Herd Immunity

ldw4mlo

Well-Known Member
Proud Parent
Feb 13, 2015
5,687
60
Country
USA
On the surface a 1% death rate doesn't seem like a lot, but that would be 78,000,000 people world wide.
Except the death rate is much lower. Similar death rate to the flu. Overall mortality rate, is different then case fatality rate.

Over 2 million people a year die in the US alone each year, without Covid.

And there will be treatments available.

HIV used to be a death sentence. It is now a chronic disease that they advertise medication for on television.
 
  • Like
Reactions: M2Abi
Did ChalkBucket help you?... help us too.

If you can't help financially... tell a friend about us!

mommyof1

Active Member
Proud Parent
Jan 31, 2012
2,327
The car
Country
USA
Lifted from the NPR article:

In interviews and correspondence with more than a dozen researchers around the world, NPR found that the vast majority believes the virus will persist at some level for a long time in places like the U.S. and Europe.

"I think it's going to be with us probably forever at this point," says Devi Sridhar, a professor of global public health at the University of Edinburgh. "It's going to be with us, and it's how we decide to live with it."


OK, first you can't use "vast majority" when you literally are talking about a dozen (or even close to 2 dozen) people. Second, the quote is intriguing. So, what ARE we going to do if scientists believe we are going to be dealing with this forever? I think a lot of people are still holding out hope on a vaccine and that's why they what everything to remain shut down, have virtual school, work from home etc. But if this truly is going to be around for years (which I suspect will be the case) then we really need to find ways to better protect the most vulnerable and open everything else up safely.
What has worked in other countries is a real lockdown followed by robust containment measures. You can't just lock away the vulnerable indefinitely and let the rest of the population contract the disease. The vulnerable will still be exposed through caregivers, and many of the "healthy" will be left with lifelong consequences.
 

gymgal

Well-Known Member
Proud Parent
Aug 22, 2008
4,013
Country
USA
What has worked in other countries is a real lockdown followed by robust containment measures. You can't just lock away the vulnerable indefinitely and let the rest of the population contract the disease. The vulnerable will still be exposed through caregivers, and many of the "healthy" will be left with lifelong consequences.
I did not state or imply that we should do what you stated. I said we need to find better ways to protect the vulnerable - that does not mean locking them away. I also said open everything safely. There are ways to do this. Other countries are proving this. We just are not listening/observing. One major issue we have in this country is the number of people in the high risk category due to health conditions that can be improved upon: diabetes, obesity, hypertension, etc. I haven't heard any public campaigns to address this - encourage people to improve their chances by reducing their risks. One of the first things I did when I read about the risk factors back in early March was to commit to exercising and losing excess weight. I was pre-diabetic and borderline hypertensive. I still have weight to lose but I am in a much better position with the the other two.
 

ldw4mlo

Well-Known Member
Proud Parent
Feb 13, 2015
5,687
60
Country
USA
We do not currently have many effective treatments for COVID. And even though we now have treatments for HIV, we still encourage prevention.
We are less than a year into this virus.There are many potential treatments.

And any HIV treatment commercial I have ever seen never ever speaks to prevention.
 

Rockygym

Active Member
Proud Parent
Aug 6, 2014
874
46
Country
USA
We are less than a year into this virus.There are many potential treatments.

And any HIV treatment commercial I have ever seen never ever speaks to prevention.
Treatment of HIV is a form of prevention. Patients with non-detectable viral loads do not generally transmit the virus.
As for COViD as indicated above there are not many treatment options yet and nothing proven effective for outpatients. Yes plenty of options but conducting the studies to prove efficacy takes time and money.
 

ldw4mlo

Well-Known Member
Proud Parent
Feb 13, 2015
5,687
60
Country
USA
What has worked in other countries is a real lockdown followed by robust containment measures.
The virus has not gone away. It has waned in certain areas for now.

The vulnerable will always be at risk, for all sorts of thing. That is not going away.
 

mommyof1

Active Member
Proud Parent
Jan 31, 2012
2,327
The car
Country
USA
We are less than a year into this virus.There are many potential treatments.

And any HIV treatment commercial I have ever seen never ever speaks to prevention.
They still teach prevention in health class, at least according to my ninth-grader. The drug companies that make commercials are selling drugs.

There are potential treatments for COVID-19, but we don’t have an effective and widely available treatment now and shouldn’t act as if we do.
 

mommyof1

Active Member
Proud Parent
Jan 31, 2012
2,327
The car
Country
USA
The virus has not gone away. It has waned in certain areas for now.

The vulnerable will always be at risk, for all sorts of thing. That is not going away.
I never said the virus had gone away. I said other countries had handled it better and were in a better position to allow some activities that are patently unsafe in the U.S.

Of course the virus will always be a risk. But we need to get to a place where we can effectively manage that risk through testing, contact tracing, treatments, and/or a vaccine. We are nowhere near close to that point yet and cannot live as if we are.
 

profmom

Well-Known Member
Proud Parent
Nov 18, 2011
9,368
Region 7
Country
USA
Part of the problem in the US is that we are framing this crisis as one to address through individual-level and private behaviors and responsibilities, rather than as community-level and public. Instead of having actively engaged government officials on all levels collaborating to address the problem, we see breakdowns and conflicts between different layers of our federal system. Instead of a communal responsibility to keep everyone safe, Americans "do research" on the internet and choose the choices they think best for themselves.

It did not have to be this way.
 

Geoffrey Taucer

Former Admin
Gold Membership
Coach
Former Gymnast
Jan 21, 2007
4,061
Baltimore, MD
Country
USA
What has worked in other countries is a real lockdown followed by robust containment measures. You can't just lock away the vulnerable indefinitely and let the rest of the population contract the disease. The vulnerable will still be exposed through caregivers, and many of the "healthy" will be left with lifelong consequences.
Yes, and I want to add one more thing that has been enormously effective in countries that have tried it:

Pay people to stay home. Provide a basic income during the crisis so people don't feel so much pressure to leave the house. Make sure people's survival needs are met regardless of work, and it will become much easier to stay home and clamp down on the spread
 

Madden3

Active Member
Proud Parent
Aug 24, 2013
774
47
Country
USA
Part of the problem in the US is that we are framing this crisis as one to address through individual-level and private behaviors and responsibilities, rather than as community-level and public. Instead of having actively engaged government officials on all levels collaborating to address the problem, we see breakdowns and conflicts between different layers of our federal system. Instead of a communal responsibility to keep everyone safe, Americans "do research" on the internet and choose the choices they think best for themselves.

It did not have to be this way.
I do not understand your point.
Every State, county, and large city, have their own health departments, which offer local guidance.
A Federal-down, dictated minutia response would not be appropriate in a country this large and diverse in population density.
To understand their local guidelines, people are better off turning to those sites on the internet, as the media is a poor source of information.
If people disagree with local guidelines, they are free to do their own research and decide how best to navigate the situation, but there may be consequences for going against guidelines, depending on enforcement.

I know you do not want the Federal Government making specific rules that everyone in the country must follow, and enforcing them. If that is what you want, I suggest be careful what you wish for.
 

JessSyd

Member
Proud Parent
Oct 10, 2013
224
Sydney Australia
Country
Australia
I know this borders on politics, but it is discussing systems rather than ideology, and is, I promise, nonpartisan so hopefully it does not break the rules.

We have a country that consists of states with their own governments and a federal government. Here, states have responsibility for things like health and school education while the federal government is responsible for things like welfare, universities, taxation policy, external border control, the military.

The first thing that happened when the virus hit our shores, was the formation of a ‘national cabinet’ which consisted of the state premiers (like governors) and the Prime Minister. They met (online) weekly during the first wave and on an as needed basis since. State leaders here are evenly split between the right and the left, so it has been pretty much the most amazing example of bipartisan cooperation this country has ever seen.

The states discuss their responses, let the federal government know what support it needed from them (welfare changes, rules about overseas visitors, assistance with procuring, occasional support from the defence Force).

States coordinated with each other on responses like internal border control, when the borders between states have been shut on and off to prevent transmission of the virus. Each state’s chief medical officer shares expertise and experience with those of the other states.

The federal government, meanwhile, used its purchasing power to procure and distribute PPE, ventilators etc, and also used economic mechanisms available to it to establish more local manufacturing capability in those areas, coordinated defense responses as required (generally helping local authorities in a needed capacity - right now they are helping with swabbing for tests, and are doing ride alongs with paramedics in case they are needed to step in there if too many ambulance officers become ill)

All in all, a lot of Australians from either side of the political divide have been watching this in surprise, slightly impressed, going ‘so it is possible to get stuff done in a sensible way with no partisan sniping and point scoring.’ We have been told the National Cabinet will probably stay after this crisis has passed, and that is an amazing piece of political reform that I think will be good for the country going forward. I will miss the ‘can do’ attitude when the sniping resumes in earnest.
 

gymgal

Well-Known Member
Proud Parent
Aug 22, 2008
4,013
Country
USA
Part of the problem in the US is that we are framing this crisis as one to address through individual-level and private behaviors and responsibilities, rather than as community-level and public. Instead of having actively engaged government officials on all levels collaborating to address the problem, we see breakdowns and conflicts between different layers of our federal system. Instead of a communal responsibility to keep everyone safe, Americans "do research" on the internet and choose the choices they think best for themselves.

It did not have to be this way.
A one size fits all approach is not conducive to the US, where we have such different such different areas of the country. Even within states, there is such differences in risk. No, the people in the rural parts of the south and midwest due not need a complete shut down of their economy because the urban areas of the country are having spikes. This is why local policy works best for the US and why the federal government should not be mandating for the whole country. I agree with this regarding schools as well, though I do find it interesting that the same folks who are saying that the federal government should mandate national guidelines for masks and shutdowns are now saying that the local municipalities should be dictating school openings "because every place is difference"

Yes, and I want to add one more thing that has been enormously effective in countries that have tried it:

Pay people to stay home. Provide a basic income during the crisis so people don't feel so much pressure to leave the house. Make sure people's survival needs are met regardless of work, and it will become much easier to stay home and clamp down on the spread
The US govt are paying people to stay home and lots of people made more money through unemployment then they did when they were working. These benefits were available for more than just those who lost their jobs. It was also offered to those who could not work due to having children at home (due to school closures). The majority of people in office jobs were able to continue working through telecommuting. In general though, I do not see the universal income policy happening in the US due to the "slippery slope" it brings. Americans are not ready to risk a long term consequence of that. They have learned over and over that once something is put into place, even temporarily, it is very difficult to reverse it.
 

profmom

Well-Known Member
Proud Parent
Nov 18, 2011
9,368
Region 7
Country
USA
Part of the problem in the US is that we are framing this crisis as one to address through individual-level and private behaviors and responsibilities, rather than as community-level and public. Instead of having actively engaged government officials on all levels collaborating to address the problem, we see breakdowns and conflicts between different layers of our federal system. Instead of a communal responsibility to keep everyone safe, Americans "do research" on the internet and choose the choices they think best for themselves.

It did not have to be this way.
Please reread my post. As the bolded text indicates, I am not saying the US failed because the federal government did not command everything from above. The US failed because the national government did not fulfill its responsibilities, because the federal government and the states were competing instead of collaborating, and because in some states, including mine, state and local officials played politics instead of working together to do what was in the public health interest. Further, messaging throughout has emphasized personal choice instead of community responsibility. We had a very good pandemic plan that accounted well for federalism. It's still available on the web. We completely botched it.
 

raenndrops

Well-Known Member
Coach
Former Gymnast
Proud Relative
Oct 24, 2009
6,475
The 'Wood, Ohio
Country
USA
Nope... Wrong... Not anti-vaxers... There will be a lot of vaccinators who will not get it or give it to the children without seeing how large amounts of people respond to it. And no, 6-12 Months if trials will not be enough for a lot of folks.
There will be plenty of "delayed vaxers" (those waiting for long term positive results before getting vaccinated), but there will also be plenty of people who will NEVER get any COVID-19 vaccine because they are completely against vaccinations. I know a few families who opt out of vaccinations ... and their children go to a pediatrician who agrees with their position ... and are homeschooled.
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: PinPin and ldw4mlo

gymgal

Well-Known Member
Proud Parent
Aug 22, 2008
4,013
Country
USA
There will be plenty of "delayed vaxers" (those waiting for long term positive results before getting vaccinated), but there will also be plenty of people who will NEVER get any COVID-19 vaccine because they are completely against vaccinations. I know a few families who opt out of vaccinations ... and their children go to a pediatrician who agrees with their position ... and are homeschooled.
Yes, this is true. I know several myself, through my line of work. I was commenting on the poster implying that anyone who is not willing to get the vaccine must be anti-vax and an idiot. Just clarifying that this is not the case. The vast majority of folks vaccinate their children but a lot of these are very uneasy about being guinea pigs for a brand new vaccine. I feel the roll out will be very slow, unless of course the schools (state) mandate it and stop the virtual school option...
 
Thank you for supporting our sponsors Energym Music & Norberts!