'Herd Immunity only way out'

[DrTuner]

6 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

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.

Here's a good question to people... when is the last time you had a full health check-up? Among the comorbidities are hypertension (high blood pressure), diabetes and probably some other underlying ones that can go undetected for a long time. Just saying that "I'm alright Jack" attitude might be false security.

 

Not directed to you since the Gallic bard has access to the magic potion, but you managed to touch the subject. 

[Assurancetourix]

1 minute ago, DrTuner said:

Not directed to you since the Gallic bard has access to the magic potion, but you managed to touch the subject. 

Since Goscini and Uderzo died the recipe has disappeared 

[Swimfan]

4 hours ago, CRUNCHER said:

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?

 

 

 

You just have to look at the numbers you quoted to give yourself the answer. At current death rates for Covid at 1.4 billion  Infected you would probably see about 50 million die.So it’s probably about 100 times more deadly than swine flu. 

[Logosone]

Excellent article. It's good to see the Telegraph in the UK is catching up with my own thinking on this.

 

Obviously containment is the best option, but it would require a massive, thorough and widespread programme of testing which countries like Thailand or the UK would most likely be unable to do. The lack of test kits is being addressed by producing cheap test kits but these are being produced in low numbers in Thailand, larger numbers in the UK. Then there's administering them, and isolating the infected. Here the UK would probably be unable to do this with its current NHS and the same would apply in Thailand.

 

In short, herd immunity will come quicker than solution by containment. In most countries, not just Thailand or the UK.

 

Sadly social distancing fanaticism will drag out the date by which herd immunity wil arrive, but arrive it will. 

 

So nobody will have to make a decision, this decision will be made by the very success of the virus itself.

Edited March 30, 2020 by Logosone

[CRUNCHER]

54 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

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.

A couple of take aways from your interesting post.

First I am reminded of the Roosevelt quote - "The only thing you need to fear is fear itself". 

Second, an item from Sky TV a couple of days ago. The UK death toll then was about 760 and 98% of those had underlying health conditions. The Imperial model predicted about 20,000 deaths in UK. Medical experts estimated half of those 20,000 would have died within a year anyway. Of course this is just prediction. It sounds a bit callous, but it does, perhaps, put thing in a different perspective.

[DrTuner]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

In short, herd immunity will come quicker than solution by containment. In most countries, not just Thailand or the UK.

 

Sadly social distancing fanaticism will drag out the date by which herd immunity wil arrive, but arrive it will. 

For some period of time. It's still unknown how long the immunity, if any, lasts. Perfectly possible it becomes endemic or starts jumping from cluster to cluster after the immunity wears off. 

 

We do have a weapon we didn't have in 1918: big data and machine learning. It could predict and isolate clusters. But to work, it needs to be fed with accurate data. It is paramount that cheap, reliable and fast tests and a system to enter the results into a central repository is built ASAP. 

 

  

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

So nobody will have to make a decision, this decision will be made by the very success of the virus itself.

The quintessential Thai method of solving problems. Ignore them and hope they go away.

Edited March 30, 2020 by DrTuner

[lust]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

Excellent article. It's good to see the Telegraph in the UK is catching up with my own thinking on this.

 

Obviously containment is the best option, but it would require a massive, thorough and widespread programme of testing which countries like Thailand or the UK would most likely be unable to do. The lack of test kits is being addressed by producing cheap test kits but these are being produced in low numbers in Thailand, larger numbers in the UK. Then there's administering them, and isolating the infected. Here the UK would probably be unable to do this with its current NHS and the same would apply in Thailand.

 

In short, herd immunity will come quicker than solution by containment. In most countries, not just Thailand or the UK.

 

Sadly social distancing fanaticism will drag out the date by which herd immunity wil arrive, but arrive it will. 

 

So nobody will have to make a decision, this decision will be made by the very success of the virus itself.

Why not educate yourself on why your fallacy won’t play out like you think it will?

[Logosone]

17 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

For some period of time. It's still unknown how long the immunity, if any, lasts. Perfectly possible it becomes endemic or starts jumping from cluster to cluster after the immunity wears off. 

 

We do have a weapon we didn't have in 1918: big data and machine learning. It could predict and isolate clusters. But to work, it needs to be fed with accurate data. It is paramount that cheap, reliable and fast tests and a system to enter the results into a central repository is built ASAP. 

 

  

The quintessential Thai method of solving problems. Ignore them and hope they go away.

 

We do not know how long immunity will last, quite right. However given that the coronaviruses mutate considerably less than influenza viruses, and the very few mutations that have been found have so far proved inconsequential, it is more likely that immunity will be around for a longer, rather than a shorter period. This is not a virus that mutates a lot. And we have seen with SARS 1.0 that a mutation can work in our favour. The original SARS lost a part of its genome in a mutation that affected transmission. 

 

The only real question is are really that many people infected already? Sir Patrick Vallance talked of a ten or twenty times multiple for cases. However, Iceland that did actual testing found that only 2% were infected of those tested. Maybe a special case. More likely Vallance is right and in the big countries the multiple is ten or twenty.

 

That means it would still be a bit of time, we'd see several waves and it would take time for herd immunity to arrive. Especially if politicians advised by flawed models insist on the social distancing fallacy, as this worst of all measures delays herd immunity.

 

However, fortunately it would appear that most people are ignoring the social distancing fundamentalists and the period required for this flawed policy is so long that it has no hope of being maintained.

 

So herd immunity it is.

 

Yes, we have good data machines, but it still depends on the very hard work of testing, identifying and isolating. Too much to ask.

 

Much easier to set up a roadblock.

 

The amount of people that would need to be tested in Thailand or the UK is so large we can not hope this will be done on time, or before herd immunity arrives.

 

 

Edited March 30, 2020 by Logosone

[DrTuner]

4 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Yes, we have good data machines, but it still depends on the very hard work of testing, identifying and isolating. Too much to ask.

And bloody frustrating. To see that there could be a solution, but it's watered down by lack of determination.

[JimmyTheMook]

Without mass testing and quarantining of the infected people - yes we will and are going to cull via the herd immunity scenario.

 

China made a new fancy hospital with bars on widows to contain the sick.

 

 

[Logosone]

8 minutes ago, DrTuner said:

And bloody frustrating. To see that there could be a solution, but it's watered down by lack of determination.

Yes, and also lack of resources. The Thais have done excellent work in producing their own fast track test kits.

 

However when I saw in how small a number they were producing I realised that mass testing is not going to be an option.

 

Even if in Thailand, the country where "do nothing" is elevated into an art form where government is concerned, there were some hope of tests being done in anything like the large numbers that would be needed, there are no resources. Even if the tests kits where here and the people were tested and identified, where would they be isolated and treated? 

 

Equally the UK, caught with its pants down with 5000 icu beds, no test kits, no respirators, where nurses are wrapping themselves in bin liners, the NHS is begging on Twitter for B&Q and Homebase to provide materials the UK government cannot organise, it does not look like there are enough resources.

 

And frankly the flawed models of Neil Ferguson, that are based on Influenza pandemics, when we now know that the transmission of this SARS 2.0 is much different due to the large number of asymptomatic carriers, with their emphasis on social distancing, rather than a successful containment strategy of testing, the bumbling Boris Johnson is not well served with these ideas. They will most likely be overtaken by herd immunity.

 

The big punchline to this incredulous orgy of incompetence of governments world-wide will be when herd immunity comes, and they will all say "Our measures worked, see social distancing, like we said, saved you, we did a great job"...and most people will applaud with gratitude for their leaders' foresight.  It's infuriating but Schiller was right, you can't fight stupid.

 

 

 

[Jane Dough]

The politics of coronavirus make herd immunity non-viable. As the UK discovered.

 

The response to the pandemic is being controlled by politicians who are trying desperately to hoodwink the public into believing they are following science.

 

Rooster

[geriatrickid]

The pushing of "herd immunity" is a misapplication of a concept and promoted by those without  field experience in epidemiology or public health. These are often  the same academics who provided the initial faulty guidance at the start of the crisis. No one credible who has been in the field for SARS, MERS, Ebola etc. supports these notions. They are almost always promoted by people who think an idea that works in theory or that looks good on paper can be applied in real life.

 

Long term immunity has not been demonstrated. It could exist, but it might not exist. Do we have immunity from other corona virus induced infections? Not always. If we did we would not suffer from colds and animals would not need corona virus vaccines.

 

It is unfortunate that some still do not understand that this isn't about the deaths, but the overwhelming of health care systems and the potential physical damage to otherwise healthy "young people". In the USA and Canada  a large portion of the ICUs are occupied by "younger" people. If we just get it over with as is argued, tens of thousands of people who would not otherwise die will die because they will be unable to access health care.

 

 

I’m an epidemiologist. When I heard about Britain’s ‘herd immunity’ coronavirus plan, I thought it was satire

- William Hanage professor of the evolution and epidemiology of infectious disease at Harvard

 

 

[Sambotte]

Herd imunity is obviously (to me) the only way.

But i think many are missing a possible main point :

People in general, old people particularely (western is majority old, decision makers too), and obese etc. sicks people (a majority too i think), do not want to be unable to have help in hospital. And they have pay a lot of money for that.

Beside, the problem with corona is it is sudden. Too massive too quick for medical to deal with it. And nobody wants to see people dying on the streets asphyxying.

 

So we have, insteed of accepting maybe 20% sicks (witch is huge), and maybe 1% deads (or more, with medical overwhelmed), within a few months, meaning, again main point : medical would be overwhelmed... instead we are on planetary lockdown...

 

This could be worst than the virus. Riots will occurs if strict confinement is maintained too long. Suicides (it's a lot of deaths every years but like pollution, people don't care, they don't see it, and they still can go to hospital for themself). Violence, etc.

Not to mention some does not like at all the idea of confinement imposed, anyway, but even worst if it's mainly to delay, and protect old or sick people mainly, and the medical system.

 

Note that medical "experts" will want to protect the medical system first, obviously. They make the decisions. So...

 

What i still do not understand is why massive tests are NOT being seriously produced. In wars, since some use this fear-trick, we can produce enornous amounts of weapons in very short time.

 

Lockdown of the planet will not work (and it's not supposed to "fight" the virus, just to delay) if too long, too totalitarist. Politicians may know that. Or not. I mean it's a interesting test somehow too.

 

So for me i am mainly looking for plans to massive test people, not just the symptomatics and medical workers. Massive testing. If positive : isolation, and find the contacts. So the world can LIVE AGAIN. 

 

World can do that, not difficult, and money is not a problem. So how more long will it takes ? Should have been prepared long before too. We know for sure about such pandemies since many many years.

 

So when will the world fight this virus instead of "cowardly" try to hide / delay ?... 

[Logosone]

45 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

The pushing of "herd immunity" is a misapplication of a concept and promoted by those without  field experience in epidemiology or public health. These are often  the same academics who provided the initial faulty guidance at the start of the crisis. No one credible who has been in the field for SARS, MERS, Ebola etc. supports these notions. They are almost always promoted by people who think an idea that works in theory or that looks good on paper can be applied in real life.

 

Long term immunity has not been demonstrated. It could exist, but it might not exist. Do we have immunity from other corona virus induced infections? Not always. If we did we would not suffer from colds and animals would not need corona virus vaccines.

 

It is unfortunate that some still do not understand that this isn't about the deaths, but the overwhelming of health care systems and the potential physical damage to otherwise healthy "young people". In the USA and Canada  a large portion of the ICUs are occupied by "younger" people. If we just get it over with as is argued, tens of thousands of people who would not otherwise die will die because they will be unable to access health care.

 

 

I’m an epidemiologist. When I heard about Britain’s ‘herd immunity’ coronavirus plan, I thought it was satire

- William Hanage professor of the evolution and epidemiology of infectious disease at Harvard

 

 

That is of course absolutely false. 

 

Here is Professor Peter Openshaw, Past President of the British Society for Immunology and Professor of Experimental Medicine at Imperial College London, on herd immunity:

 

"Generating herd immunity in the population, and particularly in younger individuals who are less likely to experience serious disease, is one way to stop the disease spreading and provide indirect protection to older, more vulnerable groups."

https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-comments-about-herd-immunity/

 

 

William Hanage did not say that herd immunity does not work, in the Guardian article he merely said that he did not support it because he thought that on humanitarian grounds the number of lives lost were something he would not support.

 

Long term immunity from this virus is of course more likely because coronaviruses do not mutate as much as other viruses. The relatively few mutations that have been found have been inconsequential. As there are few mutations, the chances of immunity disappearing quickly due to a new strain are low.

 

It is absolutely not the case that it is younger people dying from this virus, the statistics show that it is disproportionately people over 80, who had underlying health issues and would have died anyway.

 

The argument that health care will save a large number of Covid19 patients is spurious at best, there is no therapy, no vaccine, not enough respirators, not enough materials. Rather than getting it over quickly and delivering a short sharp shock to the system, those that would drag out the period when hospitals focus on Covid19 at the expense of other non-Covid19 patients do not understand that the impaired care would most likely cause more deaths on the side of critical non-Covid19 patients. Already the UK has said that operations will be cancelled because 30000 beds will be requisitioned for Covid19. So this will most likely cost more lives, when doctors, by all accounts are intubating Covid19 patients that are critical and have to watch them die. At the same time critical non-Covid19 patients will receive impaired care for longer, and there are more deaths on that side of the hospital population.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2020 by Logosone

[tjo o tjim]

There is a lot of pain to get to herd immunity.  

 

In the US, California has about 6,000 confirmed cases and 1,000 hospital beds occupied.  The numbers I am getting are that over 30% of these are in ICU— one hospital indicated 80% of patients on ventilators in the ICU.  They are preparing for MASH tents, but don’t know how they will get enough oxygen to run them... along with all the other support needs.  Patients are in the ICU for weeks minimum.

 

This is 1 person in 10,000.  Even if magically they can add 20,000 hospital beds, you are a long way from herd immunity, which is closer to 30-60% infection rate.  

 

Covid just spreads too fast for less aggressive measures than the current absurd rules and recommendations.  Without them you end up with 20x cases in two weeks.  With them, if you are lucky, you have 2x-4x the case load in two weeks.

[sotonowl]

They don't know how long immunity will last so it's a load of cobblers. Social distancing and pushing it back until an effective vaccine is found is the answer unless they can produce an effective treatment.

[dom1234]

In his heart the Donald knows his hunches are right but has to play to the gallery with the maxim all lives are equal. They're not - the more bread you have the less <deleted> you need to eat. 

[englishoak]

Herd immunity assumes future strains will be the same or near identical. If its like say smallpox and stable then thats fine and a vaccine will be found and it can be like smallpox readily eradicated by mass vaccination and or herd immunity but... and its a big but... You cant become immune to influenza nor the common cold and IF Covid19 is subject to mutation as is Influenza for example then the herd immunity theory completely fails. 

 

What is perhaps more worrying is so far there has never been a successful vaccine for any Coronavirus to date... nor for the rest of the Coronavirus family including SARS and they have been at it for over four decades now.  

Edited March 30, 2020 by englishoak

[Dexlowe]

Herd immunity has a certain logic to it, but who wants to be the one to stand up and tell the masses, "Sorry, but some of you will have to die so that the rest of us can live". It's a long-term plan fraught with disaster. NZ is under lockdown and practising social distancing, and so far it appears to be working and buying time that is being used to restore normality.

[geriatrickid]

9 hours ago, Logosone said:

That is of course absolutely false. 

 

Here is Professor Peter Openshaw, Past President of the British Society for Immunology and Professor of Experimental Medicine at Imperial College London, on herd immunity:

 

"Generating herd immunity in the population, and particularly in younger individuals who are less likely to experience serious disease, is one way to stop the disease spreading and provide indirect protection to older, more vulnerable groups."

https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-comments-about-herd-immunity/

 

 

William Hanage did not say that herd immunity does not work, in the Guardian article he merely said that he did not support it because he thought that on humanitarian grounds the number of lives lost were something he would not support.

 

Long term immunity from this virus is of course more likely because coronaviruses do not mutate as much as other viruses. The relatively few mutations that have been found have been inconsequential. As there are few mutations, the chances of immunity disappearing quickly due to a new strain are low.

 

It is absolutely not the case that it is younger people dying from this virus, the statistics show that it is disproportionately people over 80, who had underlying health issues and would have died anyway.

 

The argument that health care will save a large number of Covid19 patients is spurious at best, there is no therapy, no vaccine, not enough respirators, not enough materials. Rather than getting it over quickly and delivering a short sharp shock to the system, those that would drag out the period when hospitals focus on Covid19 at the expense of other non-Covid19 patients do not understand that the impaired care would most likely cause more deaths on the side of critical non-Covid19 patients. Already the UK has said that operations will be cancelled because 30000 beds will be requisitioned for Covid19. So this will most likely cost more lives, when doctors, by all accounts are intubating Covid19 patients that are critical and have to watch them die. At the same time critical non-Covid19 patients will receive impaired care for longer, and there are more deaths on that side of the hospital population.

Stating that I am wrong doesn't change the reality  You continually post references taken out of context and which in themselves often do not support  your position.  Bombarding the forum with the same unsubstantiated and unreliable claims, doesn't make your claims any more credible. Yes, a number of people offer their support for your claims.  They also promote  conspiracies such as 5G.  It is quite obvious that some are mentally unstable.

 

You are a self proclaimed expert who uses references to disease and  conditions that are  40+ years out of date. Your recent reference to "VD" was a laughable illustration.  The undeniable fact is that my views/position are entirely consistent with the current  strategies employed by the countries who are showing the most success in managing the  crisis. It is not because  I am special.  Rather,  it is due to the fact that I have an education and my livelihood requires that I understand the procedures, the research and the mechanisms employed.  I have faith and confidence in the  specialists who have  created and effected these strategies, some of whom I went to school with or studied under.  Their strategies  were tested and improved during the SARS, MERS and Ebola epidemics. They know what they are doing and it is beyond ridiculous that you insist that their strategy and experience is wrong,

 

We'll see in a few months if the strategy works . Until then, I am redeployed to files associated with this crisis and can no longer comment on anything here.   I know what people are doing and you do not.  Have fun shouting at your computer screen. It won't help you and thankfully I won't  be reading or hearing from you. The situation in Thailand is going to get very real over the next two weeks and I wish  people  to remain safe and healthy.   

[Roy Baht]

The Bangkok elite did not want their city full of dirty, poor sick people who could have threatened their lives and the lives of their children, so rather than order an immediate lockdown which would have contained the virus in Bangkok, they gave the dirty, sick poor 48 hour warning to get the hell out of Bangkok and bring their disease home to the rural areas to infect their poor grand-parents and parents. Meanwhile, the wealthy of Bangkok retreated to Hua Hin to party in their condos. This is definitely a culling but, in typical Thai fashion, along clear class lines.

 

 

 

[Logosone]

3 hours ago, englishoak said:

and IF Covid19 is subject to mutation as is Influenza

It's not subject to mutation like influenza virus. Influenza viruses are a different group of viruses which are known to mutate considerably more than SARS Cov2.

 

There have been very few mutations identified for SARS Cov2. Those that were found were deemed inconsequential.

 

It just does not mutate as much as the influenza viruses. So the chances are good that once immunity is achieved it will be longer term immunity.

 

 

[Logosone]

1 hour ago, geriatrickid said:

 Yes, a number of people offer their support for your claims.  They also promote  conspiracies such as 5G.  It is quite obvious that some are mentally unstable.

 

The undeniable fact is that my views/position are entirely consistent with the current  strategies employed by the countries who are showing the most success in managing the  crisis. 

 

We'll see in a few months if the strategy works .

To suggest that Professor Peter Openshaw, Past President of the British Society for Immunology and Professor of Experimental Medicine at Imperial College London is a "conspiracy theorist" and "mentally unstable" is frankly a desperate measure to attack the people who oppose you, rather than to address the facts.

 

I will rather take the words of Peter Openshaw of Imperial College, one of the greatest experts on viral infections alive today, that herd immunity works, rather than those of someone who only a few days ago advanced the theory that herd immunity to SARS Cov2 would be impossible and never work because we should look at HIV. The fact that you don't know that HIV is a stealth virus that hides in cells and has a replication cycle of just over 24 hours which gives it a genetic diversity that makes it so hard to find a vaccine or achieve herd immunity and is therefore uniquely unsuited for comparison to SARS Cov2 shows that you really do not know what you're talking about. There are very few mutations for SARS Cov2 and coronaviruses in general, far less than for the influenza viruses even. This makes both a vaccine and herd immunity very likely solutions that offer longer term immunity.

 

The fact is that your views are currently aligned with the strategies used by those countries who have shown the least success in fighting Covid19. The countries that have shown the most success have achieved that success by testing and isolating the infected, not by using social distancing. In Singapore schools are still open. Compare their mortality rate with Italy, the country with the most stringent social distancing rules in place.

 

If social distancing works so great, why is it failing so miserably in Italy, which is practising the most extreme social distancing for a long time now?

 

The fact is there are three main strategies to defeat SARS Cov2:

 

1) Testing, identifying and isolating the infected

2) Clinical Management

3) Social distancing measures

 

It is only because China used social distancing in a desperate attempt to throw everything possible at this virus that Neil Ferguson and others believe it works. They assign social distancing as the main factor in China having stemmed the virus spread. However, that is wrong. China also did mass testing and identifying and isolating of the infected.

 

A study by the Chinese after the virus spread had been contained tried to ascertain which of the above three measures worked to what extent to reduce transmission of the virus. They were unable to do so, because all the strategies were used in the same small period of time. It was therefore impossible to say if social distancing worked, except in the very early stages, and to what exact extent.

 

So what will happen is that when the virus stops spreading, as will inevitably be the case, social distancing proponents will say "See it worked". However, any study to find evidence for this would be unable to confirm it, as various measures were used simultaneously in fighting the virus, and apportioning the effect of each one is very hard to do. 

 

 

 

Edited March 31, 2020 by Logosone

[Sharp]

6 minutes ago, Logosone said:

To suggest that Professor Peter Openshaw, Past President of the British Society for Immunology and Professor of Experimental Medicine at Imperial College London is a "conspiracy theorist" and "mentally unstable" is frankly a desperate measure to attack the people who oppose you, rather than to address the facts.

 

I will rather take the words of Peter Openshaw of Imperial College, one of the greatest experts on viral infections alive today, that herd immunity works, rather than those of someone who only a few days ago advanced the theory that herd immunity to SARS Cov2 would be impossible and never work because we should look at HIV. The fact that you don't know that HIV is a stealth virus that hides in cells and has a replication cycle of just over 24 hours which gives it a genetic diversity that makes it so hard to find a vaccine or achieve herd immunity and is therefore uniquely unsuited for comparison to SARS Cov2 shows that you really do not know what you're talking about. There are very few mutations for SARS Cov2 and coronaviruses in general, far less than for the influenza viruses even. This makes both a vaccine and herd immunity very likely solutions that offer longer term immunity.

 

The fact is that your views are currently aligned with the strategies used by those countries who have shown the least success in fighting Covid19. The countries that have shown the most success have achieved that success by testing and isolating the infected, not by using social distancing. In Singapore schools are still open. Compare their mortality rate with Italy, the country with the most stringent social distancing rules in place.

 

If social distancing works so great, why is it failing so miserably in Italy, which is practising the most extreme social distancing for a long time now?

 

The fact is there are three main strategies to defeat SARS Cov2:

 

1) Testing, identifying and isolating the infected

2) Clinical Management

3) Social distancing measures

 

It is only because China used social distancing in a desperate attempt to throw everything possible at this virus that Neil Ferguson and others believe it works. They assign social distancing as the main factor in China having stemmed the virus spread. However, that is wrong. China also did mass testing and identifying and isolating of the infected.

 

A study by the Chinese after the virus spread had been contained tried to ascertain which of the above three measures worked to what extent to reduce transmission of the virus. They were unable to do so, because all the strategies were used in the same small period of time. It was therefore impossible to say if social distancing worked, except in the very early stages, and to what exact extent.

 

So what will happen is that when the virus stops spreading, as will inevitably be the case, social distancing proponents will say "See it worked". However, any study to find evidence for this would be unable to confirm it, as various measures were used simultaneously in fighting the virus, and apportioning the effect of each one is very hard to do. 

 

 

This is somewhat interesting

https://twitter.com/jeffreyatucker/status/1244659161088081920?s=20