My guess is that the medical industry isn't THAT stupid.
They probably see one dose as two shots just like some medications say that two pills is one dose. (Common over-the-counter painkillers can be considered as such.)
One recent debate is whether or not a second shot should be reserved.
If the first shot gives 75% immunity and the second shots increases this to 90%, is it better to immunize twice as many people to 75% than half as many at 75%?
The point of the vaccine is to reduce hospital ICU overload and excess mortality, much like the flu vaccine. It doesn't guarantee 100% immunity forever to everyone who gets it.
I don’t think so- in every instance thus far I have seen in the media and professionally, “doses” are considered individually. In the medical and insurance setting, multiple unit doses taken together are still counted as an individual unit.
This will create confusion inevitably however if we do switch to single dose protocols or if and when vaccines like Johnson&Johnson’s come to market (single dose). If 2-3 of the vaccines require two doses and 1-2+ only require one (or different patient status factors dictate number of dosing), it gets a lot harder to use “doses” as a general term.
I think one big issue is that the vials the vaccines come in are multi-dose, either containing 5 or 10 individual vaccines to be drawn up plus a short shelf life (Hours) after being drawn up. Vaccine administrators are going to be hesitant to open a new vial unless they know all the doses can be used in the short frame.
If California is anything like Massachusetts, A limited number of vaccination sites is probably the biggest hinderance. Vaccines generally aren’t being sent to individual medical practices, clinics, pharmacies, etc- only designated sites. Here in Mass theres maybe a few dozen sites, with many fully booked and may with restrictions (usually what town you work/live in). In reality there’s only a handful of mass vaccination sites actively taking appointments from anyone eligible.
