To believe we are back to Herd Immunity

[yesterdayschild]

Those of us who have very little are almost being forced back to work where the risk of catching CV could be very high. The rich, famous and privileged can afford to stay home or work from home where the risk is much lower.

I am worried for everyone who has to go back to work. Ifeel that the government does not give a shit about the less fortunate people.

The economy would survive if the 1% took a small hit, but we can't have that!
Agree. In other news today Jeff Bezos, Amazon owner, is set to become the world's first trillionaire. There's money out there.

The economy would survive if the 1% took a small hit, but we can't have that! Most of them don't even pay their fair taxes

I agree, but this is our own fault. We keep voting for governments who prioritise billionaires.

www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uk-corporate-tax-avoidance-havens-justice-network-dodging-a8933661.html?__twitter_impression=true&fbclid=IwAR2Rn8Kbgk7UHSDy8iV6uWk4klvCYmRzAw9WxK9cpn98E-JkIOMGDlXUTBw

Says it much more eloquently than I did.

It wasn't me it was that Irish bloke on Dr WHO: The Three Doctors.

Best programme on the telly. Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, about 5-6PM. Give it a try, come away with a small sense of hope instead of an urge to drink, swear and throw things.

www.youtube.com/user/who/videos

We could still turn this around if enough people decided it was worth the bother.

I think herd immunity is the only way to go. I read an article that hospitals are only operating at 80% capacity. So - if you're going to die from it now or in December, if your card is marked, that's it - time's up.
Spoke to a vet two days ago who agrees with me. If hospitals were out of capacity, fair enough, but they're not.
What the UK isn't doing and hasn't done is testing and tracing.

There's no point comparing Joe Soap to the Elite. There will always be that disparity in a capitalist society. Even communism broke down because one cunt will want to get ahead of the rest.

What the UK also isn't doing is admitting people with previously severe enough symptoms to warrant hospitalisation.

I think herd immunity is the only way to go.

But also -

What the UK isn't doing and hasn't done is testing and tracing.

So is herd immunity the only way to go or could we be doing testing and tracing instead?

The core part of herd immunity is testing and tracing.

People don't realise that flattening the curve means slowing down the rate of infection - not eliminating people from getting it entirely.

We know that if certain groups of people get it, they'll likely die (the shielded). What they're trying to do is balance the amount of people who get it, with the amount of people who will die from it getting it. Does that make sense? They're also trying to balance the amount of people who will be in hospital requiring ICU particularly, with what they can allow people to do. They have capacity - they're not using it. Nursing home patients are NOT being taken into hospital. Unless the Grim Reaper appears as a vision beside you, you ain't getting into hospital. That's why there's so many deaths.

Someone in another thread was trying to paint the event as plucky-but-oppressed working-class single mums versus the Duke of Westminster

That was on page two of this thread, and that's a very creative reading of my proposal that we adopt land value tax.

The elderly count less in any economic/utilitarian analysis - see the concept of the quality-adjusted life year.

QALY is a clinical tool used to decide who gets healthcare in a resource-poor health system. It's what the Italians were using to pick which patient got the ventilator and which didn't.

It is not ethically acceptable to use QALY in the way that you appear to advocate, namely to decide that a certain number of deaths of a certain class of people is the acceptable price of protecting the sacred cow that is "the economy", It's especially not acceptable when there are other things we could do to alleviate the financial hit such as taxing the rich or imposing a land value tax.

Dr Ryan has been quoted upthread about yoyo-ing in and out of lockdown being extremely bad for the economy. He's right, because no business can make any kind of plans to order stock or recall staff if noone knows when the next lockdown will hit. Attempts to "just get on with it" will result in that yoyoing. In addition, there is no purpose to hospitality and entertainment businesses such as pubs and cinemas reopening prematurely, because nobody in their right mind would go to such a place whilst the R value is too high for fear of catching the virus. Those places would be burning electricity and endangering staff for no reason, increasing their costs compared to if they had stayed closed.

There are very good reasons for not leaving lockdown too soon.

So is herd immunity the only way to go or could we be doing testing and tracing instead?

Hi @LangClegsInSpace

Testing and tracing is not an alternative to herd immunity. We need (and in time will develop) herd immunity.

Sky News covers a lot about the care home crisis. I know a lot of you favour BBC as some sort of superior reporting agency, but I think they're pretty crap. They're slow off the mark. They'll do a documentary 2-3 weeks/months later. That's not fucking news. I want on the ground reporting and Sky News is my favoured news agency. Trump wouldn't like them at all.

Yay! @ToffeeYoghurt, you're speaking sense. I'm dumbfounded by the let's get one with it brigade. Why? Why why why does that mean bravely rush outside and meet the virus head on? Why can't we test, trace and isolate pockets of the virus and get the numbers down to something more manageable before we all start crowding into schools and buses again? Why do we have to wash our hands, hold our breath and hope for the best? Why can't we do what other countries do and actually test and monitor the population?

It's only on mumsnet that I come across this nonsense but the whole 'bravely accepting herd mentality vs cowering under the duvet" narrative is such bullshit.

Hi @bd67thSaysReinstateLangCleg

It is not ethically acceptable to use QALY in the way that you appear to advocate, namely to decide that a certain number of deaths of a certain class of people is the acceptable price of protecting the sacred cow that is "the economy", It's especially not acceptable when there are other things we could do to alleviate the financial hit such as taxing the rich or imposing a land value tax.

That's rather a sweeping statement. It does depend on your code of ethics. There's a highly influential branch of moral philosophy, utilitarianism, that would regard it as the most ethical way forward.

Ok, to put it in real terms.
Say there's 100 children in a school. You only have 5 ICU paediatric beds in the local hospital.
What you do is, you let the children get it at a slow rate, so that no more than 5 beds are needed at any one time.
In reality, all 100 children get the virus, but they get it slowly at different rates, so 20 on Week 1, 20 on Week 2 etc.
What you don't want is all 100 children getting it at the same time, cos then you'd need 20 ICU beds and you only have 5.
Does that make sense to any of you?

There is only 2 option herd immunity or eradication

eradication is virtual impossible
I think a lot of people exceptions are way over reality of what we can do.

Chinchinatti and GoatyGoatyMingeMinge I am fascinated by this idea that testing and tracing goes together with 'herd immunity'. Do you have a link to where you read this?

You both have such similar arguments it must be significant.

Herd immunity involves isolating the weak and allowing the strong to get it. So testing and tracing is imperative.

Over sevenths and those with underline health problems will have to shield until a vaccine is found the rest of us are going to have to take our chances!!
At least there is enough IC beds now!! I think we might need them sooner then we think!! Probably this winter!!

Does that make sense to any of you?

No. You should prevent the children from catching the disease in the first place.

Chinchinatti and GoatyGoatyMingeMinge I am fascinated by this idea that testing and tracing goes together with 'herd immunity'. Do you have a link to where you read this?

Hi @LangClegsInSpace

They don't go together, they are different things. Herd immunity is what we must achieve. It's the resistance to the spread of a contagious disease within a population that results if a sufficiently high proportion of individuals are immune. That can be achieved be letting the disease progress, and the survivors will develop antibodies and (it is hoped) be immune, or by vaccination.

Testing and tracing in fact slows the spread, and therefore the goal of herd immunity, but it will still be reached.

Ok, let's take it back to 100 people who live in Sunny Village. 10% are older than 70, a further 10% have underlying conditions. 20% are children and 60% are adults with no conditions.
So you allow the children 20% and the adults with no underlying conditions to get it, so that's 80% of the village who are now immune.
If they're immune, they can't pass it on to the 20% who are either over 70 or have underlying conditions.
Make sense?

'the weak'

'the strong'

I know we have all been somewhat cowed by lockdown measures but we still need to 'stay alert' to dangerous propaganda.

This is not normal.

www.irishtimes.com/news/health/no-evidence-children-are-covid-19-super-spreaders-says-hiqa-1.4252521

Children are not substantially contributing to the spread of Covid-19 in their households or in schools, according to the Health Information and Quality Authority (Hiqa).

Its findings in analysis of latest global research are likely to inform the National Public Health Emergency Team’s position on re-opening schools, particularly at primary level.