FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Herd immunity. How?
Herd immunity. How?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Can we also add to the fact “underlying conditions” applies to about 15 million people in the U.K. Most vulnerable people are integrated within households containing those not shielding. It’s a ridiculous throw away statement to say everyone else crack on and let them shield. " You can add anything you like chick. I'm looking at this from the fact I care for the 92 year old gran that has 4 visits a day. Carers, NHS staff, in fact most front line workers can't run around and hope for herd immunity. If we all catch it or even just carry it, we are super spreaders (hence all the precautions we all take to avoid covid). But if someone wants to enlighten me on how we protect the vulnerable while aiming for herd immunity, I'd be grateful. But I don't see how it can be done | |||
"The best way is by vaccination whenever that becomes available, otherwise the vulnerable are as the name implies vulnerable." I agree. I keep my fingers crossed for the vaccine. Give it to the vulnerable and front line workers, then those who want herd immunity can go for it, | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"Can we also add to the fact “underlying conditions” applies to about 15 million people in the U.K. Most vulnerable people are integrated within households containing those not shielding. It’s a ridiculous throw away statement to say everyone else crack on and let them shield. " You are talking as if anyone who is vulnerable or has an underlying health condition will die if they catch it. Something like 6 out of 7 over 80s don't die if the catch it. It is not a death sentence. Same with the vulnerable, only for a small percentage is it fatal. | |||
"Can we also add to the fact “underlying conditions” applies to about 15 million people in the U.K. Most vulnerable people are integrated within households containing those not shielding. It’s a ridiculous throw away statement to say everyone else crack on and let them shield. You are talking as if anyone who is vulnerable or has an underlying health condition will die if they catch it. Something like 6 out of 7 over 80s don't die if the catch it. It is not a death sentence. Same with the vulnerable, only for a small percentage is it fatal. " 6 out off 7? Well, that's only slightly better odd than Russian roulette! Would you play?  | |||
"For herd immunity you need about 60-70% of population having been infected and immune. So far maybe about 5% infected so long way to go. We also dont know how long that immunity would last because some people have had it twice already. We may be lucky and one of the many vaccines actually work, but good chance none will. So what I'm saying is,the choice is hide away for many years and accept we will all be a lot poorer in every sense, or carry on as close to normal as possible and accept that some extra people will die (remembering that around 600 000 people die in UK every year without Covid). Thats the chice, not the answer." If there were no restrictions, based on your 5% and 60-70% (let's call it 6% and 60% for ease) then we need 10x more people to get infected and therefore, 10x more will die. That's 450,000 deaths from 1 condition which could be achieved in a couple of months. Of course, hospitals in Liverpool and Manchester would be overwhelmed within a week and most other areas within a couple of weeks so the result would be many additional deaths. The other choice is we keep restrictions (maybe even this tier system) but people stop being covidiots. The hospitality industry is virtually destroyed because people couldnt stick to rules and had house parties. Many of us are now unable to see friends and family. | |||
"Can we also add to the fact “underlying conditions” applies to about 15 million people in the U.K. Most vulnerable people are integrated within households containing those not shielding. It’s a ridiculous throw away statement to say everyone else crack on and let them shield. You are talking as if anyone who is vulnerable or has an underlying health condition will die if they catch it. Something like 6 out of 7 over 80s don't die if the catch it. It is not a death sentence. Same with the vulnerable, only for a small percentage is it fatal. 6 out off 7? Well, that's only slightly better odd than Russian roulette! Would you play? "3.2m over 80s in the UK. 1.6m over 85s. Doesn't that difference of 1.6m therefore mean that there is a 50:50 chance the over 80s will live another 5 years. But some seem to think it's ok to rob 1 in 7 (250,000) of these people and their families of 5 more years. | |||
"Can we also add to the fact “underlying conditions” applies to about 15 million people in the U.K. Most vulnerable people are integrated within households containing those not shielding. It’s a ridiculous throw away statement to say everyone else crack on and let them shield. You are talking as if anyone who is vulnerable or has an underlying health condition will die if they catch it. Something like 6 out of 7 over 80s don't die if the catch it. It is not a death sentence. Same with the vulnerable, only for a small percentage is it fatal. " I’ll be honest, I do t like those odds for my parents, a 15% chance of dying is too high for me to feel comfortable with. | |||
"I'm waiting for someone to enlighten me on another thread, but I think I'd like it's own thread. I've heard loads of ppl say protect the vulnerable but everyone else crack on with life and get exposed. So, here's my question. How do people expect the vulnerable to be protected? How do people really think you can protect your 92 year old gran who has care 4 times a day, when her carers are the fairly healthy people that could do with immunity? Yes it's only a tiny section of the vulnerable people. But please, let's hear people's views on how they think herd immunity is achieved while protecting the vulnerable " Herd immunity cannot be achieved without a vaccine. | |||
"For herd immunity you need about 60-70% of population having been infected and immune. So far maybe about 5% infected so long way to go. We also dont know how long that immunity would last because some people have had it twice already. We may be lucky and one of the many vaccines actually work, but good chance none will. So what I'm saying is,the choice is hide away for many years and accept we will all be a lot poorer in every sense, or carry on as close to normal as possible and accept that some extra people will die (remembering that around 600 000 people die in UK every year without Covid). Thats the chice, not the answer. If there were no restrictions, based on your 5% and 60-70% (let's call it 6% and 60% for ease) then we need 10x more people to get infected and therefore, 10x more will die. That's 450,000 deaths from 1 condition which could be achieved in a couple of months. Of course, hospitals in Liverpool and Manchester would be overwhelmed within a week and most other areas within a couple of weeks so the result would be many additional deaths. The other choice is we keep restrictions (maybe even this tier system) but people stop being covidiots. The hospitality industry is virtually destroyed because people couldnt stick to rules and had house parties. Many of us are now unable to see friends and family. Yes, although deaths due to COVID very likely overblown due to how it is defined in the UK, but no doubt many will die on the way to herd immunity, either now orover a longer period. I agree some sort of middle road is the preferable option. The other option would be to let the younger low risk generation do whatever they like as long as they can keep away from the higher risk and elderly. That way, we could get closer to 60% with much fewer deaths. Still hoping but not hopeful that a vaccine will come through. " | |||
| |||
"I'm waiting for someone to enlighten me on another thread, but I think I'd like it's own thread. I've heard loads of ppl say protect the vulnerable but everyone else crack on with life and get exposed. So, here's my question. How do people expect the vulnerable to be protected? How do people really think you can protect your 92 year old gran who has care 4 times a day, when her carers are the fairly healthy people that could do with immunity? Yes it's only a tiny section of the vulnerable people. But please, let's hear people's views on how they think herd immunity is achieved while protecting the vulnerable " Your taking as if your not doing it currently but obviously you are shielding, its going on right now and has been for 9 months,a managed immunity transition is Swedens long term goal, immunity is the only solution and it either comes the natural way (which I think will take place anyway) or via vaccination. The argument is really how do we keep the economy going as best we can so as to pay the massive cost of this Pandemic. | |||
| |||
"Herd immunity is a dream. Before it can be achieved, the herd meaning you and I and everyone else has to be infected. Forget about the aged and vulnerable. Even healthy young people can dome down with a severe case and die. Some that recover will suffer from long-term effects. In practical terms, herd immunity means sacrificing some lives to the altar and hoping the rest build up resistance. " There's deaths and long term effects to every decision, it's about balancing the two. With great effort it would be possible to shelter the most susceptible over 75 and or certain serious underlying conditions to the extent where we minimize the amount of deaths. Right now scientists are attempting human guinea pig experiments deliberately infecting the least vulnerable to get better ideas on vaccines and viral loads, it's possible some may die or be seriously ill but they set out with the best of intentions to keep things to a minimum.  | |||
"Herd immunity is a dream. Before it can be achieved, the herd meaning you and I and everyone else has to be infected. Forget about the aged and vulnerable. Even healthy young people can dome down with a severe case and die. Some that recover will suffer from long-term effects. In practical terms, herd immunity means sacrificing some lives to the altar and hoping the rest build up resistance. There's deaths and long term effects to every decision, it's about balancing the two. With great effort it would be possible to shelter the most susceptible over 75 and or certain serious underlying conditions to the extent where we minimize the amount of deaths. Right now scientists are attempting human guinea pig experiments deliberately infecting the least vulnerable to get better ideas on vaccines and viral loads, it's possible some may die or be seriously ill but they set out with the best of intentions to keep things to a minimum. "You are still labouring under the assumption that immunity develops and is persistent. There is not enough evidence to suggest immunity post Covid persists for long enough for herd immunity to exist. Trouble is, once you let it rip, there is no chance of putting it back in the bottle if it turns out to be the wrong decision. This also ignores the devastating human cost along the way. | |||
| |||
"If there's no natural immunity there's no vaccinated immunity unless you think it's possible to vaccinate the entire world every 3 months?." That's not exactly true. You can cause a different but protective immune response with modified virus' within an engineered vaccine. However this is clearly still a work in progress. But until there is some sort of supporting evidence, herd immunity is not something that we should be deliberately aiming for at this time. Like it or not, this is a complex disease and even with the hundreds of thousands of people and vast sums of money being ploughed into research, these things take time. | |||
"Can we also add to the fact “underlying conditions” applies to about 15 million people in the U.K. Most vulnerable people are integrated within households containing those not shielding. It’s a ridiculous throw away statement to say everyone else crack on and let them shield. You are talking as if anyone who is vulnerable or has an underlying health condition will die if they catch it. Something like 6 out of 7 over 80s don't die if the catch it. It is not a death sentence. Same with the vulnerable, only for a small percentage is it fatal. " And your point is ? | |||
"If there's no natural immunity there's no vaccinated immunity unless you think it's possible to vaccinate the entire world every 3 months?." Not strictly true, some vaccine being developed can encourage the body to produce anti bodies not replace human anti bodies. It's more genetic engineering than the vaccine production that we are familiar with for seasonal flu. | |||
| |||
"If there's no natural immunity there's no vaccinated immunity unless you think it's possible to vaccinate the entire world every 3 months?. That's not exactly true. You can cause a different but protective immune response with modified virus' within an engineered vaccine. However this is clearly still a work in progress. But until there is some sort of supporting evidence, herd immunity is not something that we should be deliberately aiming for at this time. Like it or not, this is a complex disease and even with the hundreds of thousands of people and vast sums of money being ploughed into research, these things take time." So this is brand new technique of vaccination?. Will these be the ones available first, the experts say hopefully within a year!. So the most vulnerable are still going to have shelter for what, another two years? Alot of these people don't even have two years life expectancy left, the average age of death from covid is 82.4 that's a year and half past current life expectancy, if you're in your mid 80s now with a couple of underlying illnesses they probably won't ever be able to have a normal life. And even then there's no guarantees these new vaccines will work any better than current ones and might only give the exact same immunity as natural immunity. Mean time in two years time the Western economies will start to crumble. Let's face facts, as soon as our money runs out in the West none of these options will be even be available never mind obtainable. The west's economy and growth is mostly based on entertainment, sports, cars, holidays, meals out, cinema, concerts, theatre, cruises, weekends away, even clothes and retail require people to actually have somewhere to go to for them to buy the stuff in the first place. Has anybody thought what were going to do with the millions of people who'll no longer have a job thanks to long term restrictions?. If the vaccine route is the one were opting for and that's a few years away at least before it will return normality is anybody doing any long term planning on these factors?. | |||
| |||
"If there's no natural immunity there's no vaccinated immunity unless you think it's possible to vaccinate the entire world every 3 months?. That's not exactly true. You can cause a different but protective immune response with modified virus' within an engineered vaccine. However this is clearly still a work in progress. But until there is some sort of supporting evidence, herd immunity is not something that we should be deliberately aiming for at this time. Like it or not, this is a complex disease and even with the hundreds of thousands of people and vast sums of money being ploughed into research, these things take time. So this is brand new technique of vaccination?. Will these be the ones available first, the experts say hopefully within a year!. So the most vulnerable are still going to have shelter for what, another two years? Alot of these people don't even have two years life expectancy left, the average age of death from covid is 82.4 that's a year and half past current life expectancy, if you're in your mid 80s now with a couple of underlying illnesses they probably won't ever be able to have a normal life. And even then there's no guarantees these new vaccines will work any better than current ones and might only give the exact same immunity as natural immunity. Mean time in two years time the Western economies will start to crumble. Let's face facts, as soon as our money runs out in the West none of these options will be even be available never mind obtainable. The west's economy and growth is mostly based on entertainment, sports, cars, holidays, meals out, cinema, concerts, theatre, cruises, weekends away, even clothes and retail require people to actually have somewhere to go to for them to buy the stuff in the first place. Has anybody thought what were going to do with the millions of people who'll no longer have a job thanks to long term restrictions?. If the vaccine route is the one were opting for and that's a few years away at least before it will return normality is anybody doing any long term planning on these factors?. " No, this is an established method of vaccine creation. It is however more complex than just denatured "live" virus vaccines, which is why the technique is not used for every vaccine. And you are still arguing from a point where you a) assume that not dead = perfectly recovered and fine and b) that the immune response from previous infection lasts long enough to prevent Covid simply doing laps of the living population. There is no proof yet that you are immune for long enough! | |||
"If there's no natural immunity there's no vaccinated immunity unless you think it's possible to vaccinate the entire world every 3 months?. That's not exactly true. You can cause a different but protective immune response with modified virus' within an engineered vaccine. However this is clearly still a work in progress. But until there is some sort of supporting evidence, herd immunity is not something that we should be deliberately aiming for at this time. Like it or not, this is a complex disease and even with the hundreds of thousands of people and vast sums of money being ploughed into research, these things take time. So this is brand new technique of vaccination?. Will these be the ones available first, the experts say hopefully within a year!. So the most vulnerable are still going to have shelter for what, another two years? Alot of these people don't even have two years life expectancy left, the average age of death from covid is 82.4 that's a year and half past current life expectancy, if you're in your mid 80s now with a couple of underlying illnesses they probably won't ever be able to have a normal life. And even then there's no guarantees these new vaccines will work any better than current ones and might only give the exact same immunity as natural immunity. Mean time in two years time the Western economies will start to crumble. Let's face facts, as soon as our money runs out in the West none of these options will be even be available never mind obtainable. The west's economy and growth is mostly based on entertainment, sports, cars, holidays, meals out, cinema, concerts, theatre, cruises, weekends away, even clothes and retail require people to actually have somewhere to go to for them to buy the stuff in the first place. Has anybody thought what were going to do with the millions of people who'll no longer have a job thanks to long term restrictions?. If the vaccine route is the one were opting for and that's a few years away at least before it will return normality is anybody doing any long term planning on these factors?. No, this is an established method of vaccine creation. It is however more complex than just denatured "live" virus vaccines, which is why the technique is not used for every vaccine. And you are still arguing from a point where you a) assume that not dead = perfectly recovered and fine and b) that the immune response from previous infection lasts long enough to prevent Covid simply doing laps of the living population. There is no proof yet that you are immune for long enough!" And you've no proof the vaccine will work either!. But it doesn't stop you thinking it's the best option?. | |||
| |||
"Herd immunity is a dream. Before it can be achieved, the herd meaning you and I and everyone else has to be infected. Forget about the aged and vulnerable. Even healthy young people can dome down with a severe case and die. Some that recover will suffer from long-term effects. In practical terms, herd immunity means sacrificing some lives to the altar and hoping the rest build up resistance. There's deaths and long term effects to every decision, it's about balancing the two. With great effort it would be possible to shelter the most susceptible over 75 and or certain serious underlying conditions to the extent where we minimize the amount of deaths. Right now scientists are attempting human guinea pig experiments deliberately infecting the least vulnerable to get better ideas on vaccines and viral loads, it's possible some may die or be seriously ill but they set out with the best of intentions to keep things to a minimum. "Would this sheltering be in anyway related to your previous idea of quarantining the elderly and vulnerable in hotels, away from familiar surroundings and possessions and in the company of total strangers? I mean, it's not as if that would have any repercussions on the inmates mental health, now is it, and what could possibly go wrong with confining a group of vulnerable people in one place? It's not as if anything bad happened in somewhere like that is it? Say care homes for example. | |||
"If there's no natural immunity there's no vaccinated immunity unless you think it's possible to vaccinate the entire world every 3 months?. That's not exactly true. You can cause a different but protective immune response with modified virus' within an engineered vaccine. However this is clearly still a work in progress. But until there is some sort of supporting evidence, herd immunity is not something that we should be deliberately aiming for at this time. Like it or not, this is a complex disease and even with the hundreds of thousands of people and vast sums of money being ploughed into research, these things take time. So this is brand new technique of vaccination?. Will these be the ones available first, the experts say hopefully within a year!. So the most vulnerable are still going to have shelter for what, another two years? Alot of these people don't even have two years life expectancy left, the average age of death from covid is 82.4 that's a year and half past current life expectancy, if you're in your mid 80s now with a couple of underlying illnesses they probably won't ever be able to have a normal life. And even then there's no guarantees these new vaccines will work any better than current ones and might only give the exact same immunity as natural immunity. Mean time in two years time the Western economies will start to crumble. Let's face facts, as soon as our money runs out in the West none of these options will be even be available never mind obtainable. The west's economy and growth is mostly based on entertainment, sports, cars, holidays, meals out, cinema, concerts, theatre, cruises, weekends away, even clothes and retail require people to actually have somewhere to go to for them to buy the stuff in the first place. Has anybody thought what were going to do with the millions of people who'll no longer have a job thanks to long term restrictions?. If the vaccine route is the one were opting for and that's a few years away at least before it will return normality is anybody doing any long term planning on these factors?. No, this is an established method of vaccine creation. It is however more complex than just denatured "live" virus vaccines, which is why the technique is not used for every vaccine. And you are still arguing from a point where you a) assume that not dead = perfectly recovered and fine and b) that the immune response from previous infection lasts long enough to prevent Covid simply doing laps of the living population. There is no proof yet that you are immune for long enough! And you've no proof the vaccine will work either!. But it doesn't stop you thinking it's the best option?." True, but if the vaccine doesn't work, we have limited the death toll as best as we can, if herd immunity doesn't work, you have potentially killed 10's of thousands of people for nothing, not forgetting that a large number of those people are active members of the economy you want to protect. | |||
"Herd immunity is a dream. Before it can be achieved, the herd meaning you and I and everyone else has to be infected. Forget about the aged and vulnerable. Even healthy young people can dome down with a severe case and die. Some that recover will suffer from long-term effects. In practical terms, herd immunity means sacrificing some lives to the altar and hoping the rest build up resistance. There's deaths and long term effects to every decision, it's about balancing the two. With great effort it would be possible to shelter the most susceptible over 75 and or certain serious underlying conditions to the extent where we minimize the amount of deaths. Right now scientists are attempting human guinea pig experiments deliberately infecting the least vulnerable to get better ideas on vaccines and viral loads, it's possible some may die or be seriously ill but they set out with the best of intentions to keep things to a minimum.
Would this sheltering be in anyway related to your previous idea of quarantining the elderly and vulnerable in hotels, away from familiar surroundings and possessions and in the company of total strangers?
I mean, it's not as if that would have any repercussions on the inmates mental health, now is it, and what could possibly go wrong with confining a group of vulnerable people in one place? It's not as if anything bad happened in somewhere like that is it? Say care homes for example."No I actually said if they lived in multi occupancy housing now then we could use hotels as sheltering facilities, you'd have to ring fence them with a very good testing scheme daily (but we wouldn't need to general public testing so that's where you could get the extra testing capacity from) you could maybe pay extra money to those carers who are in positions that allow to live on site, we could roll out the most successful antivirals now to the most vulnerable to stop the worst effects and also to the carers. There's many many options and it will cost a large amount on money but at least this could be offset with some sort of proper economy kept alive. | |||
| |||
"If there's no natural immunity there's no vaccinated immunity unless you think it's possible to vaccinate the entire world every 3 months?. That's not exactly true. You can cause a different but protective immune response with modified virus' within an engineered vaccine. However this is clearly still a work in progress. But until there is some sort of supporting evidence, herd immunity is not something that we should be deliberately aiming for at this time. Like it or not, this is a complex disease and even with the hundreds of thousands of people and vast sums of money being ploughed into research, these things take time. So this is brand new technique of vaccination?. Will these be the ones available first, the experts say hopefully within a year!. So the most vulnerable are still going to have shelter for what, another two years? Alot of these people don't even have two years life expectancy left, the average age of death from covid is 82.4 that's a year and half past current life expectancy, if you're in your mid 80s now with a couple of underlying illnesses they probably won't ever be able to have a normal life. And even then there's no guarantees these new vaccines will work any better than current ones and might only give the exact same immunity as natural immunity. Mean time in two years time the Western economies will start to crumble. Let's face facts, as soon as our money runs out in the West none of these options will be even be available never mind obtainable. The west's economy and growth is mostly based on entertainment, sports, cars, holidays, meals out, cinema, concerts, theatre, cruises, weekends away, even clothes and retail require people to actually have somewhere to go to for them to buy the stuff in the first place. Has anybody thought what were going to do with the millions of people who'll no longer have a job thanks to long term restrictions?. If the vaccine route is the one were opting for and that's a few years away at least before it will return normality is anybody doing any long term planning on these factors?. No, this is an established method of vaccine creation. It is however more complex than just denatured "live" virus vaccines, which is why the technique is not used for every vaccine. And you are still arguing from a point where you a) assume that not dead = perfectly recovered and fine and b) that the immune response from previous infection lasts long enough to prevent Covid simply doing laps of the living population. There is no proof yet that you are immune for long enough! And you've no proof the vaccine will work either!. But it doesn't stop you thinking it's the best option?. True, but if the vaccine doesn't work, we have limited the death toll as best as we can, if herd immunity doesn't work, you have potentially killed 10's of thousands of people for nothing, not forgetting that a large number of those people are active members of the economy you want to protect." If natural immunity doesn't work and the vaccine doesn't work don't worry about ten thousand dead, because the end will be nigh for sure.  | |||
"If we can also add the many Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic - BAME - people who fall inside the vulnerable category too. I'm assuming nobody is thinking of creating ghettos of all vulnerable people or segregated minorities, like the awful apartheid eras in some places. I'm curious too at the costings that you have for these millions of people as well as for the training/employment and segregation of people needed to care for and support them. Dipping feet into a chemical drench won't work to decontaminate them, after they may leave 1 job or area, like with foot and mouth disease etc" Have you wrote to the Indian government with your concerns or the Nigerian government?. As for costings we've currently spent 200 billion in the last 9 months and probably the same again come spring. I reckon for half a trillion pounds I could get that job done myself, well we could do the maths 5 million people need sheltering divide that by 500 billion, what's that a hundred grand per person fuck me at that rate I could put them on a round the world cruise on the QE2 for the next 3 years. And that's just spending, that's not even taking into account the billions were losing in economic losses. | |||
"If we can also add the many Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic - BAME - people who fall inside the vulnerable category too. I'm assuming nobody is thinking of creating ghettos of all vulnerable people or segregated minorities, like the awful apartheid eras in some places. I'm curious too at the costings that you have for these millions of people as well as for the training/employment and segregation of people needed to care for and support them. Dipping feet into a chemical drench won't work to decontaminate them, after they may leave 1 job or area, like with foot and mouth disease etc Have you wrote to the Indian government with your concerns or the Nigerian government?. As for costings we've currently spent 200 billion in the last 9 months and probably the same again come spring. I reckon for half a trillion pounds I could get that job done myself, well we could do the maths 5 million people need sheltering divide that by 500 billion, what's that a hundred grand per person fuck me at that rate I could put them on a round the world cruise on the QE2 for the next 3 years. And that's just spending, that's not even taking into account the billions were losing in economic losses." As long as those wanting what op is asking for, provide fully costed and detailed solutions for everyone impacted, including impacts on the economy, those are reasonable responses | |||
| |||
" "No, this is an established method of vaccine creation. It is however more complex than just denatured "live" virus vaccines, which is why the technique is not used for every vaccine. And you are still arguing from a point where you a) assume that not dead = perfectly recovered and fine and b) that the immune response from previous infection lasts long enough to prevent Covid simply doing laps of the living population. There is no proof yet that you are immune for long enough!" I am afraid this is just not correct. It is entirely true that if there is no natural immunity from this virus then any vaccine, engineered or not, will not be effective and will do more harm than good. There is no existing example of a vaccine working for an organism that does not produce natural immunity, despite scientists trying for many years. The Oxford group have been trying for more than 30 years to develop a vaccine for Malaria and are using the sam technology now for Covid. Dont be surprised if it doesnt work." Malaria is a parasitic infection, not virus based. | |||
"Can we also add to the fact “underlying conditions” applies to about 15 million people in the U.K. " And I guess that 15 million doesn't include a number for people who have 'underlying conditions' that they don't even know about... | |||
"I'm waiting for someone to enlighten me on another thread, but I think I'd like it's own thread. I've heard loads of ppl say protect the vulnerable but everyone else crack on with life and get exposed. So, here's my question. How do people expect the vulnerable to be protected? How do people really think you can protect your 92 year old gran who has care 4 times a day, when her carers are the fairly healthy people that could do with immunity? Yes it's only a tiny section of the vulnerable people. But please, let's hear people's views on how they think herd immunity is achieved while protecting the vulnerable " Sweden tried somthing similar, and failed, only 6% gained immunity, majority of deaths were in care homes, highest death toll per 100k compared to neighbours. | |||
" "No, this is an established method of vaccine creation. It is however more complex than just denatured "live" virus vaccines, which is why the technique is not used for every vaccine. And you are still arguing from a point where you a) assume that not dead = perfectly recovered and fine and b) that the immune response from previous infection lasts long enough to prevent Covid simply doing laps of the living population. There is no proof yet that you are immune for long enough!" I am afraid this is just not correct. It is entirely true that if there is no natural immunity from this virus then any vaccine, engineered or not, will not be effective and will do more harm than good. There is no existing example of a vaccine working for an organism that does not produce natural immunity, despite scientists trying for many years. The Oxford group have been trying for more than 30 years to develop a vaccine for Malaria and are using the sam technology now for Covid. Dont be surprised if it doesnt work. Malaria is a parasitic infection, not virus based. " Correct, but the concept remains the same. All our effective vaacines which have been developed are to agents which give immunity when infected naturally. And the stringer that natural immunity is (eg Small pox), the more effective is the vaccine. In contrast, we have no effective vaccine against the common cold (viral) or malaria(parasite) and we do not gain much immunity when we are infected with them naturally. However clever scientists are at devising vaccines, they will never be as good as being infected with the real thing as far as immunity is concerned. | |||
" "No, this is an established method of vaccine creation. It is however more complex than just denatured "live" virus vaccines, which is why the technique is not used for every vaccine. And you are still arguing from a point where you a) assume that not dead = perfectly recovered and fine and b) that the immune response from previous infection lasts long enough to prevent Covid simply doing laps of the living population. There is no proof yet that you are immune for long enough!" I am afraid this is just not correct. It is entirely true that if there is no natural immunity from this virus then any vaccine, engineered or not, will not be effective and will do more harm than good. There is no existing example of a vaccine working for an organism that does not produce natural immunity, despite scientists trying for many years. The Oxford group have been trying for more than 30 years to develop a vaccine for Malaria and are using the sam technology now for Covid. Dont be surprised if it doesnt work. Malaria is a parasitic infection, not virus based. Correct, but the concept remains the same. All our effective vaacines which have been developed are to agents which give immunity when infected naturally. And the stringer that natural immunity is (eg Small pox), the more effective is the vaccine. In contrast, we have no effective vaccine against the common cold (viral) or malaria(parasite) and we do not gain much immunity when we are infected with them naturally. However clever scientists are at devising vaccines, they will never be as good as being infected with the real thing as far as immunity is concerned." One of the main reasons there is no inoculation for the common cold is that it's caused by over 200 different strains of virus (a strong reason to try to limit Corona virus' chances to mutate). Also, non persistent immunity is one of the main points I am saying against letting Covid run riot. There is no guarantee that we will be immune long enough for it to burn out, it could just become a cycle of continued infection and re infection. | |||
" One of the main reasons there is no inoculation for the common cold is that it's caused by over 200 different strains of virus (a strong reason to try to limit Corona virus' chances to mutate). Also, non persistent immunity is one of the main points I am saying against letting Covid run riot. There is no guarantee that we will be immune long enough for it to burn out, it could just become a cycle of continued infection and re infection. " If that is the case then we are well and truly screwed whatever we do. Eventually restrictions would have to be lifted and we would have to take our chances. Bad news for humans, good news for all the other creatures on the planet. | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"But herd immunity is a myth according to some on fans, oops looks like they are wrong. Not sure if we are quite there yet but must be very close now, good news indeed" Many don't actually understand what herd immunity means. There is the misconception that it means allowing a virus to run rampant until everyone has an immunity. | |||
"But herd immunity is a myth according to some on fans, oops looks like they are wrong. Not sure if we are quite there yet but must be very close now, good news indeed Many don't actually understand what herd immunity means. There is the misconception that it means allowing a virus to run rampant until everyone has an immunity. " Natural versus vaccine derived herd immunity. The former would be horrific. The latter... why we don't have ten kids and hope one or two make it to adulthood. | |||
"Herd immunity by Monday." It's a notional point, that real world experience could validate. We probably don't have even distribution of immunity across the country, so it could also persist infecting people, where a lower proportion of the population are vaccinated or have acquired immunity naturally. It will take some time to determine the specific point of actual herd immunity, rather than theoretical. | |||
"Herd immunity by Monday." 50% vaccination or infected rate (predicted by Monday) isn’t herd immunity. With original strain the modelling suggested 65%+ to get herd immunity. With new more transmissible strains it is nearer 75-80%. And with a sizeable proportion of the population being reluctant to get vaccinated and predicted slow down in first doses being given we are still some way off. | |||
"But herd immunity is a myth according to some on fans, oops looks like they are wrong. Not sure if we are quite there yet but must be very close now, good news indeed Many don't actually understand what herd immunity means. There is the misconception that it means allowing a virus to run rampant until everyone has an immunity. " Oh allowing a deadly virus to run rampant until everyone has an immunity does sort of work (as long as the virus doesn't mutate). It mainly works by killing everyone that has susceptibility. Natural evolutionary pressure then dictates that those with a genetic predisposition to being less susceptible are the ones more likely to live long enough to have more children, thus reinforcing those genes. It only takes a few generations, and a shit load of dead people, and the only ones still surviving will be highly resistant to the disease. Or at least resistant long enough to have children, there's no evolutionary pressure to keep any species alive for long after child bearing. Human beings only have a longer lifespan because the long childhood period means that parents are still useful until children reach puberty and can breed themselves. So if everyone is okay with millions dying every month, and lifespan settling out at about 25 years in four generations time, then sure, we should just let the virus rip. At least it would put an end to people fucking up the planet, and give some of the other species a chance. | |||
"But herd immunity is a myth according to some on fans, oops looks like they are wrong. Not sure if we are quite there yet but must be very close now, good news indeed Many don't actually understand what herd immunity means. There is the misconception that it means allowing a virus to run rampant until everyone has an immunity. Oh allowing a deadly virus to run rampant until everyone has an immunity does sort of work (as long as the virus doesn't mutate). It mainly works by killing everyone that has susceptibility. Natural evolutionary pressure then dictates that those with a genetic predisposition to being less susceptible are the ones more likely to live long enough to have more children, thus reinforcing those genes. It only takes a few generations, and a shit load of dead people, and the only ones still surviving will be highly resistant to the disease. Or at least resistant long enough to have children, there's no evolutionary pressure to keep any species alive for long after child bearing. Human beings only have a longer lifespan because the long childhood period means that parents are still useful until children reach puberty and can breed themselves. So if everyone is okay with millions dying every month, and lifespan settling out at about 25 years in four generations time, then sure, we should just let the virus rip. At least it would put an end to people fucking up the planet, and give some of the other species a chance." Except covid has a mortality of 2 to 3 percent so none of your predictions would happen, especially as treatments are now more effective , | |||
