Herd immunity being considered again?

apolloa

Distinguished Member
I personally think based on the current latest guidelines, they have put the economy first and with no advice to wear face masks, only a covering in certain situations travelling to the workplace but not including the workplace, they are still following the herd immunity ideology.
 

iangreasby

Well-known Member
I personally think based on the current latest guidelines, they have put the economy first and with no advice to wear face masks, only a covering in certain situations travelling to the workplace but not including the workplace, they are still following the herd immunity ideology.
We should have followed the herd immunity from the outset. Thankfully, we do seem to have got there now, almost by accident.
 

apolloa

Distinguished Member
We should have followed the herd immunity from the outset. Thankfully, we do seem to have got there now, almost by accident.
So you like the idea of a virus, which we still know absolutely nothing about and you have no immunity against, should be allowed to infect everyone. Wow. Do you have any proof to show your immune to the virus after you’ve had it? I guess you must be a fit 20 something that’s not got an ounce of fat on them and no medical issues at all?
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
We should have followed the herd immunity from the outset. Thankfully, we do seem to have got there now, almost by accident.
Almost by accident? So we just bumbled our way into it, making some potentially terrible decisions along the way? (I say potentially as when this is over we'll review those decisions).

I caught this article yesterday; not really followed too much news on the herd immunity aspect recently. But for me it was never the way to go.

As above, it's very easy to say when you don't think you'll have to face any consequences of it.

 

maddy

Well-known Member
As above, it's very easy to say when you don't think you'll have to face any consequences of it.
That works both ways though, doesn't it? How much impact do you think that COVID-19 is having on Mike Ryan's lifestyle? He's still being paid (tax free, presumably, like other WHO employees), nice defined benefit pension, travelling etc.

I'd rather those with their finger on the nuclear button aren't safely ensconced in a nuclear bunker.

In the absence of vaccine or effective treatments, herd immunity is the eventuality all countries will end up with.
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
That works both ways though, doesn't it? How much impact do you think that COVID-19 is having on Mike Ryan's lifestyle? He's still being paid (tax free, presumably, like other WHO employees), nice defined benefit pension, travelling etc.

I'd rather those with their finger on the nuclear button aren't safely ensconced in a nuclear bunker.

In the absence of vaccine or effective treatments, herd immunity is the eventuality all countries will end up with.
It does work both ways, so just consider me the other way to the herd immunity approach :)

You've said yourself before I'm sure, that it's basically a rock and a hard place whenever decisions on this virus are made. There's always going to be some who win or lose (for want of a better phrase of course), and I certainly would have been more fearful than most with the approach.

I think the vast quantity of unknown surrounding this virus too would have made it a foolish choice. Those even who don't die and recover, I've seen plenty to suggest there may be long term physical damage we don't know of yet.
 

hunt808

Member
We should have followed the herd immunity from the outset. Thankfully, we do seem to have got there now, almost by accident.
The modelling for that scenario showed a quarter of a million deaths in the UK (don't quote me, but I think that was March to December), and the NHS being completely overwhelmed. It's why it was quickly abandoned. Hence 'Protect the NHS, Save Lives' etc.
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
The modelling for that scenario showed a quarter of a million deaths in the UK (don't quote me, but I think that was March to December), and the NHS being completely overwhelmed. It's why it was quickly abandoned. Hence 'Protect the NHS, Save Lives' etc.
To be an honest an overwhelmed NHS would have led to so many more unrelated fatalities too, the amount of people who would have lost loved ones in some way would have been off the scale.

I'm not sure how people would have coped with that.

Advocation of the herd immunity approach is certainly not something I could ever do.
 

iangreasby

Well-known Member
So you like the idea of a virus, which we still know absolutely nothing about and you have no immunity against, should be allowed to infect everyone. Wow. Do you have any proof to show your immune to the virus after you’ve had it? I guess you must be a fit 20 something that’s not got an ounce of fat on them and no medical issues at all?
I am in my late 50s and slightly overweight, but that's not the point. We have to hope that becoming infected gives us some immunity. What's the alternative to letting the virus spread (after shielding the elderly and vulnerable)? Of course, maintain social distance and wash hands etc, but locking ourselves away isn't the answer. The virus will still be here when we start engaging in normal social activity again. Just like the flu is still here, but we learn to live with it. Maybe you are waiting for a vaccine to come to our rescue? Good luck with that.
 

hunt808

Member
To be an honest an overwhelmed NHS would have led to so many more unrelated fatalities too, the amount of people who would have lost loved ones in some way would have been off the scale.

I'm not sure how people would have coped with that.

Advocation of the herd immunity approach is certainly not something I could ever do.
I can't remember if that 250,000 figure included non-COVID fatalities or not. Either way, I guess it was high enough to scare the bejesus out of government.
 

apolloa

Distinguished Member
I am in my late 50s and slightly overweight, but that's not the point. We have to hope that becoming infected gives us some immunity. What's the alternative to letting the virus spread (after shielding the elderly and vulnerable)? Of course, maintain social distance and wash hands etc, but locking ourselves away isn't the answer. The virus will still be here when we start engaging in normal social activity again. Just like the flu is still here, but we learn to live with it. Maybe you are waiting for a vaccine to come to our rescue? Good luck with that.
Lock down until a vaccine is found, or suffer the consequences. It’s really that simple, it’s nature and nothing is more powerful, your in a risk group then like me, I have no intention of getting it without fully understanding it, which we don’t, no testing has been performed really. This is not like the flu, it hasn’t gone away with the weather, it’s mutated several time already globally, second waves are hitting areas globally, it’s a global pandemic, the only reason deaths aren’t in the millions is because of global efforts to stop that. The whole herd immunity idea was based on the flu, and Covid 19 is not the flu and all anyone knows is we have no immunity to it, also the idea was ditched I believe after the government was told how many people would die in the process.
It’s estimated over 55 thousand I believe have died in the U.K. so far, and that’s from no one moving around, if everyone was back to normal think what that figure would be then...
Now if you go back to normality, fill up the NHS as normal, then come winter you’ll have the flu and Covid 19, that’s a recipe for a fair few deaths that would be needless.

Their isn’t a single test to prove you cannot catch Covid 19 after you’ve had, indeed the evidence so far seems to suggest the opposite. Of course it’s nature way of balancing the global population anyway, so perhaps a few million should be killed off? Certainly help with this planet and it’s resources.
 

iangreasby

Well-known Member
@apolloa . When COVID arrived, like you, I was extremely worried. However, the more expert opinion I've read, leads me to believe it's mainly a threat to over 70s and/or those with health conditions. I do follow all the guidelines and also have no intention of getting infected. Realistically speaking though, I will probably get it at some stage, maybe I've already had it and not realised. I've read several articles written by experts who are adamant that the perception of risk as indicated by the general public is completely overstated compared to the actual level of risk from all the available data.
 
Last edited:

leedebs

Well-known Member
So lockdown until vaccine is found would be an option. Now all other countries of the world are coming out of lockdown, if that was the best option wouldn't everyone else be doing that? I presume it isn't hence why the only option is to gradually get back to normal with obvious care/isolation as necessary to be taken of the elderly & those with underlying conditions.
 

starfarer

Well-known Member
Spanish serosurvey is out .https://www.isciii.es/Noticias/Noticias/Paginas/Noticias/PrimerosDatosEstudioENECOVID19.aspx. 5% prevalance in total population & with recorded deaths,rough estimation of IFR% is slightly over 1. UK update will be published tomorrow but expect to be similar.
 

richp007

Distinguished Member
@apolloa . When COVID arrived, like you, I was extremely worried. However, the more expert opinion I've read, leads me to believe it's mainly a threat to over 70s and/or those with health conditions. I do follow all the guidelines and also have no intention of getting infected. Realistically speaking though, I will probably get it at some stage, maybe I've already had it and not realised. I've read several articles written by experts who are adamant that the perception of risk as indicated by the general public is completely overstated compared to the actual level of risk from all the available data.
Do you have any loved ones who are at more risk than you with this? I'd say particularly younger family members than you, given that you believe it's mainly a threat to over 70's and those with health conditions.

I'm not having a go, but from people I've spoken to with similar sentiment - even one of my closest friends - none of them have any loved ones they'd be immediately worried about if they contracted the virus.

Which unfortunately fits the shoe of if it's likely not going to kill anyone you care about, you're happy to go with the herd immunity idea.

Might seem like I'm being insensitive, but I'm sure you get the point I'm making. For me I've 2 close family members who would be at high risk if they got it. I wouldn't be prepared to potentially lose both, just so everyone else can get on.

But I guess you could say then perhaps I'm being selfish as well.

This is why I believe herd immunity wouldn't fly, too many people would lose too many people.
 

iangreasby

Well-known Member
Do you have any loved ones who are at more risk than you with this? I'd say particularly younger family members than you, given that you believe it's mainly a threat to over 70's and those with health conditions.

I'm not having a go, but from people I've spoken to with similar sentiment - even one of my closest friends - none of them have any loved ones they'd be immediately worried about if they contracted the virus.

Which unfortunately fits the shoe of if it's likely not going to kill anyone you care about, you're happy to go with the herd immunity idea.

Might seem like I'm being insensitive, but I'm sure you get the point I'm making. For me I've 2 close family members who would be at high risk if they got it. I wouldn't be prepared to potentially lose both, just so everyone else can get on.

But I guess you could say then perhaps I'm being selfish as well.

This is why I believe herd immunity wouldn't fly, too many people would lose too many people.
Yes, I do. My father is 83 and has been self-isolating since this all started.
 

Nick74

Well-known Member
Lock down until a vaccine is found
It's not quite so stark a choice. There's been considerable research into therapies (treatments), too.

Hydroxychloroquine is a blind alley, though Trump's worked very hard to illuminate it. Remdesivir is another possibility that's had more promising results (I'm not sure what the latest is on this). Google "Covid-19 therapies" and you'll see that trials of further treatments are underway.

I we have an effective therapy and can mobilise production and supply the need for a vaccine becomes less urgent.
 

apolloa

Distinguished Member
@apolloa . When COVID arrived, like you, I was extremely worried. However, the more expert opinion I've read, leads me to believe it's mainly a threat to over 70s and/or those with health conditions. I do follow all the guidelines and also have no intention of getting infected. Realistically speaking though, I will probably get it at some stage, maybe I've already had it and not realised. I've read several articles written by experts who are adamant that the perception of risk as indicated by the general public is completely overstated compared to the actual level of risk from all the available data.
But you ARE the in a higher risk group, your overweight and in your 50’s by your own admission, being over weight puts you in a high risk group according to the government based on its advice.
It’s also naive to claim only the over 70’s and people with other ailments die from it, no they don’t, hundreds of normal people will have died, does Boris have an ailment apart from being podgy? I don’t know of one yet he was in ICU fighting for his life..

People clever hark back to the Spanish flu that killed millions I believe in its second wave, that came about because people went back to normality believing it has gone away..... history has shown us what will happen, human greed is still prevailing however instead of learning from that history.
And your also assuming the virus won’t mutate I to being more deadly to everyone. They advised 100 children at least have had a violent reaction to it, some ended up in ICU. That’s a tiny number but how many other groups will be affected in ways not yet understood? They have said no one knows of the long term effects on the body from the virus.

They’ve approves an antibody test today so maybe it’ll throw some light on all of this. But I fully expect a second wave to hit as everyone is going back to work now.

However they need to use this new test to see if anyone does become immune to it after first having it. And then if you can contract any other strain of it like the flu or cold virus. Then you’ll know if herd immunity is a good idea or not.
 

apolloa

Distinguished Member
Just to point out Boris was not ventilated. Poorly yes, fighting for his life, not quite.
Boris seems to think it could have gone either way and is in no doubt the NHS saved his life, he didn’t state he was fighting for his life but I’m not sure how else you would interpret it, if your in ICU it’s for a reason...

 

Lee

Moderator
They advised 100 children at least have had a violent reaction to it, some ended up in ICU. That’s a tiny number but how many other groups will be affected in ways not yet understood?
In New York they have over 100 children with that condition and 3 have died and other states have cases. A worrying development and hopefully one which doesn't get worse over time.
 

kav

Distinguished Member
Model in scientific terms of “one potential way to deal with the virus” rather than model in terms of “a gold standard approach to dealing with the virus”, which is how the Post is using the word. Also worth mentioning that the style of reporting the NY Post goes for is akin to The Mail or The Express over here.

Not meaning to pick on you, I’ve been really impressed with your “coverage” of things here, just thought it was worth mentioning as I think when you read the source commentary the use of the word model is skewed heavily by the way the Post has reported it. :)

I don’t know who the Twitter account is but looks like there’s an agenda going on there, because there can be more than one model and saying that the Swedish approach is “a model” is not the same thing as saying “the Swedish approach is correct and no other approach is”.
 

Ruperts slippers

Distinguished Member
Do you have any loved ones who are at more risk than you with this? I'd say particularly younger family members than you, given that you believe it's mainly a threat to over 70's and those with health conditions.

I'm not having a go, but from people I've spoken to with similar sentiment - even one of my closest friends - none of them have any loved ones they'd be immediately worried about if they contracted the virus.

Which unfortunately fits the shoe of if it's likely not going to kill anyone you care about, you're happy to go with the herd immunity idea.

Might seem like I'm being insensitive, but I'm sure you get the point I'm making. For me I've 2 close family members who would be at high risk if they got it. I wouldn't be prepared to potentially lose both, just so everyone else can get on.

But I guess you could say then perhaps I'm being selfish as well.

This is why I believe herd immunity wouldn't fly, too many people would lose too many people.
What are your feelings on the economic issue that is happening now, and looms ever larger in the near future. A 35% drop in gdp, really does worry me, but what worries me more is the seemingly unawareness of the general population of what that means.
You imagine a 600-900 billion minimum loss to the economy in 3 months. A whole year's worth of government revenue.

My parents are reaching 70, my mum has an autoimmune disease, my dad has various ailments but is always on the go, chopping trees, down, faffing with daft projects like building walls. They live semi rural, so chances of infection are slim. He has his Nebosh Msc so he does a mental risk assessment everytime he goes out. He wears a respirator filtered mask, gloves, similar to those offering protection from asbestos. So they're both mitigating the risk substantially.
I just don't worry about them, sooner or later the time will come when they just won't be here, both me and my brother accepted that yrs ago.

So yes I'm personally happy to go with isolation of the elderly, everyone else is going to have try get back to normal, tentatively yes, but let's restart the economy.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: New Denon AV Products, HDMI 2.1, 8K, DTS:X Pro Sound Q&A with Denon Product Specialists

Latest News

Disney Plus announces Star Wars: The Bad Batch spin-off
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
LG CX and GX OLED TVs gain AMD FreeSync Premium
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Samsung launches HW-Q950T and HW-Q900T Dolby Atmos soundbars
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 12th July 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
QDC Blue Dragon earphones on sale in UK
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom