Back to herd immunity? [split topic]

[MrMrs]

Can someone debunk this for me please. Latest spurious nonsense:
on the 13th April, after the 3 weeks are done, we will announcer either an extension to lockdown or a relaxing of the status quo. Reason for the latter is they're changing tact to herd immunity again. "They" are debating if it's better to let the old folks catch it and die (returning to norm, somewhat), or keep everyone locked down meaning vulnerable children will be at risk while locked at home.

Please tell me that's garbage.

[MrMrs]

Found this pish on Daily Mail - surely bollocks eh? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8186507/PMs-virus-adviser-warns-Britain-need-adopt-herd-immunity.html

[Zetetic]

We might see some raising and lowering of different restrictions over time, to try to balance economic damage and fatigue leading to poor compliance against the rate of transmission.

One aspect of that is that over time more people will have had it, and gained immunity, and so eventually transmission will also be slowed by herd immunity making easing of restrictions a bit easier.

That's not quite the same thing as the apparent initial strategy of widespread exposure whilst somehow isolating the vulnerable (noting that this is an ill-defined and non-obvious group, in practice, compared to the most vulnerable).

'Herd immunity' as a shorthand for some sort of strategy - rather than as a description for how high levels of immunity slows and stop transmission - isn't very helpful.

To some extent it's almost a truism that the end of this now has to be most people having developed immunity, isn't it?

[MrMrs]

i

[BlodwynPig]

After watching Michael Walker on Tysky last night - no way do I want to go out dying of this (gasping for breath through glassy lungs), even if I am surplus to requirements

[Butchers Blind]

Yeah, fuck the elderly!  They had their time and fucked up the planet, now have this virus and die.

[Abnormal Palm]

We might see some raising and lowering of different restrictions over time, to try to balance economic damage and fatigue leading to poor compliance against the rate of transmission.

One aspect of that is that over time more people will have had it, and gained immunity, and so eventually transmission will also be slowed by herd immunity making easing of restrictions a bit easier.

That's not quite the same thing as the apparent initial strategy of widespread exposure whilst somehow isolating the vulnerable (noting that this is an ill-defined and non-obvious group, in practice, compared to the most vulnerable).

'Herd immunity' as a shorthand for some sort of strategy - rather than as a description for how high levels of immunity slows and stop transmission - isn't very helpful.

To some extent it's almost a truism that the end of this now has to be most people having developed immunity, isn't it?

Excellent post. Clear and builds on assumed knowledge of others. I've given you a hard time occasionally but I just wanted to say nice one.

[Funcrusher]

Has it been established at this point that if you've had it then you have immunity and won't get it again at least for a reasonable period of time after?

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

The problem with the herd immunity idea is that there don't seem to be any hard and fast rules about who's going to get a "mild" illness and who's going to end up in intensive care on a ventilator. Also I can't imagine how they could possibly control it short of going town to town and saying "your turn to have COVID-19. Households with elderly and immunocompromised residents, smear the blood of a lamb on your door and remain inside. Everyone else line up for your COVID-19 injection. Upon receiving your injection return to your homes and self-isolate till you no longer have a temperature."

At this point the only options are remain indoors and risk a rise in mental illness and domestic violence, or everybody who's not aged 70+ just wander around getting sick and coughing on other people and hope the bodies don't pile up too much. Italy has 14,000+ people dead now. Spain isn't far behind. There isn't a third way.

[peanutbutter]

I've seen end of May floated a lot lately so my guess is... maintain lockdown until then, there's such an absolute explosion in social activity that bank holiday weekend that cases spike and there's another month of lockdown.

Premier League better be back before bullshit office jobs are required to return from working at home to their workplaces though

[MrMrs]

Heard it immunity more like

[idunnosomename]

Turd immunity

[Abnormal Palm]

Again, let's look at Wuhan and assume a similar approach.

They had approximately ten weeks of lockdown, officially, but unofficially they slowed down for about a week and gradually restarted for about a week before the official gradual restart! We've had, what, two weeks officially and a week of slowdown and psychological prep? Middle of May, I'd expect them to start putting things in place (i.e. nudging industry and the non-key public sector) to begin a phased return to functional employment and output. The messaging will be shit but for those who can read between the lines, they'll be putting the responsibility on the citizens to maintain social distancing in order to stay open for as long as possible.

By this point, I hope we will have been able to learn some more lessons from China, Spain and Italy (and maybe the US) and even more hopefully, the NHS will have survived and become better equipped and supported to cope with the ripples which follow. That could be optimistic as fuck but we'll know at the end of April how effectively Spain and Italy deadened the spike and how well China coped with the restart.

[Johnny Yesno]

Has it been established at this point that if you've had it then you have immunity and won't get it again at least for a reasonable period of time after?

No. As I understand it, it might be like a common cold virus in that it could mutate in three months and you'd be vulnerable to being reinfected but with less severe effects. Which would leave us in a similar position to where we are now in that most people would be ok but would be carriers of the virus threatening the health of vulnerable people.

[Sin Agog]

Back to reality,

[bgmnts]

Herd immunity really is a cunt term.

[steveh]

No. As I understand it, it might be like a common cold virus in that it could mutate in three months and you'd be vulnerable to being reinfected but with less severe effects. Which would leave us in a similar position to where we are now in that most people would be ok but would be carriers of the virus threatening the health of vulnerable people.

So far though it has been mutating slowly, which is good for vaccines and longer-lasting immunity:

There are only about four to 10 genetic differences between the strains that have infected people in the United States and the original virus that spread in Wuhan, he said.

"That's a relatively small number of mutations for having passed through a large number of people," Thielen said. "At this point, the mutation rate of the virus would suggest that the vaccine developed for SARS-CoV-2 would be a single vaccine, rather than a new vaccine every year like the flu vaccine."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/the-coronavirus-isnt-mutating-quickly-suggesting-a-vaccine-would-offer-lasting-protection/2020/03/24/406522d6-6dfd-11ea-b148-e4ce3fbd85b5_story.html

[Poirots BigGarlickyCorpse]

So I was walking the dog and thought of "third ways", probably none of which are practical:

- Quarantine towns with COVID-19 cases. If you live in Springfield and work in Springfield you can go to work and your kids can go to school if they go to school in Springfield. If you live in Springfield but work in Capital City then you have to stay home. Goods and deliveries only in or out.

- Everyone is supplied with facemasks and allowed back to work/school

- Politicians, corporations, banks, landlords and other vultures come together and lean really heavily on "what are we supposed to do, people can't live on handouts forever, the economy, the precious economy" and brainwash at least 51% of the population into believing that bodies piling up is fine, actually, you can't just shut the world down because of a cold

[BlodwynPig]

Manifesto 62

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

- Politicians, corporations, banks, landlords and other vultures come together and lean really heavily on "what are we supposed to do, people can't live on handouts forever, the economy, the precious economy" and brainwash at least 51% of the population into believing that bodies piling up is fine, actually, you can't just shut the world down because of a cold

The horse has bolted on that one, but there is a scenario here where the above try to take credit for the 'reboot' in a few months time and make the public believe that easing restrictions and cutting red tape = economic growth.

The next recession won't be countered by Austerity but by deregulation of nearly everything. They will try to combine Brexit with that.

[Abnormal Palm]

TOTAL FUCKDOWN

[BlodwynPig]

The horse has bolted on that one, but there is a scenario here where the above try to take credit for the 'reboot' in a few months time and make the public believe that easing restrictions and cutting red tape = economic growth.

The next recession won't be countered by Austerity but by deregulation of nearly everything. They will try to combine Brexit with that.

Where is the end game? when is the TOTAL COLLAPSE. If Brexit doesn't do it, Iraq didn't do it, and the pandemic doesn't do it - only leaves the PALE HORSE

[phantom_power]

Herd immunity really is a cunt term.

Not really. It is part of how vaccines work, and why anti-vaccers are risking people's lives by lowering immunity. Herd in this case just means a group if people. It isn't meant to infer they are just cattle. It is a term that has been used for a long time. It is just this specific use of the term by an uncaring government that is cunty

[olliebean]

Not really. It is part of how vaccines work, and why anti-vaccers are risking people's lives by lowering immunity. Herd in this case just means a group if people. It isn't meant to infer they are just cattle. It is a term that has been used for a long time. It is just this specific use of the term by an uncaring government that is cunty

It's not the use of the term that's cunty, it's the idea of using it as a strategy when there's no vaccine; i.e., when the only way to achieve it is for almost everyone to catch the virus and lots of people consequently to die.

[BlodwynPig]

It's not the use of the term that's cunty, it's the idea of using it as a strategy when there's no vaccine; i.e., when the only way to achieve it is for almost everyone to catch the virus and lots of people consequently to die.

And then in 3 months the immunity wears off...

[big al]

It's not the use of the term that's cunty, it's the idea of using it as a strategy when there's no vaccine; i.e., when the only way to achieve it is for almost everyone to catch the virus and lots of people consequently to die.

I think the general concept was sound; letting healthy people bear the brunt and gain near herd immunity that way, but that would only work if we also make an effort to keep the more vulnerable people entirely safe from it. and that wasn't really mentioned.  And I don't think it was well received coming from a government who had just had to let a potential adviser go because he held eugenicist views. Also, Boris Johnson blithely saying that people will lose loved ones was particularly callous, especially as the man can't seem to remove the smirk from his face.

[Dewt]

Hah, this is fucked, nobody has a clue what to do.

If shit falls apart I'm gonna go live in my car with a gun.

[Johnny Yesno]

I think the general concept was sound; letting healthy people bear the brunt and gain near herd immunity that way, but that would only work if we also make an effort to keep the more vulnerable people entirely safe from it.

No, it was a shit idea because there was no way to keep vulnerable people safe, particularly with no testing strategy. In addition, the virus has killed young people with no underlying health problems.

And I don't think it was well received coming from a government who had just had to let a potential adviser go because he held eugenicist views. Also, Boris Johnson blithely saying that people will lose loved ones was particularly callous, especially as the man can't seem to remove the smirk from his face.

Well, that didn't help but it was an unsound strategy anyway unless the plan was actually to kill loads of people.

[BlodwynPig]

Britain's Got Talent returning soon... is this the start?

[Johnny Yesno]

Hah, this is fucked, nobody has a clue what to do.

Not now they've missed the window for containment by mass antigen testing, no. And now this: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/05/coronavirus-testing-kits-could-be-unreliable-uk-scientists-say

Novara called it days ago.