Herd Immunity...

[wcmagumba]

Seems like what right wingers here prefer, like right wingers in the UK apparently want (the government there is now denying this approach is being considered). Drump thinks this will get rid of many Democrats along with his supporters, he and the sycophants around him just don't care...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/its-going-to-be-daunting-uk-considers-opposite-approach-to-the-uss-by-allowing-more-people-to-contract-coronavirus-2020-03-14

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Herd immunity only works when most of a population is already immune.

For example, most people in the US are immune to measles, either because they had it as children or were vaccinated for it. This means that even those who haven't been vaccinated, either because they have some medical reason for not doing it or because their parents are stupid, are less likely to get it because the virus isn't circulating around as much as it would be in a non-immune population. But nobody is immune to CV yet because people are just starting to get it. It's not even clear yet that having had it and recovering from it confers immunity (there are a few reports of recovered people getting it again). But a policy of letting everybody get a disease in the hope that eventually most people will be immune is just insane.

[pat_k]

2. Boris J wants to see 60% in UK contract the virus to develop "herd immunity"

He claims they have shifted from containment to "flattening the curve" but have ceased testing of any but the most severe cases, and are mandating very few "social isolation" measures.

They figure 60% will contract COVID-19 anyway, so why not just let it happen? It's a good thing, because they will develop "herd immunity."

Never mind that they are doing no surveillance testing to see how their experiment with millions of lives is going.

If I were the EU, I would immediately bar travel from the UK to any other EU country.

Let them develop their "herd immunity" in isolation.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. That's just insane.

[pat_k]

6. I'm waiting for this stroke of brilliance to be the outcome of Kushner's information gathering.

And we all know Trump plans to follow whatever recommendations Jared comes up with.

[pat_k]

10. Except UK is not shutting things down.

He is recommending that people who feel ill self-isolate for 7 days -- not long enough.

The last I looked, there were few if any mandatory shut downs ordered by PM.

[Steelrolled]

7. It works in theory

it they can control the rate of infection. But I don't see that happening. We could really use some beneficial mutations but we have no idea when they will occur.

[pat_k]

14. In addition, although we must prepare for worst case...

That is, we must prepare for catastrophic spread being "inevitable," the fact is, we don't know enough. The "worst case" models are built on assumptions that may not hold up. They are telling us what "could" happen, not what will happen. Until we have a better idea of ACTUAL infection rates and growth in different geographic areas here, it is simply not clear that the virus is -- even at this late juncture -- not containable (at least in certain regions).

It is premature to throw up our hands and say fuck it.

And ceasing testing -- even of random samples to collect data -- is utterly asinine.

[coti]

4. No, not only right wingers would like to see our population develop herd immunity to the virus

In fact, I would hope that most people don't want to see our elderly and sick continue to be vulnerable to this virus in perpetuity.

[EarthFirst]

5. This is what happens when you don't science... nt

[EarthFirst]

12. Sure it is...

However misunderstanding that herd immunity is gained by doing nothing; is far from.

Unless I misunderstood what how UK government believes this should be combated...

[uriel1972]

15. /sigh..

Herd Immunity happens when the disease is isolated because most of the population in question are immune..
The disease has no oppurtunity to leap from person to person because most people are immune, effectively preventing the disease from attacking vulnerable people because it can't use a vector.

That's why when you vaccinate most of the populace, those who are not vaccinated are safe, thus "Immune". As has been seen lately, when vaccination rates drop the "Immunity" is lost and people die.

Letting the most vulnerable die might sound good when you think you are not vulnerable, but you are in a pandemic.

[uriel1972]

19. Our best course of action will be to develop a vaccine and get it to as many people as possible...

If you read the article by the epidemiologist (one whose life is in studying plagues and immunity), you should see that an uncontrolled wildfire of disease is undesirable in the utmost degree.

"We had to burn down the village in order to save it." nope... not for me, no way, no how.

[coti]

20. Yes, that's what I said in post #8 nt

[Skidmore]

11. Culling the herd

has been desired by extremists on both ends of the spectrum. Golden opportunity for them has presented itself.

[wcmagumba]

13. My thought when I read the UK article...nt

[uriel1972]

18. Yeah,

They think they are immune in their Golden Towers of privilege and wealth. They will be SOOL when the pandemic hits in full force.
Unfortunately the vulnerable people such as myself, will pay the price for their blind, selfish, arrogance, and ignorance as well.

Ignorant in their Arrogance and Arrogant in their Ignorance.... They will fall upon the sword of their selfishness.

[hlthe2b]

16. Given we know nearly NOTHING about the natural immunity conferred, this is basic genocide.

There is no evidence as of yet that long term immunity will follow (though we certainly believe that will be the case); nor do we know if there may be mutations to the virus that COULD theoretically render one susceptible again. We don't know what level of herd immunity would be required to ultimately burn this out.

This is as irresponsible a course as I could imagine unless ones' goal is to rid their country of a large proportion of their population.

[pat_k]

21. This!

Consider H3N2.

As I understand it (and my understanding is limited) the nature of the virus makes it very difficult to make an effective vaccine against it from year to year. Like other seasonal flu's, developing immunity to a variation of one year doesn't help much when a new variation comes along the next year. And since the flu vaccines they develop have limited effect of H3N2, we don't develop some sort of "herd immunity" against it.

[crickets]

22. +1 It's horrifying.

[Wounded Bear]

23. Part of our problem as modern humans...

is that we have all of these vaccinations and such that don't necessarily allow our immune systems to get "trained" so to speak.

The alternative, of course, requires regular culling of the herd with pandemics like this.

I kind of like our modern way.

[uriel1972]

24. A big problem is with people forgetting...

Forgetting the Spanish Flu, forgetting polio, forgetting typhoid and diphtheria, even forgetting how dangerous measles and chicken pox can be. Those who went through SARS and the like were able to do the things we are slowly, oh so slowly, learning again.

[Wounded Bear]

25. Those with no remembrance of history...

yada, yada, yada.

Also nice to have Repubs around who actively try to prevent us from learning from past mistakes.

[C_U_L8R]

26. There is no immunity

when people are becoming re-infected.

[obamanut2012]

27. People are not becoming reinfected

People on here need to quit stating that misinformation.

[uriel1972]

28. There is no "Known" case oif reinfection would be more accurate...

There is so much we don't know, but it *is* important to accept our limitations and not repeat unverified reports.

[C_U_L8R]

29. I don't know. There's a lot of conflicting information.

Either way, has any immunity been proven yet?