Coronavirus

ChopleyIOM

Hearthstone Addict
webby
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Location
IOM
This article is one of the best I've read so far [the writer is an nhs GP too]:

'If the majority of people who are unlikely to suffer much ill effect could catch the infection, and get over it safely, they would be much less likely to transmit it to the vulnerable during the winter.

This strategy goes by the ugly name of herd immunity, an unfeeling name for the most compassionate policy.'
That is genuinely dangerous nonsense, and it flat out doesn't work for Covid-19.

There are two ways to achieve herd immunity, and those are (1) A vaccine is developed and enough people are vaccinated to effectively wipe out the disease (a measles style scenario) (2) Sufficient people get infected and remain immune to the disease to make transmission between people very rare.

Obviously (1) is off the table until we have a vaccine - but that's definitely the best hope.

The problem with (2) is that:

(a) It's increasingly looking like being infected with Covid-19 and surviving doesn't even confer immunity for any significant period of time. i.e. People who'd had it and recovered, could still catch it again and spread it again.

and

(b) Even if it did, there's the sheer number of people who'd need to be infected for it work, the best estimates for Covid-19 put it at about 70% of people would need to be infected and survive, are we really advocating a policy that would require TENS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE in the UK to catch Covid-19? Even with a mortality rate of around 1%, that's an awful lot of dead people, and that's before we start to factor in the approx 8-10% of people who go on to suffer long term negative health effects. (Long-Covid, which can affect people of all age groups.)

The NHS would collapse, literally collapse, under the weight of Covid-19 victims, plus you'd have to add on all the additional people that would die because they couldn't be treated for their illnesses either.
 

mack341

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2018
Location
south east england
'If the majority of people who are unlikely to suffer much ill effect could catch the infection, and get over it safely, they would be much less likely to transmit it to the vulnerable during the winter.

This strategy goes by the ugly name of herd immunity, an unfeeling name for the most compassionate policy.'

That is genuinely dangerous nonsense, and it flat out doesn't work for Covid-19.
Really ??? looks like herd immunity has more or less worked in sweden, or do you know otherwise?

can you back up these statements of yours regarding immunity, and in section b) of your post?

[Any links or quotes ?]

The article was about the 'circuit breaker' lockdown idea, which is where we are now, any opinion on this?

or her point " And in two weeks’ time, or whenever we disconnect the ‘circuit breaker’, the coronavirus will surge back. This time, we will be facing its effects during the flu season, when many more people will be compromised by flu and even less able to fight Covid-19."?



1600720061256.png
 

ChopleyIOM

Hearthstone Addict
webby
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Location
IOM
Eh? Sweden absolutely hasn't gone for herd immunity, they've tried to suppress the virus using different means to us (i.e. they've never imposed a lockdown), but what they absolutely haven't done is sanctioned or pursued a policy of herd immunity.

Some reading here on herd immunity, what it is and how it's achieved -
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


It's super important to understand Sweden are trying to control and contain the virus in all sorts of ways, absolutely not, 'Ahhh fuck it, let it just do whatever it wants'.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
Last edited:

mack341

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2018
Location
south east england
Eh? Sweden absolutely hasn't gone for herd immunity, they've tried to suppress the virus using different means to us (i.e. they've never imposed a lockdown), but what they absolutely haven't done is sanctioned or pursued a policy of herd immunity.

Some reading here on what it is and how it's achieved -
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
This is actually one of the headlines in the Times today, but paywalled:

Sweden beating coronavirus with herd immunity, expert claims


"Evidence is mounting that Sweden has beaten the coronavirus epidemic with herd immunity rather than lockdowns, according to a renowned expert on the spread of disease.

Sweden’s infection rate has remained low and stable at a time when other European countries are facing a strong resurgence.


In Britain there are 69 cases per 100,000 people compared to just 28 for every 100,000 in
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
which did not implement stringent lockdown measures this spring.

The infection rate in France is almost seven times higher than in Sweden and the virus is ten times more prevalent in Spain, both countries that implemented strict lockdowns.

Kim Sneppen, professor of biocomplexity at the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen, an expert in the spread of the virus, has concluded that....

----------

The term 'herd immunity' and sweden is all over the internet, the concept seems a total surprise to you?

We know they still followed social distancing and handwashing etc..., the whole point is they didn't impose a lockdown other than a few minor things, and their case rate and deaths are better than the uk and elsewhere with stricter lockdowns?

The mayoclinic article you linked doesn't mention T-cells?
 

dealer wins

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Location
London the sh$thole
Sweden got it right, like I predicted back on the day of our 1st lockdown on this very thread.

We fecked up, and it comes at the cost of millions of jobs, and 500,000 lives doomed through the NHS not treating cancers, heart conditions etc
 

ChopleyIOM

Hearthstone Addict
webby
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Location
IOM
The problem is that the term 'herd immunity' is being thrown about by people who have no idea what it actually means. If you show some of these articles you're talking about to, for example, an actual virologist, they'll probably say something quite rude.

There's a good argument that the term 'herd immunity' shouldn't be used at all for simply allowing a majority of a population to catch a disease, and should be strictly applied to it being achieved through vaccination.

Sweden has peaked at around 6-7% of people having antibodies to protect against Covid-19 infection, with increasing evidence that immunity can fade within months. That's a million miles away from herd immunity, which has, I repeat, never been stated as an objective in Sweden.

By all accounts the reason Sweden is doing so well is that they're doing a great job on social distancing and hygiene and having very strong and cohesive societal structures that lend themselves well to a population working well as a group to limit the spread of a very dangerous disease. Their success has nothing to do with herd immunity, because they don't have it.

Further reading -
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


1600723253062.png
 

Slottery

Senior Member
PABnoaccred
MM
Joined
Aug 21, 2017
Location
Malta
For some reason it seems that in most of places, currently new infections are in areas where were very few infections at spring, like in Sweden and in many countries in different areas than back then. Nobody knows answer for sure why, but some (even these virologists) are thinking possible effect of T-Cells, all what's been tested are antibodies and as said above, these numbers are so low and many don't have them almost at all that it doesn't explain why virus seem going to "new places" instead of getting another round where it was it's worse in spring.

Wouldn't think ie. in Sweden they have started now to keep social distancing and wash their hands and didn't do it at all when it was it's worse. They didn't close schools, restaurants or anything which have made many of these experts to wonder what's happening. Many have started to think that something else than only antibodies could have given some immunity/tolerance against virus, these spoken T-Cells to be one possibility.

That's something we don't know, maybe one day somebody will find out, now still there are no source who would be sure about what happened, all are more or less educated guesses/estimations/assumptions.
 

mack341

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2018
Location
south east england
I think it is a fact that Sweden is closer to the state of herd immunity than we are, they may still be miles off but allowing fit and healthy people to catch the virus and come through it benefits the more vulnerable population and puts them [statistically] at less risk.

Also it is widely accepted this virus is mild for a large number of people, they may not even realise they've had it.

"Fifteenth SAGE meeting- March 13 2020: 'SAGE was unanimous that measures seeking to completely suppress spread of COVID-19 will cause a second peak.' 'Community testing is ending today.' 'The science suggests household isolation...of the elderly and vulnerable should be implemented soon.' "
 

Mr_Slot5

Experienced Member
Joined
May 6, 2019
Location
Cheshire
I'm seeing tentative signs that we may have seen the worst of COVID.

The case figures for France and Spain seem to be showing signs of plateau. If we had today's testing regime back in March and April and plotted the cases graph, this current wave would be a mere ripple.

The fact that the rate of cases increase appears to be slowing in Spain and France suggests, to me, the virus is hitting the buffers naturally. This, in turn, suggests 2 things. 1) We are seeing an increase in asymptomatic spread or 2) We are rapidly approaching immunity threshold. The two may be interlinked.

My guess? I have a thought that whatever that dry cough bug was that ripped through Nov-Jan time was another coronavirus variant which has afforded some crossover T cell immunity to the wider community.
 

mack341

Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2018
Location
south east england
I don't think these numbers match the ones I see on worldometer.
What figures are you seeing? I haven't read that full article as it's paywalled, would be odd for the Times to get a basic thing like this wrong

The gov site says 4,368 cases today, I think the population is 66.5 million, and they said per 100,000, I think they may have meant per million as that would equal: [4368/ 66.5= 65.6] which then isn't a mile off their figure of 69 :confused:
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 10)

  • Top