he said.

Some New York residents who work or receive medical care in Vermont may also be driving up the county’s numbers, Levine said. 

In addition, college cases have been an issue as students return to the state for the spring semester. Vermont reported 39 student cases this week compared to 118 last week, but the latest numbers did not include any reports from the University of Vermont.

Norwich University’s outbreak among students rose to 94 cases this week, Levine said. The health department is working with Norwich to refine its testing protocol, along with testing a variety of college samples to see if any of them could be one of the Covid variants circulating elsewhere in the country.

Long-term care case progress

The number of high-risk cases in Vermont is declining, likely driving a decrease in deaths.

The state had 27 deaths in January compared to 71 in December, according to the state report. The number of cases among Vermonters 65 and over has also declined in recent weeks as conditions improve statewide.

Levine said there have been fewer cases in long-term care facilities as well. 

Smith said people at all 37 skilled nursing facilities, the highest-risk facilities, have received both doses of the vaccine. About 87% at residential care facilities and 94% at assisted living facilities have received at least the first dose. 

In total, 85% of long-term care residents have elected to receive the first dose of the vaccine, Smith said.

Levine said it was difficult to say whether the decline in cases could be the result of the vaccinations. “I would love to say that what we’re seeing in the long-term cares is related to the vaccine, but that would be a little guesswork and a little premature,” he said.

The state has convened a working group to discuss opening up new activities for long-term care residents, such as social gatherings and events to allow people to socialize within the facility.

“Seniors have been isolated for far too long,” Smith said.

Levine said the initial discussion hasn’t included family visits, but it’s not out of the realm of possibility. The state briefly resumed family visits at a low point of the virus last year.

“There’ll be plenty [of family members] that will not have yet received their vaccine,” he said. “But that doesn’t mean we can’t improve the lives of those, those facilities with the activities and social arrangements that can be made within the facility.”

Read the story on VTDigger here: Vaccine shipments to Vermont on the rise; 55,000 vaccinated so far.

HARDWICK — Nancy Stevens was among the first members of the general public in Vermont to receive the Covid-19 vaccine.

Outside a clinic at Hazen Union High School, the 83-year-old said she was surprised to have snagged an opening-day appointment when the state’s registration system opened on Monday. “I got right through as soon as it opened,” she said.

Stevens, who lives in East Hardwick, has been homebound for the past 11 months. “It’s been tough,” she said. “I miss my family. I used to go places and do things with my family and friends almost every day.” She skipped the usual Thanksgiving and Christmas get-togethers, and still hasn’t met one of her great-grandchildren, who was born almost a year ago.

“I’d like very much to be able to be free again,” Stevens said.

Her vaccination was a first step. More than a thousand Vermonters received their first dose of the vaccine Wednesday, when 25 clinics for the general public opened statewide. More sites will come online in the coming days, according to the Health Department, eventually totaling 54 locations in 39 cities and towns.

All Vermonters 75 and older are eligible to make appointments. About 30,700 people had registered by around 5 p.m. on Wednesday, nearly three-fourths of the eligible population that had yet to receive the vaccine.

When enough Vermonters are immune, state officials expect to begin unwinding the restrictions that have hampered people’s lives for the better part of a year. “This is the light at the end of the tunnel,” said Mike Smith, secretary of the Agency of Human Services, at a press conference Wednesday morning.

Valerie Valcour ran the site in Hardwick. As a public health nurse with the state for 21 years, Valcour had staffed previous vaccination efforts for diseases such as H1N1, tetanus and influenza. “This is by far the largest scale I’ve ever done,” she said. “It’s exciting. And nerve-wracking.”

The site was running smoothly so far, Valcour said around noon. Thirteen people — a combination of state employees, Medical Reserve Corps volunteers, and local emergency medical technicians — helped patients through the process. One checked each incoming person against the list of registered patients, took their temperature and asked if they were exhibiting any symptoms.

Patients then proceeded to the high school’s gym. Along the halfcourt line, they sat down at a row of tables and chairs to fill out paperwork, then sat between two fabric partitions to receive their shot. Staff guided each patient to a row of folding chairs, where they were asked to sit for at least 15 minutes to ensure they didn’t have an adverse reaction. 

Valcour said the team had experienced only minor snags. The online system for checking registrations and scheduling appointments for patients’ second doses had caused some glitches early on, she said, but had not interrupted anyone’s ability to get their vaccine. 

The Health Department has urged people to keep their appointments, warning that no-shows could lead to spoiled doses. At the Hardwick site, only three people had missed their spots by around 2 p.m.

Valcour said that, amid the busy work of getting the site up and running, she hadn’t fully had the opportunity to step back and appreciate the significance of the day.

“I know it’s a big event,” she said. “This is the ultimate public health work — vaccinations, and being able to protect lives and prevent death.”

Betty Ackermann, 88, drove from Cabot to get her shot. Ackermann has no internet connection, so her granddaughter registered her on Monday. Her vaccination was “very efficient,” she said — the whole process took less than half an hour.

Asked what would change for her when she’s fully immune, Ackermann said, “Not much. I live by myself and it’s quiet most of the time. I’ll be able to hug my grandchildren and great-grandchildren.”

But she felt strongly about getting vaccinated for the greater good. “They urge everybody to get it,” she said. “I’d be happy if this virus gets the heck out of the country, and I’ll do whatever they want me to do to try to do that.”

To register for a vaccine appointment or get information on walk-in clinics, visit healthvermont.gov/MyVaccine or call 855-722-7878. 

You will be asked to provide your name, date of birth, address, email (if available), phone number, and health insurance information (if available, but not required).

Read the story on VTDigger here: Public vaccinations begin, offering people hope ‘to be free again’.

BURLINGTON — Burlington has opened its first state-run Covid-19 vaccination site for people age 75 and older — the first general populace group to become eligible for the vaccine. 

And so far, one of every 10 Chittenden County residents has received at least one dose of the two-part vaccine, Burlington Mayor Miro Weinberger confirmed at a press conference Wednesday. That’s the highest vaccination percentage among the state’s 14 counties; the vaccine success has largely been driven by the high presence of health care and long-term care facilities in the county, Weinberger said

“There is still clearly a long way to go,” Weinberger said. “But being one-tenth of the way there, especially that one-tenth being the highest-risk members of the state, is a real sign of progress.” 

The new vaccination site opened Wednesday at the Integrated Arts Academy in the Old North End. Because the school is closed on Wednesdays for remote learning, that’s when the clinic will take place, with the next one set for Feb. 3.

Weinberger said he spoke with Heather Danis, a district director with the Vermont Department of Health who is overseeing the Burlington vaccination site. She told him that, as the location opened Wednesday morning, staff members had tears in their eyes and broke into applause as the first patients rolled in. 

No walk-ins are accepted at the vaccination sites; people 75 and older can sign up for an appointment on the Health Department’s website. As of today, Weinberger reported, 29,000 people had signed up; about 50,000 Vermonters are 75 or older. 

So far, there’s only one vaccination location in Burlington, but the city’s chief innovation officer, Brian Lowe, said another should open soon in Winooski. Kinney Drugs pharmacies are also offering vaccinations, separate from the state’s registration website, but Weinberger said most of those appointments have already been filled. 

There have been some instances across the country where extra doses of the vaccine have become available at pharmacies or government sites due to missed appointments. However, “people should not just show up and hope there’s going to be any sort of leftovers,” Weinberger said of the Burlington site. “It’s not going to work that way.” 

He said Danis has a plan: The clinic has a list of people to call who are next in line. Any leftover doses will go to them first, he said. 

If any residents have trouble making a vaccination appointment or traveling to the site, they can contact the city’s Resource and Recovery Center at 802-755-7239. 

Covid-19 cases in the county have continued to dip over the past couple of weeks. Today, 17 new cases were reported in the county, compared to a 77-case one-day high in mid-January. So far, no signs of the more contagious variant of Covid-19 have been found through testing in the city’s sewer system. 

Read the story on VTDigger here: 10% of Chittenden County residents vaccinated against coronavirus.