Epidemiologist: Why Lockdowns Are The Wrong Policy

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by hcap

I just agreed herd immunity works if one is willing to:

The question does not necessarily have an either/or answer.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by tucker6

The question does not necessarily have an either/or answer.

If you take what the far right has been proclaiming, setting up a false dichotomy between jobs and the economy, it sure does.

I have for dozens of posts suggested both can be done simultaneously

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by hcap

If you take what the far right has been proclaiming, setting up a false dichotomy between jobs and the economy, it sure does.

I have for dozens of posts suggested both can be done simultaneously

You were the one an hour ago claiming such a false dichotomy between death and money. You even wanted, and have many times over the weeks, someone to tell you how much a life was worth so we could figure out the breakeven point in our decision-making. Those are you words and ideas, not the far right's words.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by tucker6

You were the one an hour ago claiming such a false dichotomy between death and money. You even wanted, and have many times over the weeks, someone to tell you how much a life was worth so we could figure out the breakeven point in our decision-making. Those are you words and ideas, not the far right's words.

No I claimed you gents were the ones choosing IMMEDIATE herd immunity and it's inerrant higher death and suffering NOW in order to re-open the economy. When there is so many flaws in assuming in the "long run" there will be less death and suffering, ignoring the the large percentage of the population that must be infected without a vaccine and therapeutics, needed to EASE INTO herd immunity....

Epidemiologists recommend flattening the curve smartly using precision testing, contact tracing, quarantining and separation when necessary. As demonstrated by the successful efforts of many countries.

My position is flattening the curve gives us more time to get to get to herd immunity with only minor hindrances to re-opening things.

A scalpel, not a sledge hammer.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by hcap

Epidemiologists recommend flattening the curve smartly using precision testing, contact tracing, quarantining and separation when necessary. As demonstrated by the successful efforts of many countries.

My position is flattening the curve gives us more time to get to get to herd immunity with only minor hindrances to re-opening things.

A scalpel, not a sledge hammer.

We flattened the curve. Time to open up the spigot again. Getting to herd immunity was never part of equation when deciding when to reopen. The shutdown was simply to prevent an overloading of the hospital system. FULL STOP. Mission Accomplished!!

Everything else now stated is goal posting moving.

[hcap]

Originally Posted by tucker6

We flattened the curve. Time to open up the spigot again. Getting to herd immunity was never part of equation when deciding when to reopen. The shutdown was simply to prevent an overloading of the hospital system. FULL STOP. Mission Accomplished!!

Everything else now stated is goal posting moving.

Wrong! flatterning the curve reduces deaths and suffering overall. Ultimately with vaccinations, allows us time to get into herd immunity slowly as we have in other infections diseases during the modern era.

From the U.K. which experimented with herd immunity and put Boris into the ICU

https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/e...herd-immunity/

Herd immunity occurs when a large enough proportion of a population are immune that an infection does not spread so easily or it can actually die out.

“Unfortunately, a very rough estimate suggests that we will only reach herd immunity to Covid-19 when approximately 60% of the population is immune (and remember that immunity is currently only reached by getting the infection as we have no vaccine!). The major downside is that this will mean that in the UK alone at least 36 million people will need to be infected and recover. It is almost impossible to predict what that will mean in terms of human costs but we are conservatively looking at 10,000s deaths, and possibly at 100,000s of death.

“In determining what level of herd immunity is necessary to stop the spread of infection we need to know the R0 (or reproductive ratio) this is the number of people that are likely to be infected by a single case when a new pathogen appears in a community with no prior immunity.

“So assume a pathogen with an R0=2, this means that after the first case there will be 2, then 4, then 8, etc. But by the time half the population is immune, on average half the people exposed from a single case will be immune and therefore only one person per infected person gets the infection.

“So the sequence 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256 ….. becomes 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 and the disease will actually die out fairly quickly. Estimates of the R0 for COVID-19 vary somewhat but are in the order 2.0 to 3.0. Assuming that R0=3 then after about 66% of the population becomes infected then the virus will die out in the population.

“But it is not as simple as this as individuals are always moving into and out of a population, largely through birth and death. But in this case future years will see a reduction in the average age of infection and so risk of more serious disease will be lower.

“This does not mean that achieving herd immunity through natural infection should be an objective as this does imply that a lot of people will suffer the infection and risk severe illness and even death. But if our most vulnerable people are protected during this stage then it may well be possible to ultimately reduce the death rates as infection rates in subsequent years will be substantially reduced and a vaccine may become available that would protect our most vulnerable citizens even more.”
.................................................. .....................
And the latest updates on the RO number of covid is 5.7

That is the problem. Almost 100, 000 dead here in less than 3 months.

[Tom]

For all the posts he has in this thread, you would thing he would been right at least once.

Alas.......not to be.

[jay68802]

Originally Posted by Tom

For all the posts he has in this thread, you would thing he would been right at least once.

Alas.......not to be.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by hcap

You just have to be willing to appraise and commercialize what lives are worth.

We do it all the time...it's just not as in your face as it is now...

As a recent video I posted pointed out...we do it with driving...with opioids for pain management...with smoking...all sorts of shit we "allow" that kills loads of people....

But with COVID, every life is sacred and precious...all of a sudden.

Those killed by the flu every year want their social distancing TOO!

[Poindexter]

By the way was looking at Influenza and just saw that like covid-19 90% of the deaths are in the older 65/underlying condition category. Now given so many people die every year from the flu and the fact that once again we know who is susceptible can't we say that we have been brutally negligent in protecting the same group of people that we have now elected to shut down the entire economy to protect. Maybe some of the protocols that we are adapting for Covid-19 should have been adapted years ago to protect the vulnerable and relieve some of the major costs involved in treating the flu. We have had various outbreaks over the years and yet nothing has really been done to protect these people. Now Covid-19 comes and we make 100 % reversal and go all in shutting down the economy everywhere. This is so typical of Governments, Neglect situations or potential dangers for years and then when something really happens go to the opposite extreme and completely overreact.

Yes covid-19 is more contagious, but the bottom line as PA has insinuated numerous times, nobody gave a rat's ass until now.

Here is a reference on the flu.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3278149/

[classhandicapper]

Why Herd Immunity may be easier to reach than commonly thought.

Interesting paper and encouraging if correct.

https://www.nicholaslewis.org/why-he...-than-thought/

Figure 4 shows the progression of a COVID-19 epidemic in the case of CV=1 for the common social connectivity factor inhomogeneity, with unrelated inhomogeneity in susceptibility having a standard deviation of 0.4. The HIT (herd immunity threshold) is 60% lower than for a homogeneous population, at 23.6% rather than 58.3% of the population. And 43% rather than 88% of the population ultimately becomes infected. If the standard deviation of unrelated inhomogeneity in susceptibility is increased to 0.8, the HIT becomes 18.9%, and 35% of the population are ultimately infected.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

By the way was looking at Influenza and just saw that like covid-19 90% of the deaths are in the older 65/underlying condition category. Now given so many people die every year from the flu and the fact that once again we know who is susceptible can't we say that we have been brutally negligent in protecting the same group of people that we have now elected to shut down the entire economy to protect. Maybe some of the protocols that we are adapting for Covid-19 should have been adapted years ago to protect the vulnerable and relieve some of the major costs involved in treating the flu. We have had various outbreaks over the years and yet nothing has really been done to protect these people. Now Covid-19 comes and we make 100 % reversal and go all in shutting down the economy everywhere. This is so typical of Governments, Neglect situations or potential dangers for years and then when something really happens go to the opposite extreme and completely overreact.

Yes covid-19 is more contagious, but the bottom line as PA has insinuated numerous times, nobody gave a rat's ass until now.

Here is a reference on the flu.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3278149/

Are you suggesting that the major costs of treating the flu are greater than the costs to shut down the economy?

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by AndyC

Are you suggesting that the major costs of treating the flu are greater than the costs to shut down the economy?

Not at all. Not what I said.

[Tom]

https://techstartups.com/2020/05/20/...n-study-shows/

A new research study from investment bank giant JP Morgan allegedly found that infection rates have declined — not increased — in states where lockdowns have ended, “even after allowing for an appropriate measurement lag.” The research, which was first revealed by CNBC anchor Carl Quintanilla, further confirms findings from German epidemiologist Knut Wittkowski saying that coronavirus lockdowns policies are wrong and not evidence-based.

[PaceAdvantage]

Eventually, any and all good news will be spun in a way which will hail lockdowns as the savior of all mankind.