Herd Immunity?

[alloutoffucks]

The UK approach is for most people to get this virus and try to create herd immunity. Herd immunity is being talked about as if it means that everyone who is still alive will be immune to this virus. But is that true?

I would love the opinions of someone who really understands this.

Because as far as I can see the virus has already mutated. Won't this mean that we just get a version of this virus every so often in the UK just as we get with flu? And like flu it would just continue to kill people who become in later years elderly and vulnerable?
Or have I misunderstood this all?

The point of this thread was to ask anyone on here who are experts on this.
As I said in my OP this makes no sense scientifically to me. I do have a science background. And all I can see is that this will make the virus an endemic one that will kill some people every year in the UK.

Search cattle coronavirus for more info. It’s similar.

@Veterinari

Yes that’s right, dismiss a Professor of Microbiology from NYU. I’m sure he’s prone to hysteria.

FFS. It’s too early to be sure either way. That’s the point.

Yes it is too early to tell. But it does look as if this virus has already mutated once.

Another way of framing the question is what evidence do we have that there will be herd immunity to this particular virus?

And all I can see is that this will make the virus an endemic one that will kill some people every year in the UK.

What's your suggested alternative? Bleach the planet?

It’s utter rubbish basically a cull.

@defthand
I didn't dismiss the professor at NYU, I simply linked to a consensus article from 4 other professors who give measured responses and multiple other explanations for the postulated 'dormancy'.

Sadly, herd immunity can actually cause evolution of the virus and increase the spread of escaped, novel strains.

Whether is dormancy ornot,it is irresponsible to allow 75% ofthe population to becomeinfected whenmany people will have a poor prognosis given their age orunderlying health condition.

There is quite a lot of difference between "bleaching the planet" and trying to prevent the spread.... If China or Russia have such cavalier attitude we will be shouting from the top of our lungs....

Could this be helpful?

Coronavirus: Can herd immunity protect the population? - BBC Newsnight

My point is Lua that it will eventually spread to 60-75% of the planet regardless of what we do. It won't go away. We will all be exposed/infected over our lifetime, that is inevitable as it becomes endemic.
So talking about 'stopping' it is futile.

It may or may not mutate.

Assuming it doesn't, and that no vaccine is developed:

It will make its way through the population until enough of the herd has recovered and become immune (or died) that it slowed right down and there was just the odd case. Then in a few years, there will be new people. At some point, there will be enough of them for the disease to reassert itself.

It's the same reason why, before immunisation, you could predict with some accuracy how many years between the 'big' measles outbreaks.

The thing is there are several corona viruses around already. They do evolve, naturally. These viruses can affect the elderly or immune compromised or even randomly relatively healthy people and sadly cause pneumonia and death. The difference is we never test for it so wouldn't know what virus has been the cause. We all get those viruses each year as coughs and colds and those are the things that can seriously affect those at risk.

The difference with this is that it's a new, novel so no one has immunity so no heed immunity YET and it is particularly sneaky, strong and easily transmitted. Once it is in the population it's effects will be similar to the others. Perhaps a vaccine will then be used longer term for those at risk.

It's like how chicken pox can be very bad news for some people, so there is a vaccine, but for most is an annoying rite of passage for children.

Has anyone actually told BJ that we're not cattle?

No expert. But isn't herd immunity the term you use AFTER mass immunisation, not before? We will just become a giant species reservoir for a virus that comes from a group known to mutate a lot. Why don't we all have "herd immunity" to flu?

Herd immunity from my understanding in cattle is say you have 15 cattle in a field.

They all get corona SARS (or SARS-COV-2 if you want to be fussy) 5 survive they go on to breed.

They are not immune as you can’t be with a flu/cold like illness but they have stronger genetics so survived it and go on to have healthier offspring.

Basically eugenics.

!

I think I understand the benefits of herd immunity, but my understanding is that 60% of the population needs to catch the virus in order for this to be achieved. That will involve a huge amount of collateral damage along the way.

Are the elderly and disabled simply going to be sacrificed so that we can achieve herd immunity and protect our economy in the process? Because that's what it looks like to me.

Someone please tell me if I've misunderstood.

There is some benefits but only at a huge social cost.

Population of uk 66 440 000

80% infections rate 58 467 200

Collateral damage (only 3% deaths)
1 520 147

Thats assuming the 15% that "only" need oxygen dont die because the NHS are so overwhelmed they cant get it.

If "only" 60% of the population get it only
369,111,111 people will die. If we get oxygen to the 738,222,222 who need it they might not die

4000 ICU beds in this country. Prior to the crisis

Incidentally the death toll at Auschwitz was about 1.1 million so about the same as 60% infection rate

For a herd immunity theory that just about every other scientist disagrees with

Agree Hazel I’ve done the maths too.

@Purplewhitelie That's not what herd immunity means. Herd immunity is when an infection cannot spread because too many people (or animals) are immune. For example, say we know that a person who has BoJoVirus, which is spread by sneezing, they will infect 5 people on average if no one in the population is immune. We also know that they will come into contact with 100 people on average while they are infectious but they won't pass it on to all of them because they didn't sneeze on them. However, if 20 of those 100 people are immune to BojoVirus, they will only infect 4 people on average because of all of the people they sneezed it is likely that 1 of them will be immune. The herd immunity threshold is the point that if someone is infectious, they are unlikely to sneeze on someone who is not immune. In the case of BojoVirus, that would be 80% of the population because the threshold for herd immunity is the number of people infected on average in a population that has no immunity minus 1 divided by number of people infected on average in a population that has no immunity ie (5-1)/5 = 0.8.

Of course, in reality, although it is likely someone who is infected will become immune, immunity can wane. It doesn't mean you will be immune for life.

Yes but corona virus mutates every few persons or animals.

That’s why you have to keep on vaccinating cattle/people: the flu jab.

I thought everyone knew this? It’s your common cold, flu or sars within the corona grouping.

That’s why in the above I explained earlier is the only way it could possibly work? Stronger breeding to be more robust against respiratory infections?

It’s not a model I would want to follow even if I had cows or horses again out of choice!

Discuss!