'Herd Immunity only way out'

[R123]

A well known British newspaper carries an opinion that the only way to solve the problem is to allow the virus to run its course and in effect 'cull' the weakest.

 

See :

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/03/29/herd-immunity-way-impasse/

 

(subscription)

 

-Do you agree?

 

 

 

[Sheryl]

What is being done in countries where it has reached the level of community spread will also achieve this, but at a slower rate so as to not totally overwhelm health services.

 

Allowing it to run rampant would get it over with faster but kill far more people, and not just the weakest and not just from COVID. Everyone in need of medical care would be jeopardized.

[VocalNeal]

Nice troll post. 

 

As I am not an expert of communicable diseases nor aware of what can be done to cure cases of serious infection then I am not very well placed to agree or disagree. 

 

Professionals who, on the other-hand, do know what to do I am sure are doing their best to do the right thing.  

 

Sheryl is correct however as a mate of mine who is waiting to have definitive tests as to whether of not he has cancer, is waiting for CT scans etc because his local hospital is currently preoccupied. 

Edited March 30, 2020 by VocalNeal

[R123]

"Nice troll post"

 

No it is NOT.

 

This is a deadly serious matter. Kindly do not trivialize it...

[timendres]

It is beginning to look more and more like herd immunity is already a foregone conclusion. This virus spread far too long in far too many places before action was taken. It is now just a question of slowing the curve and getting to the point that immunity puts this virus in the corner.

[jmccarty]

Letting it run its course was largely what 2009 Swine flu pandemic did. The casualty number is not clear, but it was a lot even after several vaccines were made available.

 

A vaccine, if available and safer than the virus itself, would be welcome before letting it run rampant.

[Jingthing]

23 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

What is being done in countries where it has reached the level of community spread will also achieve this, but at a slower rate so as to not totally overwhelm health services.

 

Allowing it to run rampant would get it over with faster but kill far more people, and not just the weakest and not just from COVID. Everyone in need of medical care would be jeopardized.

Thailand is at that stage in your opinion yes or no? 

[Sheryl]

27 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Thailand is at that stage in your opinion yes or no? 

 

There is some community spread here but not (at least as yet) so rampant that they cannot still do containment.

 

Containment strategies (tracing and testing/quarantining contacts etc) still make sense. Even in Bangkok, but  especially in other provinces.

 

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, Sheryl said:

 

There is some community spread here but not (at least as yet) so rampant that they cannot still do containment.

 

Containment strategies (tracing and testing/quarantining contacts etc) still make sense. Even in Bangkok, but  especially in other provinces.

 

I really hope that you are right but without massive testing here as they did in South Korea in my opinion neither the government nor the public can possibly know much about the actual stage of this that Thailand is at. 

[CRUNCHER]

46 minutes ago, jmccarty said:

Letting it run its course was largely what 2009 Swine flu pandemic did. The casualty number is not clear, but it was a lot even after several vaccines were made available.

 

A vaccine, if available and safer than the virus itself, would be welcome before letting it run rampant.

You are right to raise the issue of the swine flu - the last pandemic. Estimated casualty numbers vary, but the upper end is 1.4 billion infected with 500,000 dead (Wikipedia). Another factor with swine flu is that it died out in 2009 only to re-appear in 2010.

 

  The economic impact of the approach to COVID 19 is going to be horrendous.  The suffering this will cause can only be imagined (or perhaps can't). I have asked myself, before Trump even raised it, - is the cure worse than the illness? 

 

Unfortunately I cannot answer my own question.  What I would like to have is a professional and definitive answer to the question - why is COVID 19 being treated differently to Swine Flu?

 

 

 

[baansgr]

At a minimum 3% fatality rate....let's just work out the tens of millions of deaths worldwide....will shadow Spanish flu..

[Andy from Kent]

1 hour ago, VocalNeal said:

Nice troll post. 

 

As I am not an expert of communicable diseases nor aware of what can be done to cure cases of serious infection then I am not very well placed to agree or disagree. 

 

Professionals who, on the other-hand, do know what to do I am sure are doing their best to do the right thing.  

 

Sheryl is correct however as a mate of mine who is waiting to have definitive tests as to whether of not he has cancer, is waiting for CT scans etc because his local hospital is currently preoccupied. 

 

You might want to hold back on troll accusations.

 

[CRUNCHER]

14 minutes ago, baansgr said:

At a minimum 3% fatality rate....let's just work out the tens of millions of deaths worldwide....will shadow Spanish flu..

You have a point, but before we estimate the numbers relating to a 3% mortality rate we need to know the infection rate numbers. Some experts are predicting something closer to  a 1% mortality rate.  We will not know until it is over.

 

The world seemed to go to a lock down mentality before the extent of the spread was known.  History will, perhaps, show that this was the correct approach.  Until we get to that time I cannot help but have reservations.

 

Still, we have gone down that road and it is too late to change.  Time will tell.  

Edited March 30, 2020 by CRUNCHER

[baansgr]

6 minutes ago, CRUNCHER said:

You have a point, but before we estimate the numbers relating to a 3% mortality rate we need to know the infection rate numbers. Some experts are predicting something closer to  a 1% mortality rate.  We will not know until it is over.

 

The world seemed to go to a lock down mentality before the extent of the spread was known.  History will, perhaps, show that this was the correct approach.  Until we get to that time I cannot help but have reservations.

 

Still, we have gone down that road and it is too late to change.  Time will tell.  

Of course...but would you like to put it to the Italians with almost 11% fatalities....herding can be done over a longer period....not the let's just everyone infected mentality.

 

 

[Skallywag]

1 hour ago, R123 said:

A well known British newspaper carries an opinion that the only way to solve the problem is to allow the virus to run its course and in effect 'cull' the weakest.

 

1 hour ago, Sheryl said:

What is being done in countries where it has reached the level of community spread will also achieve this, but at a slower rate so as to not totally overwhelm health services.

 

Allowing it to run rampant would get it over with faster but kill far more people, and not just the weakest and not just from COVID. Everyone in need of medical care would be jeopardized.

Good to hear from you Sheryl.   I understand the reason for containment, home isolation, etc... to reduce the possibility of overwhelming health services.  But if younger healthy people are likely to only have mild symptoms, I think they should be allowed to go back to work.  Otherwise, a global economic depression may end up causing long term stress, death, and starvation/homelessness possibly for those who have spent all their savings staying home with no income.  Mortgages, car payments, grocery bills all need to be paid or you lose them/cannot afford.   

Governments cannot bail people out forever.  They need taxes coming in also

I certainly do not have the answer.   Feel the CDC, WHO, NIH, NHS and all are doing their best and will continue to do so.  Time will tell. 

Hoping we can all get through this together

Peace and Health 

[FarFlungFalang]

1 hour ago, Sheryl said:

What is being done in countries where it has reached the level of community spread will also achieve this, but at a slower rate so as to not totally overwhelm health services.

 

Allowing it to run rampant would get it over with faster but kill far more people, and not just the weakest and not just from COVID. Everyone in need of medical care would be jeopardized.

The efforts to flattening the curve seem to be failing to prevent the health services being overwhelmed.Will it just drag out the overwhelming of the services causing as many if not more deaths by preventing the health services dealing with it's other life saving efforts?Are the efforts to save the lives of elderly people with underlying issues interfering with saving the lives of younger people with treatable but life threatening issues?Hard decisions to be made. 

[Skallywag]

1 minute ago, FarFlungFalang said:

Are the efforts to save the lives of elderly people with underlying issues interfering with saving the lives of younger people with treatable but life threatening issues?Hard decisions to be made. 

I would imagine the number of younger people with treatable life threatening issues would be fairly small compared to the number of elderly needing life saving treatment at this point in time.  Have no stats to go on, just my hunch.  Interesting point, and I wonder if hospitals are giving the elderly beds even if they have no ventilators for them, just letting them expire while cared for as a humanitarian service - and to keep them from going home and infecting others.

 

[Greenie]

12 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

 

But if younger healthy people are likely to only have mild symptoms, I think they should be allowed to go back to work. 

If they have it they spread it. With "get back to work" there is a silent implication of "get back to normal". If a large portion of the population does this the virus will have a big party.

Edited March 30, 2020 by Greenie

[Dumbastheycome]

1 hour ago, R123 said:

"Nice troll post"

 

No it is NOT.

 

This is a deadly serious matter. Kindly do not trivialize it...

Herd immunity  will be achieved either way. Those it kills are unlikely to  avoid that  outcome. But the purpose of the need to slow it is to help hospital capacity in avoiding preventable deaths. There are those who despite being in good prior health who also "go critical" but if not necessary to do so why should they become the priority?

Just letting  this infection spread uncontrolled is not  far short of  then progressing to the point of saying empty out the  aged  care  homes, the  terminal illness wards, physically or medically  dependent, or any other sector of society deemed non viable and hose them down  with Covid-19 and get it over and  done  with! Should it be ignored that in real terms all of these people are a part of an industry that employs many thousands in tax paying employment just one consideration.  

 

[from the home of CC]

2 hours ago, timendres said:

It is beginning to look more and more like herd immunity is already a foregone conclusion. This virus spread far too long in far too many places before action was taken. It is now just a question of slowing the curve and getting to the point that immunity puts this virus in the corner.

the only reason this came out was to save a buck and then to save face. Of course countries are going to say this, they are going to have to explain later how 100's of thousands died because they didn't act, and there's going to be a lot of fools that believe that bs.. lol

[Sharp]

https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/dr-fauci-concedes-coronavirus-death-rate-like-bad-flu/

[Sheryl]

46 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

I wonder if hospitals are giving the elderly beds even if they have no ventilators for them, just letting them expire while cared for as a humanitarian service - and to keep them from going home and infecting others.

 

 

Many elderly people have Advanced directives requesting that life support not be used...I know all my elderly relatives do, with me named as health care proxy.   In such cases, and also in cases without a directive if   there is  no reasonable hope for recovery and patient / family consent, then hospice care is provided along with (often) measures short of intubation, e.g. oxygen by mask and other noninvasive respiratory support. Still pretty care intensive. There is more to caring for people with severe COVID than ventilators.

[Sheryl]

5 hours ago, Sharp said:

https://www.wnd.com/2020/03/dr-fauci-concedes-coronavirus-death-rate-like-bad-flu/

 

It has always been evident that the case fatality rate is much lower than SARs and MERS and it has always been likely it will ultimately prove akin to severe influenza in that regard.

 

But - and this is a very big BUT - the overall number of deaths will be much, much larger if spread is not contained.  This is due to the much greater numbers who will be infected as there is no prior immunity in the population (even with new variants of influenza, there is often some degree of cross-immunity from prior strains). Additionally, and not known initially, the virus is unusually effective at spreading and can be spread by asymptomatic people.

 

Do the math: a 1% or even (as is possible) 0.5% case fatality with 1 million, 10 million and 100 million infections. Big difference.

 

The other consideration is that whatever the normal case fatality rate is,  that will go out the window if health care services collapse or are seriously comprised. In that case the CFR is higher than it needs to be -- not just for COVID but for everything else as well.

 

These "elective" surgeries and procedures that have been cancelled aren't unimportant and prolonged delays will cost lives in many cases.

 

 

 

[NCC1701A]

Mr Spock would instantly know the answer to this question.

Because he does not have human emotions he would not feel compassion, guilt or remorse.  He would look at the big picture and understand all the ramifications possible including economic collapse leading to mass starvation and war. 

 

Herd Immunity would be the logical conclusion.

 

But he is just a fictional character.

 

Human politicians in the west that suggest that course of action are crucified as monsters. Are they?

 

Are people who seem compassionate but don't care about the big picture right?  

 

This is a extremely difficult moral question for some. Save a few and collapse the world or just let the herd go about their business.    

 

How long would you sit in your house knowing every day brings you closer to ruin?

 

all of this aside, I think in the USA and the world there should now be a health care heroes day". 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2020 by NCC1701A

[DrTuner]

One thing nobody bothers to mention is if it's allowed a free run in order to get herd immunity, a lot of doctors and nurses will die due to inadequate equipment and facilities and it'll have a lasting impact on the health care system beyond that of the virus itself. 

[timendres]

14 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

One thing nobody bothers to mention is if it's allowed a free run in order to get herd immunity, a lot of doctors and nurses will die due to inadequate equipment and facilities and it'll have a lasting impact on the health care system beyond that of the virus itself. 

Why would their numbers be any different from the general population?

Generally young to middle-aged, reasonably healthy: 1-2% mortality, 3% max.

Doesn't seem like a "lasting impact on the health care system".

[DrTuner]

1 hour ago, timendres said:

Why would their numbers be any different from the general population?

Generally young to middle-aged, reasonably healthy: 1-2% mortality, 3% max.

Doesn't seem like a "lasting impact on the health care system".

Because they are continuously in an environment where they viral load in the air is high, you are likely to get infected with a high dose and have severe symptoms. That's the reason why they need the N95 masks. It's the same reason why the news are touting "we are running out of equipment". 

 

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/sars-cov-2-viral-load-and-the-severity-of-covid-19/

 

The people working in those conditions are true heroes.

 

First doctor known to die was the Chinese whistleblower, Li Wenliang: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51403795 . He seemed young and healthy from what I've read.

 

Also, you can't replace doctors fast. 

 

This is one of the main reasons to "flatten the curve". It's not just about hardware.

Edited March 30, 2020 by DrTuner

[CharlieH]

OTT derogatory slur and response to it have been removed.

[lust]

https://www.sciencealert.com/why-herd-immunity-will-not-save-us-from-the-covid-19-pandemic/amp

[Assurancetourix]

2 hours ago, NCC1701A said:

Mr Spock would instantly know the answer to this question.

Because he does not have human emotions he would not feel compassion, guilt or remorse.  He would look at the big picture and understand all the ramifications possible including economic collapse leading to mass starvation and war. 

 

Herd Immunity would be the logical conclusion.

This is also what the leaders of rare countries like Sweden, Switzerland think.

Morality has nothing to do or see in what is happening today.
The countries that have done (South Korea) or are currently doing (Germany) a massive screening will be the ones that will do the best and the quickest.
And Mr. Trump, you can think what you want from him, but he made the right decision: to make sure that the economy of his country did not collapse.
The others, because of the gross ignorance of their leaders will be plunged into a serious recession;
millions of jobs lost, most forever.
All this by an unreasonable fear which comes from nowhere except maybe of the European middle ages ... well fed by the newspapers " aux ordres " which ALL belong to billionaires.

very many dead who have absolutely nothing to do with the Covid will be declared because of it while these people, mostly elderly or very elderly, died because they already had 1 or 2 or even 3 significant pathologies.
the Covid will only speed up the process but has never been the lethal factor.