Off Topic Coronavirus

[Staines R's]

Herd immunity! I mentioned that when this all kick off months ago and many on here disagreed... now it's the way to go?
On another note, it's bloody sad seeing many people suffering from loneliness and depression during all this cr2p.
I have just seen a heartbreaking report. (so bloody sad). We need to take a moment to reflect and check up on our friends. I have a mate who is really down because of all this and I always make sure I call him and try and cheer him up.

Would you kindly point me to the post where you championed Herd Immunity ‘cos to be honest, I really can’t remember you saying anything of the kind (whereas I have since the beginning).
Not trying to accuse you of lying or jumping on the band wagon but you have got form for doing that kind of stuff
By the way......is your mate a soldier ?

 

[qprbeth]

So the new infection rate is much higher in the north/ nort-west than in London.
Why is that?

Is it because London was the epi centre of the first outbreak and the testing system was so bad at the start that we have no idea how many had it. Infact the level of infection was so much higher than we thought that they are in fact approaching a herd immunity scenario in London

 

[Stroller]

So the new infection rate is much higher in the north/ nort-west than in London.
Why is that?

Is it because London was the epi centre of the first outbreak and the testing system was so bad at the start that we have no idea how many had it. Infact the level of infection was so much higher than we thought that they are in fact approaching a herd immunity scenario in London

That's what I was suggesting in my earlier post, Beth. Very large numbers in London will have already have had the virus and the capital will have developed a significant level of herd immunity.

 

[colognehornet]

That's what I was suggesting in my earlier post, Beth. Very large numbers in London will have already have had the virus and the capital will have developed a significant level of herd immunity.

I think we need to kick the idea of herd immunity into touch - in order for it really to lead to a situation where an infection will no longer spread amongst any population you would need to have at least 70% of that population infected. In London's case such a scenario would mean between 5 and 6 million infections - even with a death rate between 0.1% and 1% that would be catastrophic. The only way herd immunity will come in is once you have a vaccine.

 

[Stroller]

I think we need to kick the idea of herd immunity into touch - in order for it really to lead to a situation where an infection will no longer spread amongst any population you would need to have at least 70% of that population infected. In London's case such a scenario would mean between 5 and 6 million infections - even with a death rate between 0.1% and 1% that would be catastrophic. The only way herd immunity will come in is once you have a vaccine.

Where do you get 70% from? I've seen 40% widely quoted. Even if London has only 25% immunity, it will greatly slow the spread of the virus.

 

[colognehornet]

Where do you get 70% from? I've seen 40% widely quoted. Even if London has only 25% immunity, it will greatly slow the spread of the virus.

This is based on the calculations of epidemiologists based on the (RO) rate of a disease without any precautions or lockdowns taking place. Taking Mumps for an example, which has an RO rate of 10-12, meaning that every person who is infected will infect 10-12 others. Without vaccination, or lockdowns or other precautions, roughly 95% of the population gets infected over time - some people (the 5%) don't get sick because they can no longer catch it from anyone. For mumps you need 92% infection to stop it spreading entirely - known as the herd immunity threshold (which is different for every infectious disease based on the RO rate). Covid 19 is much less infectious with an estimated RO rate of 3, without any precautions (if you just let it run wild) - everything less than that is as a result of lockdowns. With this figure the herd immunity threshold drops to 70%. With that figure there would be no further infections - though 40% would still lower the number significantly. But whether it's 70%, 40% or whatever is splitting hairs - we're still talking about high figures. Much higher than the NHS could cope with.

 

[finglasqpr]

High numbers of new cases in Ireland.m today. 618 in the Republib and 1,080 in Northern Ireland.

Checkpoints clearly visible near the border in the Republic. No sign of any checkpoints in N.I. we need to improve the co-operation between both jurisdictions to get the virus under control.

 

[Stroller]

This is based on the calculations of epidemiologists based on the (RO) rate of a disease without any precautions or lockdowns taking place. Taking Mumps for an example, which has an RO rate of 10-12, meaning that every person who is infected will infect 10-12 others. Without vaccination, or lockdowns or other precautions, roughly 95% of the population gets infected over time - some people (the 5%) don't get sick because they can no longer catch it from anyone. For mumps you need 92% infection to stop it spreading entirely - known as the herd immunity threshold (which is different for every infectious disease based on the RO rate). Covid 19 is much less infectious with an estimated RO rate of 3, without any precautions (if you just let it run wild) - everything less than that is as a result of lockdowns. With this figure the herd immunity threshold drops to 70%. With that figure there would be no further infections - though 40% would still lower the number significantly. But whether it's 70%, 40% or whatever is splitting hairs - we're still talking about high figures. Much higher than the NHS could cope with.

All very well, but the point stands that infections in London are growing at a slower rate than elsewhere, and that this is very likely to be because London has a higher level of immunity. As simple as that. You're dealing in extremes, I wasn't suggesting we 'let it run wild', nor was I talking about 'no further infections'.

 

[sb_73]

Would you kindly point me to the post where you championed Herd Immunity ‘cos to be honest, I really can’t remember you saying anything of the kind (whereas I have since the beginning).
Not trying to accuse you of lying or jumping on the band wagon but you have got form for doing that kind of stuff
By the way......is your mate a soldier ?

Naughty.

Can you give me an example of a disease where herd immunity has worked in the absence of a vaccine and within, say, a year, or whatever period you think reasonable? I’m struggling to find one. All the famous ones - polio, smallpox, measles until idiots stopped taking the vaccine - did so with the aid of a vaccine. Sweden isn’t aiming for herd immunity, they just felt that it would be unreasonable to lockdown their population for an extended period of time and then trusted them to be sensible - they closed universities and made lots of recommendations, which people have mainly followed, about social distancing, table service in bars etc. But I bet they try to vaccinate their population as quickly as they can once the means is available.

I’m not sure why herd immunity doesn’t seem to work, without assistance, it’s a very beguiling concept. And I have always wanted the Swedish approach to work, while never really believing that it would here, unfortunately.

 

[Staines R's]

I think we need to kick the idea of herd immunity into touch - in order for it really to lead to a situation where an infection will no longer spread amongst any population you would need to have at least 70% of that population infected. In London's case such a scenario would mean between 5 and 6 million infections - even with a death rate between 0.1% and 1% that would be catastrophic. The only way herd immunity will come in is once you have a vaccine.

But surely any calculation of % of death rate due to COVID is impossible because we don’t know how many have already been infected. For all we know the death rate could be 0.0000001.

 

[qprbeth]

Where do you get 70% from? I've seen 40% widely quoted. Even if London has only 25% immunity, it will greatly slow the spread of the virus.

In herd immunity you want to stop the spread of virus...not allow it to trickle along.

If you stop it...it dies out.
If you slow it ( which is a good thing...I'm not denying) it trickles along until it finds a virgin source and then it blows up again.

Herd immunity through vaccine wants over 90% to prevent people who cannot get vaccinated ( immunosuppressed, transplant patients etc) from getting it...

 

[qprbeth]

Naughty.

Can you give me an example of a disease where herd immunity has worked in the absence of a vaccine and within, say, a year, or whatever period you think reasonable? I’m struggling to find one. All the famous ones - polio, smallpox, measles until idiots stopped taking the vaccine - did so with the aid of a vaccine. Sweden isn’t aiming for herd immunity, they just felt that it would be unreasonable to lockdown their population for an extended period of time and then trusted them to be sensible - they closed universities and made lots of recommendations, which people have mainly followed, about social distancing, table service in bars etc. But I bet they try to vaccinate their population as quickly as they can once the means is available.

I’m not sure why herd immunity doesn’t seem to work, without assistance, it’s a very beguiling concept. And I have always wanted the Swedish approach to work, while never really believing that it would here, unfortunately.

Herd immunity doesn't work Stan simply because you cannot get enough people vaccinated/ immune for transmission to "disappear".


So old people and vunerable people
..and people like me...hide away.

When we do go out into the new world we are fresh meat... especially for a virus...which travels through most people without making them stop what they are doing..


Consider what would have happened if at the beginning ...no body said anything...and it went through our younger people...infecting them all lightly...but taking out older people...with a mixture of seasonal flu, heart attacks ...and dying in their sleep

 

[Staines R's]

Naughty.

Can you give me an example of a disease where herd immunity has worked in the absence of a vaccine and within, say, a year, or whatever period you think reasonable? I’m struggling to find one. All the famous ones - polio, smallpox, measles until idiots stopped taking the vaccine - did so with the aid of a vaccine. Sweden isn’t aiming for herd immunity, they just felt that it would be unreasonable to lockdown their population for an extended period of time and then trusted them to be sensible - they closed universities and made lots of recommendations, which people have mainly followed, about social distancing, table service in bars etc. But I bet they try to vaccinate their population as quickly as they can once the means is available.

I’m not sure why herd immunity doesn’t seem to work, without assistance, it’s a very beguiling concept. And I have always wanted the Swedish approach to work, while never really believing that it would here, unfortunately.

To be honest G, no I can’t because I’m probably not clever enough to understand the whole concept.......however aren’t we going full out for a vaccine and some are reported to be almost ready (whether or not that’s actually a reality)
The reason I have always championed Herd Immunity (unlike Ellers who changes his views with the wind) is that there seems no other logical alternative.......like it or not, this thing is now with us, probably forever, and we are gonna have to cope with it. Sadly the current way is not working.

 

[Stroller]

In herd immunity you want to stop the spread of virus...not allow it to trickle along.

If you stop it...it dies out.
If you slow it ( which is a good thing...I'm not denying) it trickles along until it finds a virgin source and then it blows up again.

Herd immunity through vaccine wants over 90% to prevent people who cannot get vaccinated ( immunosuppressed, transplant patients etc) from getting it...

As I just said to Cologne, I wasn't talking about no new infections, just pointing to higher immunity slowing the spread in London. Partial herd immunity, not complete.

 

[Staines R's]

Herd immunity doesn't work Stan simply because you cannot get enough people vaccinated/ immune for transmission to "disappear".

So Beth, genuine question, are you saying the well respected scientists and experts who DO say Herd Immunity is the way forward, are talking complete BS ?

If it’s a certain fact that this will not work then why are they still in jobs.

 

[qprbeth]

I don't know Stainsey.

But scientists work in 2 different worlds.

In a world of the computer ( in silico) where no one is really hurt and no one's granny dies...I am sure herd immunity is the way to go....Let it rip through the community ...take out the old and the infirm. Everyone gets immune, if only for a few months...that's long enough. The virus dies out. Bingo...the young and the strong build a new world.

But we live in a real world...where everyone can complain that their mum died in a care home, because they weren't give the same drugs as Trump. The politicians have to listen to the public to be re-elected.

Different virus...but the only difference between Spanish flu and Covid...Is that we all know about Covid..all over the world .

In the 1918-20 a war had ended and people were pleased, people were dying but the population was not aware how many were. And people died all the time...as there was no good hospitals, no antibiotics, and little understanding.

Sorry for the jaundiced view

 

[Staines R's]

I don't know Stainsey.

But scientists work in 2 different worlds.

In a world of the computer ( in silico) where no one is really hurt and no one's granny dies...I am sure herd immunity is the way to go....Let it rip through the community ...take out the old and the infirm. Everyone gets immune, if only for a few months...that's long enough. The virus dies out. Bingo...the young and the strong build a new world.

But we live in a real world...where everyone can complain that their mum died in a care home, because they weren't give the same drugs as Trump. The politicians have to listen to the public to be re-elected.

Different virus...but the only difference between Spanish flu and Covid...Is that we all know about Covid..all over the world .

In the 1918-20 a war had ended and people were pleased, people were dying but the population was not aware how many were. And people died all the time...as there was no good hospitals, no antibiotics, and little understanding.

Sorry for the jaundiced view

Totally get what your saying Beth, and as we’ve already said, every single death is a tragedy.
However as I said to G......we have to come up with a solution, the bumbling around and constant u-turns is DEFINITELY not working.....we need a firm direction. To me Herd Immunity has always been the only way we can go...sadly people will die, however the vast majority won’t.

Adding to this, as I again mentioned to G earlier this week, people on the street really are getting angry and frustrated out there. Violence is increasing and will only get worse....it’s a tinderbox waiting to erupt. I’ve just watched an interesting programme about the future of Clubbing during and after this virus......how long is it gonna be until people say ‘**** it, I’ll risk my health ‘cos I need to get out and party (and of course this is already happening with illegal raves all over the place).
This simply cannot go on..........we need to get on with our lives.

 

[Star of David Bardsley]

Johnson to make a statement on Monday. Fortunately the virus doesn’t work weekends nor does he.

 

[Staines R's]

Johnson to make a statement on Monday. Fortunately the virus doesn’t work weekends nor does he.

He’s probably off somewhere banging someone’s mum......I wonder who ?

 

[Star of David Bardsley]

He’s probably off somewhere banging someone’s mum......I wonder who ?

Does that violinist have kids?