FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Herd immunity may not work
Herd immunity may not work
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *ncutgem OP Man
over a year ago
Bath ish |
Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term"
None of that is actually true.
First if everyone was immune for a month at the same time, the virus would die out, there needs to be active virus cases and people who can catch it for the virus to propagate.
Secondly, there is no such thing as "the common cold". The condition which we know as the cold is just a group of similar symptoms. There are literally hundreds of different viruses which cause "the cold", most of which people only catch once. Flu is the same, there are loads of different Flu strains which do the rounds and the annual flu-jab is a protection against the most prevalent strains for this given year.
Cal |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term"
Different strains.
The people who have had it twice had different strains just like you can with the flu
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term
None of that is actually true.
First if everyone was immune for a month at the same time, the virus would die out, there needs to be active virus cases and people who can catch it for the virus to propagate.
Secondly, there is no such thing as "the common cold". The condition which we know as the cold is just a group of similar symptoms. There are literally hundreds of different viruses which cause "the cold", most of which people only catch once. Flu is the same, there are loads of different Flu strains which do the rounds and the annual flu-jab is a protection against the most prevalent strains for this given year.
Cal"
I think that what the post was alluding to, while I don't know not factually true it is essentially right in pointing out that this virus can be with us for a very long time and unless these selfish covid deniers grow some brain cells we will never get it under control |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term"
Writing only works if you use grammar and punctuation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term
None of that is actually true.
First if everyone was immune for a month at the same time, the virus would die out, there needs to be active virus cases and people who can catch it for the virus to propagate.
Secondly, there is no such thing as "the common cold". The condition which we know as the cold is just a group of similar symptoms. There are literally hundreds of different viruses which cause "the cold", most of which people only catch once. Flu is the same, there are loads of different Flu strains which do the rounds and the annual flu-jab is a protection against the most prevalent strains for this given year.
Cal
I think that what the post was alluding to, while I don't know not factually true it is essentially right in pointing out that this virus can be with us for a very long time and unless these selfish covid deniers grow some brain cells we will never get it under control "
See this is the fundamental flawed strategy. ‘Trying to control’
You don’t control a pandemic. It’s laughable to believe you can.
It’ll do what a pandemic does and always has done. All you’re doing in ‘trying to control’ it, is dragging things out & causing more deaths long term.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
To get herd immunity from this virus would require a fairly large proportion of the population to have had a recent infection. Perhaps 60% - 80% of the country having had a recent infection would have meant that our health services would have been overwhelmed before we got to herd immunity level, and tens of thousands of people would have died. We currently have about 8% of the population showing antibodies, after the deaths that we've had.
We also don't know how much immunity is possible, nor for how long. What proportion of the 8% have immunity today? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"To get herd immunity from this virus would require a fairly large proportion of the population to have had a recent infection. Perhaps 60% - 80% of the country having had a recent infection would have meant that our health services would have been overwhelmed before we got to herd immunity level, and tens of thousands of people would have died. We currently have about 8% of the population showing antibodies, after the deaths that we've had.
We also don't know how much immunity is possible, nor for how long. What proportion of the 8% have immunity today? "
This may or may not be true, but, realistically it’s the only solution to get out of this. It won’t be a smooth ride, but track & trace is a lost cause now, forget a vaccine and you can’t keep locking down on and off.
Herd immunity is the least destructive of all the options. Fact. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"To get herd immunity from this virus would require a fairly large proportion of the population to have had a recent infection. Perhaps 60% - 80% of the country having had a recent infection would have meant that our health services would have been overwhelmed before we got to herd immunity level, and tens of thousands of people would have died. We currently have about 8% of the population showing antibodies, after the deaths that we've had.
We also don't know how much immunity is possible, nor for how long. What proportion of the 8% have immunity today? "
Those figures may or may not be accurate, however there is no choice but to achieve herd immunity, there never was any choice, it seems to be accepted that there are several strains now so it's likely a vaccine will provide only a partial solution covid will become just another cause of illness and death which we will adjust to. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Herd immunity is the least destructive of all the options. Fact. "
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
As a previous poster said to even attempt a herd immunity strategy would require the majority of the population to acquire the virus, by which time the number of deaths and people becoming very ill would not only overwhelm the NHS but decimate the working population, thereby killing the economy anyway. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the
Different strains.
The people who have had it twice had different strains just like you can with the flu
"
I'm almost sure I heard on radio that there was a woman recently caught the same strain twice, first time minor symptoms and second time hospitalised her.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the
Different strains.
The people who have had it twice had different strains just like you can with the flu
I'm almost sure I heard on radio that there was a woman recently caught the same strain twice, first time minor symptoms and second time hospitalised her.
"
If we admit the 0.001% who have caught it can catch it again, it makes no measurable difference to the herd immunity percentage required. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Herd immunity is the least destructive of all the options. Fact.
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
As a previous poster said to even attempt a herd immunity strategy would require the majority of the population to acquire the virus, by which time the number of deaths and people becoming very ill would not only overwhelm the NHS but decimate the working population, thereby killing the economy anyway."
Decimate the working population?? Under 30 your more likely to die of a lightning strike u,under 55 more likely to die of a road traffic accident, the average age of death from Covid is 82.4 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *osforthMan
over a year ago
newcastle on tyne |
Latest research suggests it will become endemic, therefore all the measures taken now are useless & let's be honest there is no overall strategy anyway. Arbitrary number of 6 to meet outside but can work in office of 50+, pubs close at 10 all on the street at once, ect all nonsense. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Herd immunity is the least destructive of all the options. Fact.
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
As a previous poster said to even attempt a herd immunity strategy would require the majority of the population to acquire the virus, by which time the number of deaths and people becoming very ill would not only overwhelm the NHS but decimate the working population, thereby killing the economy anyway. Decimate the working population?? Under 30 your more likely to die of a lightning strike u,under 55 more likely to die of a road traffic accident, the average age of death from Covid is 82.4 "
You're aware of the 'hidden' damage that this virus can inflict on people, including organ damage and failure, of heart, kidneys, brain etc, as well as cognitive impairments. If we freely let people get infected, the NHS will not cope to a much greater extent than in the spring. This will impact on other NHS treatment needs that people have. It's a discredited proposal. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
So what is the answer then? "I certainly don't have it, and from the way the country is heading I don't think those in charge have it either. There is no right way to tackle it, lockdowns earlier in the year have led us to this point, more lockdowns are going to struggle to be imposed as we are seeing all over the country and herd immunity won't work, a mass vaccine that everyone will have is realistically some two years away, so I wonder where are we heading??? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Discussion of fringe views such as herd immunity, the Barrington letter etc, are potentially causing conflict amongst people who don't want to follow the simple steps we have. It's important to build adherence to the current measures, without creating confusion and disharmony.
It's wearisome but following some simple steps can help you and others to stay safer, as the virus isn't going to go away very quickly here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term"
People catch the cold because it mutates. This will do the same therefore it will always be here.
What's your plan? Lockdown again next year? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Herd immunity is the least destructive of all the options. Fact.
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
As a previous poster said to even attempt a herd immunity strategy would require the majority of the population to acquire the virus, by which time the number of deaths and people becoming very ill would not only overwhelm the NHS but decimate the working population, thereby killing the economy anyway. Decimate the working population?? Under 30 your more likely to die of a lightning strike u,under 55 more likely to die of a road traffic accident, the average age of death from Covid is 82.4 "
In my post I wasnt only referring to covid deaths, in fact people dying may well be less of an issue from a health infrastructure perspective. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Herd immunity is the least destructive of all the options. Fact.
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
As a previous poster said to even attempt a herd immunity strategy would require the majority of the population to acquire the virus, by which time the number of deaths and people becoming very ill would not only overwhelm the NHS but decimate the working population, thereby killing the economy anyway."
But he wrote "fact". What more proof do you need? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Discussion of fringe views such as herd immunity, the Barrington letter etc, are potentially causing conflict amongst people who don't want to follow the simple steps we have. It's important to build adherence to the current measures, without creating confusion and disharmony.
It's wearisome but following some simple steps can help you and others to stay safer, as the virus isn't going to go away very quickly here. "
So what's your strategy? Lockdown every few months? I'd rather roll the dice and take my chance with the virus. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Only a government of madmen would follow the herd immunity path being proposed by many on here. Our government may be idiots, but they are not mad, so going for herd immunity is not going to happen. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Herd immunity is the least destructive of all the options. Fact.
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
As a previous poster said to even attempt a herd immunity strategy would require the majority of the population to acquire the virus, by which time the number of deaths and people becoming very ill would not only overwhelm the NHS but decimate the working population, thereby killing the economy anyway.
But he wrote "fact". What more proof do you need?"
Of course, I missed that point. I'll retire gracefully to the fringes  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Herd immunity is the least destructive of all the options. Fact.
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
As a previous poster said to even attempt a herd immunity strategy would require the majority of the population to acquire the virus, by which time the number of deaths and people becoming very ill would not only overwhelm the NHS but decimate the working population, thereby killing the economy anyway.
But he wrote "fact". What more proof do you need?
Of course, I missed that point. I'll retire gracefully to the fringes "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Only a government of madmen would follow the herd immunity path being proposed by many on here. Our government may be idiots, but they are not mad, so going for herd immunity is not going to happen."
Exactly, those supporting the herd immunity approach haven’t done the maths, it is impossible |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Only a government of madmen would follow the herd immunity path being proposed by many on here. Our government may be idiots, but they are not mad, so going for herd immunity is not going to happen."
Eventually their hand will be forced & they’ll have no choice but to. The alternative is economic ruin & millions of people in poverty and dying long term as a result.
Herd immunity is still, despite taking everything else into account the least destructive option. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ab jamesMan
over a year ago
ribble valley |
I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Only a government of madmen would follow the herd immunity path being proposed by many on here. Our government may be idiots, but they are not mad, so going for herd immunity is not going to happen.
Eventually their hand will be forced & they’ll have no choice but to. The alternative is economic ruin & millions of people in poverty and dying long term as a result.
Herd immunity is still, despite taking everything else into account the least destructive option."
The Lancet would disagree with you:
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31924-3/fulltext |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term"
Might wanna look up the science, we're not "truly immune" to seasonal flu, hence the seasonal flu jab.
Our body's naturally forget some vaccinations and remember others (tb) forever.
Herd immunity is certainly difficult without a vaccine, and with trust in science as low as it seems, I think we're sleep walking into another huge national issue. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"To get herd immunity from this virus would require a fairly large proportion of the population to have had a recent infection. Perhaps 60% - 80% of the country having had a recent infection would have meant that our health services would have been overwhelmed before we got to herd immunity level, and tens of thousands of people would have died. We currently have about 8% of the population showing antibodies, after the deaths that we've had.
We also don't know how much immunity is possible, nor for how long. What proportion of the 8% have immunity today?
This may or may not be true, but, realistically it’s the only solution to get out of this. It won’t be a smooth ride, but track & trace is a lost cause now, forget a vaccine and you can’t keep locking down on and off.
Herd immunity is the least destructive of all the options. Fact. "
Fucks sake, myself and others have explained to you why herd immunity is unlikely to work with COVID 19.
I mean we already know there are two distinct strains which do not have crossover immunity. IF immunity is possible, it does not cause immunity to the second strain.
Additional, as stated before, letting it burn through a population like the UKs risks additional mutations causing additional strains.
Controlling population interactions is the only way to possibly suppress the virus numbers to the point where it's of minimal concern.
We know that this works based on New Zealand, that is before they opened up to the global community. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
So with the last sentence you destroyed your whole argument, once people mix it spreads. The flu and colds have numerous different strains we only tend to vaccinate the vulnerable as the rest of us fight it off just as we will with covid. The only way to eradicate it is for the whole world to isolate for three weeks at the very minimum, thats every single family group stay in their own home, no.nhs no police no food. Just think of all the deaths that would cause not only to humans but all the livestock we need, all the crops that would rot in the fields etc etc.
It only takes one person to start it off again just as shown by NZ and Oz
We as a species will simply have to live with it, treatments have improved with experience, the vaccine could improve the chances of the weak as the flu one does. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So with the last sentence you destroyed your whole argument, once people mix it spreads. The flu and colds have numerous different strains we only tend to vaccinate the vulnerable as the rest of us fight it off just as we will with covid. The only way to eradicate it is for the whole world to isolate for three weeks at the very minimum, thats every single family group stay in their own home, no.nhs no police no food. Just think of all the deaths that would cause not only to humans but all the livestock we need, all the crops that would rot in the fields etc etc.
It only takes one person to start it off again just as shown by NZ and Oz
We as a species will simply have to live with it, treatments have improved with experience, the vaccine could improve the chances of the weak as the flu one does."
Thank Christ you don't make any important decisions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So with the last sentence you destroyed your whole argument, once people mix it spreads. The flu and colds have numerous different strains we only tend to vaccinate the vulnerable as the rest of us fight it off just as we will with covid. The only way to eradicate it is for the whole world to isolate for three weeks at the very minimum, thats every single family group stay in their own home, no.nhs no police no food. Just think of all the deaths that would cause not only to humans but all the livestock we need, all the crops that would rot in the fields etc etc.
It only takes one person to start it off again just as shown by NZ and Oz
We as a species will simply have to live with it, treatments have improved with experience, the vaccine could improve the chances of the weak as the flu one does.
Thank Christ you don't make any important decisions."
Hey, they might well be MPs for all we know. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So with the last sentence you destroyed your whole argument, once people mix it spreads. The flu and colds have numerous different strains we only tend to vaccinate the vulnerable as the rest of us fight it off just as we will with covid. The only way to eradicate it is for the whole world to isolate for three weeks at the very minimum, thats every single family group stay in their own home, no.nhs no police no food. Just think of all the deaths that would cause not only to humans but all the livestock we need, all the crops that would rot in the fields etc etc.
It only takes one person to start it off again just as shown by NZ and Oz
We as a species will simply have to live with it, treatments have improved with experience, the vaccine could improve the chances of the weak as the flu one does.
Thank Christ you don't make any important decisions.
Hey, they might well be MPs for all we know. "
Probably a government minister  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term"
Its looknig more and more like thats true but then viruses do evolve over time. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Discussion of fringe views such as herd immunity, the Barrington letter etc, are potentially causing conflict amongst people who don't want to follow the simple steps we have. It's important to build adherence to the current measures, without creating confusion and disharmony.
It's wearisome but following some simple steps can help you and others to stay safer, as the virus isn't going to go away very quickly here. So what's your strategy? Lockdown every few months? I'd rather roll the dice and take my chance with the virus."
Follow the guidance from the appropriate specialists. We have Cobra etc and they have been pushing for short lockdown since September. Time heals. Reducing infection levels, hospital admissions deaths and helping the economy now is essential. New health measures are being trialled and introduced. Winter is a significantly much more important period for us to reduce numbers before it's here, as people are indoors for a greater proportion of the time.
We are not below 3rd world country levels of impoverishment. We are a very wealthy nation and can afford to safeguard our citizens health and lives. The ephemeral is less important than what makes the country great, which is its people. We should secure a safer footing before winter fully arrives. Next year is another issue but we need to have more of the people in good health then, who may otherwise be dead or living with permanent disabilities because we didn't care to make sacrifices. A vaccine is likely to be with us in 2021, to help us to regain our standing.
The ending of the lockdown we had was not claimed to be the only time we'd face those measures. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"To get herd immunity from this virus would require a fairly large proportion of the population to have had a recent infection. Perhaps 60% - 80% of the country having had a recent infection would have meant that our health services would have been overwhelmed before we got to herd immunity level, and tens of thousands of people would have died. We currently have about 8% of the population showing antibodies, after the deaths that we've had.
We also don't know how much immunity is possible, nor for how long. What proportion of the 8% have immunity today?
Those figures may or may not be accurate, however there is no choice but to achieve herd immunity, there never was any choice, it seems to be accepted that there are several strains now so it's likely a vaccine will provide only a partial solution covid will become just another cause of illness and death which we will adjust to. "
Worse still a vaccine only stimulates antibodies exactly the same as infection without having to be infected, if herd immunity is impossible then vaccination is impossible, if as a Corona family virus it mutates yearly or biannually as most other Corona do then you'd vaccination of 70% of the population of the world at least once but possibly 3 to 5 times a year.
We can state what we do know for a fact, there's four Corona family viruses out there that give you the common cold, there all controlled by herd immunity, reinfection is possible but unlikely and although mutation occurs the body retains many other ways to fight off reinfection other than mere antibodies. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So with the last sentence you destroyed your whole argument, once people mix it spreads. The flu and colds have numerous different strains we only tend to vaccinate the vulnerable as the rest of us fight it off just as we will with covid. The only way to eradicate it is for the whole world to isolate for three weeks at the very minimum, thats every single family group stay in their own home, no.nhs no police no food. Just think of all the deaths that would cause not only to humans but all the livestock we need, all the crops that would rot in the fields etc etc.
It only takes one person to start it off again just as shown by NZ and Oz
We as a species will simply have to live with it, treatments have improved with experience, the vaccine could improve the chances of the weak as the flu one does.
Thank Christ you don't make any important decisions.
Hey, they might well be MPs for all we know. "
True. And scary. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on. "
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on. "
Agreed. A vaccine isn't a cure, as it will then take time for the relative herd immunity to take place. On top of that, as we push to vaccine into the public, they'll be spikes caused by the vaccine, meaning measures like we're living in now, will probably continue even then.
Plus, we have a large portion of the general public that think any vaccine for covid-19 is made by bill gates, who wants to use 5G as a weapon sooooooo it's all gonna be a long time till we can even think about life without this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine."
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine.
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?."
I'm not sure what's controversial here. The fact I said a vaccine is a vaccine rather than a cure?
Yes a vaccine stimulates an antibody response. That's the point of it. And, crucially, it does so without you needing to get ill or potentially die 1st. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
We'll reach infection levels needed for a form of herd immunity long before any vaccine will be in play.
What we should be doing is sheltering the vulnerable as best as possible in free hotels and single occupancy housing, the immediate starting off redemsivir or whatever the antiviral is caused which can much reduce symptoms in the vulnerable, this should be fine with immediate effect if we're really serious about reducing hospitalisations and deaths while maintaining a level of economy needed to pay for all these measures. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine.
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?."
Thats about it though with a far milder version that your antibodies can be produced to rid you of it. Thats how the flu one works. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ab jamesMan
over a year ago
ribble valley |
"We'll reach infection levels needed for a form of herd immunity long before any vaccine will be in play.
What we should be doing is sheltering the vulnerable as best as possible in free hotels and single occupancy housing, the immediate starting off redemsivir or whatever the antiviral is caused which can much reduce symptoms in the vulnerable, this should be fine with immediate effect if we're really serious about reducing hospitalisations and deaths while maintaining a level of economy needed to pay for all these measures."
Free hotels, single occupancy housing?
For how many millions of people? We'd have to start the biggest building project the country has ever seen! God alone knows how much this would cost! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rufinWoman
over a year ago
notts |
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine.
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?.
Thats about it though with a far milder version that your antibodies can be produced to rid you of it. Thats how the flu one works. "
It only works if the strains they guess will appear actually do appear, and it hardly works at all some years, particularly for the elderly. Flu still kills a lot of vulnerable people. The good news is that a permanent lockdown might save many of those deaths as well. Seeing as we're all about the lockdown nowadays. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine.
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?.
Thats about it though with a far milder version that your antibodies can be produced to rid you of it. Thats how the flu one works. "
If we can all agree that it will work whenever it's possible to do it then we can agree that herd immunity through people actually catching the virus will also do it, in fact no vaccine ever made has ever done it better than your actually body being exposed to the pathogen in the first place, so in fact vaccine is never as good as the real thing but is the next best thing.
With this in mind, we don't have the years it will take to roll out this vaccination programme let alone whether you could actually impose it on 60-70 of the population, the only people who purport that the global economy has no problems are the ones who believe in the great reset!!.
The shit is going to hit the fan really soon and the far fringes of politics are slavering at the prospect.
Be warned, they haven't got your best interests at heart
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine.
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?.
Thats about it though with a far milder version that your antibodies can be produced to rid you of it. Thats how the flu one works.
If we can all agree that it will work whenever it's possible to do it then we can agree that herd immunity through people actually catching the virus will also do it, in fact no vaccine ever made has ever done it better than your actually body being exposed to the pathogen in the first place, so in fact vaccine is never as good as the real thing but is the next best thing.
With this in mind, we don't have the years it will take to roll out this vaccination programme let alone whether you could actually impose it on 60-70 of the population, the only people who purport that the global economy has no problems are the ones who believe in the great reset!!.
The shit is going to hit the fan really soon and the far fringes of politics are slavering at the prospect.
Be warned, they haven't got your best interests at heart
"
"vaccine is never as good as the real thing"?
*sigh*
I'll say this again. The point of a vaccine is it triggers an antibody resonse without the need to 1st get ill or die. That's why a vaccine is far better than the real thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"We'll reach infection levels needed for a form of herd immunity long before any vaccine will be in play.
What we should be doing is sheltering the vulnerable as best as possible in free hotels and single occupancy housing, the immediate starting off redemsivir or whatever the antiviral is caused which can much reduce symptoms in the vulnerable, this should be fine with immediate effect if we're really serious about reducing hospitalisations and deaths while maintaining a level of economy needed to pay for all these measures.
Free hotels, single occupancy housing?
For how many millions of people? We'd have to start the biggest building project the country has ever seen! God alone knows how much this would cost! "
We're only really talking about the most vulnerable, those with 1-2 comorbidities plus over 70s
The hotels are already empty, care homes could be split into smaller ones (one of the reasons Norway's death toll was well under Swedens was average size capacity, 230 in Sweden 31 in Norway).
The immediate start of antivirals in the vulnerable, all these measures would bring down the hospitalisations and deaths considerably while maintaining an open economy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine.
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?.
Thats about it though with a far milder version that your antibodies can be produced to rid you of it. Thats how the flu one works.
If we can all agree that it will work whenever it's possible to do it then we can agree that herd immunity through people actually catching the virus will also do it, in fact no vaccine ever made has ever done it better than your actually body being exposed to the pathogen in the first place, so in fact vaccine is never as good as the real thing but is the next best thing.
With this in mind, we don't have the years it will take to roll out this vaccination programme let alone whether you could actually impose it on 60-70 of the population, the only people who purport that the global economy has no problems are the ones who believe in the great reset!!.
The shit is going to hit the fan really soon and the far fringes of politics are slavering at the prospect.
Be warned, they haven't got your best interests at heart
"vaccine is never as good as the real thing"?
*sigh*
I'll say this again. The point of a vaccine is it triggers an antibody resonse without the need to 1st get ill or die. That's why a vaccine is far better than the real thing."
Sigh you missed the point completely, the immune response via a vaccine is NEVER as strong as actually getting the illness.
Therefore if vaccines work which I said they do then herd immunity will work. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine.
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?.
Thats about it though with a far milder version that your antibodies can be produced to rid you of it. Thats how the flu one works.
It only works if the strains they guess will appear actually do appear, and it hardly works at all some years, particularly for the elderly. Flu still kills a lot of vulnerable people. The good news is that a permanent lockdown might save many of those deaths as well. Seeing as we're all about the lockdown nowadays."
The virus will mutate all of them do thats why last years flue vaccine might not work with this years flue it will be the same with covid. Vaccines will help but don't bet your house on it.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine.
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?.
Thats about it though with a far milder version that your antibodies can be produced to rid you of it. Thats how the flu one works.
If we can all agree that it will work whenever it's possible to do it then we can agree that herd immunity through people actually catching the virus will also do it, in fact no vaccine ever made has ever done it better than your actually body being exposed to the pathogen in the first place, so in fact vaccine is never as good as the real thing but is the next best thing.
With this in mind, we don't have the years it will take to roll out this vaccination programme let alone whether you could actually impose it on 60-70 of the population, the only people who purport that the global economy has no problems are the ones who believe in the great reset!!.
The shit is going to hit the fan really soon and the far fringes of politics are slavering at the prospect.
Be warned, they haven't got your best interests at heart
"vaccine is never as good as the real thing"?
*sigh*
I'll say this again. The point of a vaccine is it triggers an antibody resonse without the need to 1st get ill or die. That's why a vaccine is far better than the real thing.
Sigh you missed the point completely, the immune response via a vaccine is NEVER as strong as actually getting the illness.
Therefore if vaccines work which I said they do then herd immunity will work. "
You're just flat out ignoring what vaccines do and why. They trigger an immune response without a person having to get ill or die 1st. How many times? That's the point of them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine.
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?.
Thats about it though with a far milder version that your antibodies can be produced to rid you of it. Thats how the flu one works.
If we can all agree that it will work whenever it's possible to do it then we can agree that herd immunity through people actually catching the virus will also do it, in fact no vaccine ever made has ever done it better than your actually body being exposed to the pathogen in the first place, so in fact vaccine is never as good as the real thing but is the next best thing.
With this in mind, we don't have the years it will take to roll out this vaccination programme let alone whether you could actually impose it on 60-70 of the population, the only people who purport that the global economy has no problems are the ones who believe in the great reset!!.
The shit is going to hit the fan really soon and the far fringes of politics are slavering at the prospect.
Be warned, they haven't got your best interests at heart
"vaccine is never as good as the real thing"?
*sigh*
I'll say this again. The point of a vaccine is it triggers an antibody resonse without the need to 1st get ill or die. That's why a vaccine is far better than the real thing.
Sigh you missed the point completely, the immune response via a vaccine is NEVER as strong as actually getting the illness.
Therefore if vaccines work which I said they do then herd immunity will work. "
Seriously, please go educate yourself about vaccines. The protection they give is just as good as your normal immunity from being infected. You just don't risk dying to get the end result. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *eekendsCouple
over a year ago
Darlington |
we lost the plot on this in february, we were in nz,aus and singapore feb/march and every were we went temperatures were taken and track and trace used on cruise etc,
We wondered if to return at end of march as being in singapore and the rates in uk were starting to soar and yet they were still dithering .
Since our return on 4th april I have had my temperature taken twice other than at hospital which was a minor visit, even went for flu jab and the nurse didnt take my temp, what is the first sign of any illness ????
The government are still trying to do this on cheap and like anything done on cheap it costs you 3 times as much in end,
Closing business,s means they cannot recover to pay taxes, losing employment means the employees now cannot spend or pay taxes and it will take a long while to get work and security, rates drop because premises empty, people without money only start to burden society and crime soars.our largest business is amazon who pay very low taxes and low wages
we have spent a fortune on cronieism track and trace is a joke, old pals earning fortunes and not supplying properly, and our loved ones getting the pain, and there is no proper way out
We will have a lockdown but it will be 2 months too late and the NHS will be creaking at the seams,
Nightingale hospitals should have been the places all corona virus patients should have gone to leave the hospitals to concentrate on daily business , but they werent because we are so understaffed on specialists due to lack of funding for too long, they do not have the staff to operate them, they were a political football, they thought they would never need them, but they shut the people up, now we are paying for them and still cannot use them
its a disgrace but its what the people voted for so the price is now to pay. dont forget all the Brexit millionaires have fled the country now and they wont be using the NHS or paying into it just like they promised ( oops thats a lie)
most of them lived abroad at the time anyway |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Sandman, do you really not understand the benefit of getting vaccinated? If so, please read up on it. In fact, here's a link from the WHO:
https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/embrace-the-facts-about-vaccines-not-the-myths
Or are you deliberately spreading disinformation? If so, please stop. When it comes to public health, spreading disinformation about vaccines is toxic, dangerous behaviour.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Herd immunity is the least destructive of all the options. Fact.
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
As a previous poster said to even attempt a herd immunity strategy would require the majority of the population to acquire the virus, by which time the number of deaths and people becoming very ill would not only overwhelm the NHS but decimate the working population, thereby killing the economy anyway."
. Complete nonsense in my view. To start with herd immunity does not require the majority to get it. With every disease there have always been a large percentage of the population who prove to be immune. Secondly we know that this virus massively affects the very elderly and the sick, not the working population |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Seriously, please go educate yourself about vaccines. The protection they give is just as good as your normal immunity from being infected. You just don't risk dying to get the end result. "
Just as good or the same? Asking for educational purposes? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Seriously, please go educate yourself about vaccines. The protection they give is just as good as your normal immunity from being infected. You just don't risk dying to get the end result.
Just as good or the same? Asking for educational purposes? "
Same. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Seriously, please go educate yourself about vaccines. The protection they give is just as good as your normal immunity from being infected. You just don't risk dying to get the end result.
Just as good or the same? Asking for educational purposes? "
I posted this link above. I'll post it again here as it answers your question:
https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/embrace-the-facts-about-vaccines-not-the-myths |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Seriously, please go educate yourself about vaccines. The protection they give is just as good as your normal immunity from being infected. You just don't risk dying to get the end result.
Just as good or the same? Asking for educational purposes?
Same. "
Cool you have educated ya self lol |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term"
There have been only a handful of cases where they have cought it twice. Different strains play a big part. Stay positive and try not to be negative about somthing we dont know much about. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term
There have been only a handful of cases where they have cought it twice. Different strains play a big part. Stay positive and try not to be negative about somthing we dont know much about."
The problem is we are all scared of the unknown you only have to see all the horror films made with not knowing what is coming for them.
People fret sadly its human nature. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term
There have been only a handful of cases where they have cought it twice. Different strains play a big part. Stay positive and try not to be negative about somthing we dont know much about.
The problem is we are all scared of the unknown you only have to see all the horror films made with not knowing what is coming for them.
People fret sadly its human nature. "
It makes sense from an evolutionary pov to be paranoid, the monkey that was scared there could be a snake in the grass is more likely to pass on their genes (to a degree) haha |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term
There have been only a handful of cases where they have cought it twice. Different strains play a big part. Stay positive and try not to be negative about somthing we dont know much about.
The problem is we are all scared of the unknown you only have to see all the horror films made with not knowing what is coming for them.
People fret sadly its human nature. "
People are scared of the unknown, true enough. And, yes, we do fret.
That's why facts are so important, especially during a pandemic. It's crucial to public health.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term
There have been only a handful of cases where they have cought it twice. Different strains play a big part. Stay positive and try not to be negative about somthing we dont know much about.
The problem is we are all scared of the unknown you only have to see all the horror films made with not knowing what is coming for them.
People fret sadly its human nature.
It makes sense from an evolutionary pov to be paranoid, the monkey that was scared there could be a snake in the grass is more likely to pass on their genes (to a degree) haha"
Well on a plus that analogy made me smile |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *JCouple
over a year ago
Teesside |
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again. "
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing? "
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day "
It's like shooting fish in a barrel. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ab jamesMan
over a year ago
ribble valley |
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day
It's like shooting fish in a barrel. "
I'm glad you said it
My barrel is devoid of life now |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *obka3Couple
over a year ago
bournemouth |
"So with the last sentence you destroyed your whole argument, once people mix it spreads. The flu and colds have numerous different strains we only tend to vaccinate the vulnerable as the rest of us fight it off just as we will with covid. The only way to eradicate it is for the whole world to isolate for three weeks at the very minimum, thats every single family group stay in their own home, no.nhs no police no food. Just think of all the deaths that would cause not only to humans but all the livestock we need, all the crops that would rot in the fields etc etc.
It only takes one person to start it off again just as shown by NZ and Oz
We as a species will simply have to live with it, treatments have improved with experience, the vaccine could improve the chances of the weak as the flu one does.
Thank Christ you don't make any important decisions."
Ok then how does your mega intelligence think on how we move forward |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *arry247Couple
over a year ago
Wakefield |
"Only a government of madmen would follow the herd immunity path being proposed by many on here. Our government may be idiots, but they are not mad, so going for herd immunity is not going to happen."
Herd immunity will happen as that is what vaccines provide.
The problem is no one yet knows how long the immunity lasts it may be long term it may be short term, the virus may mutate and weaken the effect of a vaccine.
At present no one knows the answers |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
What confuses us if herd immunity won't work because the body doesn't keep antibodies why are the NHS seeking people who have had covid 19 for plasma donations ? They are using the antibodies to treat new cases..doesnt make sense....someone is selling fakenews.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *JCouple
over a year ago
Teesside |
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
I'm glad you said it
My barrel is devoid of life now "
No you said no government on the planet would follow that policy.
I called out your post as bullshit by simply highlighting 3 countries that clearly are following that policy.
How successful they are or not wasn't mentioned at all and totally irrelevant |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"They test these donors and when their antibodies drop they stop taking plasma different people have antibofies for different lengths of time
"
Correct but the information for the virus is stored in the T cells which then starts to reproduce antibodies when the threat arrives in the body again.
You dont keep the antibodies the t cells remembers the make up of the virus.
I wish people would understand this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *JCouple
over a year ago
Teesside |
"They test these donors and when their antibodies drop they stop taking plasma different people have antibofies for different lengths of time
Correct but the information for the virus is stored in the T cells which then starts to reproduce antibodies when the threat arrives in the body again.
You dont keep the antibodies the t cells remembers the make up of the virus.
I wish people would understand this."
The fact that so many don't understand this on here and in real life is is quite frankly shocking tbh.
KJ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
I'm glad you said it
My barrel is devoid of life now
No you said no government on the planet would follow that policy.
I called out your post as bullshit by simply highlighting 3 countries that clearly are following that policy.
How successful they are or not wasn't mentioned at all and totally irrelevant "
If that was your argument, then perhaps you should have stated that in your original post and then this follow up would have been unnecessary. Your original post gives the impression that you were advocating for herd immunity, whether that was your intention or not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't put your money on an all conquering vaccine in 2021. I think they will be more effective in healing people but a cure im more sceptical on.
A vaccine isn't a cure. It's a vaccine.
If herd immunity can't exist because you can catch it twice then a vaccination becomes pointless as well, all the vaccine will do is simulate an antibody response exactly the same as catching it does?.
Thats about it though with a far milder version that your antibodies can be produced to rid you of it. Thats how the flu one works.
If we can all agree that it will work whenever it's possible to do it then we can agree that herd immunity through people actually catching the virus will also do it, in fact no vaccine ever made has ever done it better than your actually body being exposed to the pathogen in the first place, so in fact vaccine is never as good as the real thing but is the next best thing.
With this in mind, we don't have the years it will take to roll out this vaccination programme let alone whether you could actually impose it on 60-70 of the population, the only people who purport that the global economy has no problems are the ones who believe in the great reset!!.
The shit is going to hit the fan really soon and the far fringes of politics are slavering at the prospect.
Be warned, they haven't got your best interests at heart
"vaccine is never as good as the real thing"?
*sigh*
I'll say this again. The point of a vaccine is it triggers an antibody resonse without the need to 1st get ill or die. That's why a vaccine is far better than the real thing.
Sigh you missed the point completely, the immune response via a vaccine is NEVER as strong as actually getting the illness.
Therefore if vaccines work which I said they do then herd immunity will work.
You're just flat out ignoring what vaccines do and why. They trigger an immune response without a person having to get ill or die 1st. How many times? That's the point of them."
I think he understands. Not everyone getting a virus will get ill or die but their body will still build up the immunity by fighting it off. Natural vaccine as it were. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Its amazing how many Virologists and Epidemiologists have graduated in the last 6 months who all give their professional advice on here
I'm really flattered that as a member of fab I'm in the company of so many educated people |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ab jamesMan
over a year ago
ribble valley |
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
I'm glad you said it
My barrel is devoid of life now
No you said no government on the planet would follow that policy.
I called out your post as bullshit by simply highlighting 3 countries that clearly are following that policy.
How successful they are or not wasn't mentioned at all and totally irrelevant "
OK. You really think in the named countries the policy is to let the virus run wild without trying to check it, I think you'll find they're social distancing, wearing masks and waiting for a vaccine! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ab jamesMan
over a year ago
ribble valley |
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
I'm glad you said it
My barrel is devoid of life now
No you said no government on the planet would follow that policy.
I called out your post as bullshit by simply highlighting 3 countries that clearly are following that policy.
How successful they are or not wasn't mentioned at all and totally irrelevant
OK. You really think in the named countries the policy is to let the virus run wild without trying to check it, I think you'll find they're social distancing, wearing masks and waiting for a vaccine! "
50 gallons of water for sale! Comes in wooden container. Not needed anymore |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *JCouple
over a year ago
Teesside |
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
I'm glad you said it
My barrel is devoid of life now
No you said no government on the planet would follow that policy.
I called out your post as bullshit by simply highlighting 3 countries that clearly are following that policy.
How successful they are or not wasn't mentioned at all and totally irrelevant
OK. You really think in the named countries the policy is to let the virus run wild without trying to check it, I think you'll find they're social distancing, wearing masks and waiting for a vaccine! "
Dear me you are tragically uninformed
Sweden’s Chief Epidemiologist Anders Tegnell is unconvinced by the evidence for masks and doesn't recommend them. (let alone make laws to wear them like the UK).
In fact they have stated all the hard factual data has proved infections have increased since the use of Masks (including in the UK). If you listen to Swedens politicians they also believe using Masks gives people a false sense of security / they feel they are protected and all social distancing goes out of the window (this is clear to see in any supermarket in the UK).
So instead in Sweden the emphasis is on keeping a safe distance from others.
Even when Fox news went to Sweden at the height of the Pandemic in April / May the vast majority of Swede's weren't wearing a mask (the news videos are online to watch).
Fast forward to today if you go to Stockholm you will struggle to find many people wearing masks. The tiny minority that do do it through personal choice.
KJ
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ab jamesMan
over a year ago
ribble valley |
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
I'm glad you said it
My barrel is devoid of life now
No you said no government on the planet would follow that policy.
I called out your post as bullshit by simply highlighting 3 countries that clearly are following that policy.
How successful they are or not wasn't mentioned at all and totally irrelevant
OK. You really think in the named countries the policy is to let the virus run wild without trying to check it, I think you'll find they're social distancing, wearing masks and waiting for a vaccine!
Dear me you are tragically uninformed
Sweden’s Chief Epidemiologist Anders Tegnell is unconvinced by the evidence for masks and doesn't recommend them. (let alone make laws to wear them like the UK).
In fact they have stated all the hard factual data has proved infections have increased since the use of Masks (including in the UK). If you listen to Swedens politicians they also believe using Masks gives people a false sense of security / they feel they are protected and all social distancing goes out of the window (this is clear to see in any supermarket in the UK).
So instead in Sweden the emphasis is on keeping a safe distance from others.
Even when Fox news went to Sweden at the height of the Pandemic in April / May the vast majority of Swede's weren't wearing a mask (the news videos are online to watch).
Fast forward to today if you go to Stockholm you will struggle to find many people wearing masks. The tiny minority that do do it through personal choice.
KJ
"
Do you believe that. Do you really think masks don't work. Numbers are rising in Sweden too, you do realise that? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *JCouple
over a year ago
Teesside |
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
I'm glad you said it
My barrel is devoid of life now
No you said no government on the planet would follow that policy.
I called out your post as bullshit by simply highlighting 3 countries that clearly are following that policy.
How successful they are or not wasn't mentioned at all and totally irrelevant
OK. You really think in the named countries the policy is to let the virus run wild without trying to check it, I think you'll find they're social distancing, wearing masks and waiting for a vaccine!
Dear me you are tragically uninformed
Sweden’s Chief Epidemiologist Anders Tegnell is unconvinced by the evidence for masks and doesn't recommend them. (let alone make laws to wear them like the UK).
In fact they have stated all the hard factual data has proved infections have increased since the use of Masks (including in the UK). If you listen to Swedens politicians they also believe using Masks gives people a false sense of security / they feel they are protected and all social distancing goes out of the window (this is clear to see in any supermarket in the UK).
So instead in Sweden the emphasis is on keeping a safe distance from others.
Even when Fox news went to Sweden at the height of the Pandemic in April / May the vast majority of Swede's weren't wearing a mask (the news videos are online to watch).
Fast forward to today if you go to Stockholm you will struggle to find many people wearing masks. The tiny minority that do do it through personal choice.
KJ
Do you believe that. Do you really think masks don't work. Numbers are rising in Sweden too, you do realise that? "
I believe in science, the scientific studies conducted by respected people in their areas of expertise, peer review, cold hard data and established facts.
I give far less weight to opinions, outlandish predictions and modelling which time and time again now has been proven widely off that mark by factors of 10 and beyond.
Can you find a study where the introduction of masks reduced covid transmission and the infection numbers came down? Just 1 study / set of data please?
All of the data shows the introduction of masks made zero impact on transmission and in fact in many places transmission rates have increased. That's just the facts obviously other factors played a big role in the increased transmission.
Masks can work in a clinical setting where they are combined with ppe. The disposal masks are only to be worn for a relatively short period of time e.g. surgery and then are to be medically disposed of.
Sadly Joe public use these disposable masks time and time again.
I loose count of the amount of people in town that walk about the high street with their mask stuffed in a pocket and then pull it out and apply it as they are walking into a shop. As soon as they leave they take it off and stuff it back into a pocket. Rinse and repeat for god knows how many shops they decide to enter during that town trip.
So lets say they have covid and infected particles and saliva had been caught inside their mask (you know the inside part your not meant to touch right). Each time they fiddle with and take off their mask to stuff in a pocket those particles can be transfered onto their hands. The same hands that are then touching door handles, shop products, food items, lift buttons, cash machine screens etc etc.
2nd to this is the superman effect some people get with a mask. As soon as they mask up they don't give a fuck about the 2 meter rule (which is proven to be effective) and think nothing of encrouching people's personal space to get where they want.
Next time your out have a close look at some of the masks people wear especially the light coloured material masks, the amount of crud, food, and dirty stains on them is frightening. I dread to think what the inside of the mask looks like.
We take new sealed masks to our clients at every 121 so they can bin the one they have used for weeks on end. Some of the masks they discard for the new one are horrendous. Then again we work with people who are living in poverty so buying new masks or even been able to wash cloth masks is pretty low on their priority list.
Do I believe masks work no. Are masks a problem highly likely. Regardless its the law so Yes I wear a mask and follow all the protocols regarding using them properly sadly many people dont.
KJ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
I'm glad you said it
My barrel is devoid of life now
No you said no government on the planet would follow that policy.
I called out your post as bullshit by simply highlighting 3 countries that clearly are following that policy.
How successful they are or not wasn't mentioned at all and totally irrelevant
OK. You really think in the named countries the policy is to let the virus run wild without trying to check it, I think you'll find they're social distancing, wearing masks and waiting for a vaccine!
Dear me you are tragically uninformed
Sweden’s Chief Epidemiologist Anders Tegnell is unconvinced by the evidence for masks and doesn't recommend them. (let alone make laws to wear them like the UK).
In fact they have stated all the hard factual data has proved infections have increased since the use of Masks (including in the UK). If you listen to Swedens politicians they also believe using Masks gives people a false sense of security / they feel they are protected and all social distancing goes out of the window (this is clear to see in any supermarket in the UK).
So instead in Sweden the emphasis is on keeping a safe distance from others.
Even when Fox news went to Sweden at the height of the Pandemic in April / May the vast majority of Swede's weren't wearing a mask (the news videos are online to watch).
Fast forward to today if you go to Stockholm you will struggle to find many people wearing masks. The tiny minority that do do it through personal choice.
KJ
Do you believe that. Do you really think masks don't work. Numbers are rising in Sweden too, you do realise that?
I believe in science, the scientific studies conducted by respected people in their areas of expertise, peer review, cold hard data and established facts.
I give far less weight to opinions, outlandish predictions and modelling which time and time again now has been proven widely off that mark by factors of 10 and beyond.
Can you find a study where the introduction of masks reduced covid transmission and the infection numbers came down? Just 1 study / set of data please?
All of the data shows the introduction of masks made zero impact on transmission and in fact in many places transmission rates have increased. That's just the facts obviously other factors played a big role in the increased transmission.
Masks can work in a clinical setting where they are combined with ppe. The disposal masks are only to be worn for a relatively short period of time e.g. surgery and then are to be medically disposed of.
Sadly Joe public use these disposable masks time and time again.
I loose count of the amount of people in town that walk about the high street with their mask stuffed in a pocket and then pull it out and apply it as they are walking into a shop. As soon as they leave they take it off and stuff it back into a pocket. Rinse and repeat for god knows how many shops they decide to enter during that town trip.
So lets say they have covid and infected particles and saliva had been caught inside their mask (you know the inside part your not meant to touch right). Each time they fiddle with and take off their mask to stuff in a pocket those particles can be transfered onto their hands. The same hands that are then touching door handles, shop products, food items, lift buttons, cash machine screens etc etc.
2nd to this is the superman effect some people get with a mask. As soon as they mask up they don't give a fuck about the 2 meter rule (which is proven to be effective) and think nothing of encrouching people's personal space to get where they want.
Next time your out have a close look at some of the masks people wear especially the light coloured material masks, the amount of crud, food, and dirty stains on them is frightening. I dread to think what the inside of the mask looks like.
We take new sealed masks to our clients at every 121 so they can bin the one they have used for weeks on end. Some of the masks they discard for the new one are horrendous. Then again we work with people who are living in poverty so buying new masks or even been able to wash cloth masks is pretty low on their priority list.
Do I believe masks work no. Are masks a problem highly likely. Regardless its the law so Yes I wear a mask and follow all the protocols regarding using them properly sadly many people dont.
KJ "
I've had my mask 6 months and washed it once. I wear if I think I will get a fine, otherwise I don't because I'm not closer than a metre to someone else. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wonder why no government on the planet have chosen to go down the herd immunity road? I wonder why the vast amount of science doesn't agree with these "facts"
Probably because they've been discredited over and over and over again.
Really??
What do you think Sweden, India and Brazil are doing?
Brazil? Has had 152,000 deaths, Sweden’s is the worst out of the Scandinavian nations and India are seeing 700 deaths a day
It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
I'm glad you said it
My barrel is devoid of life now
No you said no government on the planet would follow that policy.
I called out your post as bullshit by simply highlighting 3 countries that clearly are following that policy.
How successful they are or not wasn't mentioned at all and totally irrelevant
OK. You really think in the named countries the policy is to let the virus run wild without trying to check it, I think you'll find they're social distancing, wearing masks and waiting for a vaccine!
Dear me you are tragically uninformed
Sweden’s Chief Epidemiologist Anders Tegnell is unconvinced by the evidence for masks and doesn't recommend them. (let alone make laws to wear them like the UK).
In fact they have stated all the hard factual data has proved infections have increased since the use of Masks (including in the UK). If you listen to Swedens politicians they also believe using Masks gives people a false sense of security / they feel they are protected and all social distancing goes out of the window (this is clear to see in any supermarket in the UK).
So instead in Sweden the emphasis is on keeping a safe distance from others.
Even when Fox news went to Sweden at the height of the Pandemic in April / May the vast majority of Swede's weren't wearing a mask (the news videos are online to watch).
Fast forward to today if you go to Stockholm you will struggle to find many people wearing masks. The tiny minority that do do it through personal choice.
KJ
Do you believe that. Do you really think masks don't work. Numbers are rising in Sweden too, you do realise that?
I believe in science, the scientific studies conducted by respected people in their areas of expertise, peer review, cold hard data and established facts.
I give far less weight to opinions, outlandish predictions and modelling which time and time again now has been proven widely off that mark by factors of 10 and beyond.
Can you find a study where the introduction of masks reduced covid transmission and the infection numbers came down? Just 1 study / set of data please?
All of the data shows the introduction of masks made zero impact on transmission and in fact in many places transmission rates have increased. That's just the facts obviously other factors played a big role in the increased transmission.
Masks can work in a clinical setting where they are combined with ppe. The disposal masks are only to be worn for a relatively short period of time e.g. surgery and then are to be medically disposed of.
Sadly Joe public use these disposable masks time and time again.
I loose count of the amount of people in town that walk about the high street with their mask stuffed in a pocket and then pull it out and apply it as they are walking into a shop. As soon as they leave they take it off and stuff it back into a pocket. Rinse and repeat for god knows how many shops they decide to enter during that town trip.
So lets say they have covid and infected particles and saliva had been caught inside their mask (you know the inside part your not meant to touch right). Each time they fiddle with and take off their mask to stuff in a pocket those particles can be transfered onto their hands. The same hands that are then touching door handles, shop products, food items, lift buttons, cash machine screens etc etc.
2nd to this is the superman effect some people get with a mask. As soon as they mask up they don't give a fuck about the 2 meter rule (which is proven to be effective) and think nothing of encrouching people's personal space to get where they want.
Next time your out have a close look at some of the masks people wear especially the light coloured material masks, the amount of crud, food, and dirty stains on them is frightening. I dread to think what the inside of the mask looks like.
We take new sealed masks to our clients at every 121 so they can bin the one they have used for weeks on end. Some of the masks they discard for the new one are horrendous. Then again we work with people who are living in poverty so buying new masks or even been able to wash cloth masks is pretty low on their priority list.
Do I believe masks work no. Are masks a problem highly likely. Regardless its the law so Yes I wear a mask and follow all the protocols regarding using them properly sadly many people dont.
KJ "
Here here I've been saying this for ages, they did a study on masks for influenza epidemics(this is spread similarly and is slightly more infectious)a few years back, they literally made no difference whatsoever and that was using it as you would in a theatre, used like most people and it's probably adding to infections not stopping them.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent."
Source please- this is utter bonkers science |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"To get herd immunity from this virus would require a fairly large proportion of the population to have had a recent infection. Perhaps 60% - 80% of the country having had a recent infection would have meant that our health services would have been overwhelmed before we got to herd immunity level, and tens of thousands of people would have died. We currently have about 8% of the population showing antibodies, after the deaths that we've had.
We also don't know how much immunity is possible, nor for how long. What proportion of the 8% have immunity today?
Those figures may or may not be accurate, however there is no choice but to achieve herd immunity, there never was any choice, it seems to be accepted that there are several strains now so it's likely a vaccine will provide only a partial solution covid will become just another cause of illness and death which we will adjust to. "
Please quote your source |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science"
No it's fully understood science, the higher the INFECTIOUS rate of the pathogen the higher the number of people require immunity, measles the most INFECTIOUS virus has such a high r number(around 11-12) the percentage of immunity required in the population is a minimum of 90% to stop outbreaks happening.
I'm bolding INFECTIOUS because you seem to struggle with it on the other thread, sars-cov2 has according to the WHO has an r number around 2.7-3.
If you can lower that r number via suppression them amount on natural immunity required in the population will fall (at the start of this epidemic the amount required was thought to be in the region of 55-60% due it's r number |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science"
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity."
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rHotNottsMan
over a year ago
Dubai & Nottingham |
"Immunity only works if you become truly immune It seems you can catch this thing at least twice its a common cold virus ohh look how often people get colds A message for those who don't care of they get it and care less about spreading it worry about the long term"
Some people never get coughs and common cold or maybe one every 5-10 years, they are actually quite easy to avoid if you keep your hands clean and off your face and eat properly |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?"
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients. "
Of course it matters if it's a different strain.
So decades for evidence of immunity.
Well it's hardly surprising there is no evidence to support that after 8 month lol.
A flu vaccine does not stop you getting reinfected if it's a different strain to their strains that are in this years vaccine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients. "
Yeah, they locked down during the Spanish flu in 1918 and waited for the vaccine. No, wait a minute, there was herd immunity and we moved on. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity."
Except herd immunity is how the human race still exists. It certainly isn't due to vaccines. Vaccines simply improve an individual's chance of surviving from 99.3% to 99.999%. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients.
Of course it matters if it's a different strain.
So decades for evidence of immunity.
Well it's hardly surprising there is no evidence to support that after 8 month lol.
A flu vaccine does not stop you getting reinfected if it's a different strain to their strains that are in this years vaccine."
As for covid19, we don't have evidence of immunity against reinfection from the same unmutated strain of it, so we should assume that we can get reinfected.
There are flu vaccines in trial that are planned to provide immunity against the range of influenza A, B and C types, which will be great news for improving health. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients.
Of course it matters if it's a different strain.
So decades for evidence of immunity.
Well it's hardly surprising there is no evidence to support that after 8 month lol.
A flu vaccine does not stop you getting reinfected if it's a different strain to their strains that are in this years vaccine.
As for covid19, we don't have evidence of immunity against reinfection from the same unmutated strain of it, so we should assume that we can get reinfected.
There are flu vaccines in trial that are planned to provide immunity against the range of influenza A, B and C types, which will be great news for improving health. "
I guess if you dismiss the fact that more than 30 million have caught it and when they find one person who might have caught it twice it makes the news, then you could pretend there's no evidence. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients.
Of course it matters if it's a different strain.
So decades for evidence of immunity.
Well it's hardly surprising there is no evidence to support that after 8 month lol.
A flu vaccine does not stop you getting reinfected if it's a different strain to their strains that are in this years vaccine."
So what point are you trying to make if the precise strain is so important? It just proves herd immunity doesn't work either? And the flu vaccine actually protects you from several strains, they take the ones most likely to be prevalent each year and tailor the vaccine. There are too many strains of flu to do all of them, largely due to the amount of time it has had to mutate. We do not want that situation with Covid. I also don't get your last point, I am completely unsurprised that we don't have long term evidence yet, which is again exactly why you don't just give up trying to control a brand new pathogen, take the brakes app and let it rip through the population and then figure out just how much permanent damage it does later.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients.
Yeah, they locked down during the Spanish flu in 1918 and waited for the vaccine. No, wait a minute, there was herd immunity and we moved on."
And in excess of 50 million people died before the disease burnt itself out and mutated to less fatal strains. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients.
Yeah, they locked down during the Spanish flu in 1918 and waited for the vaccine. No, wait a minute, there was herd immunity and we moved on.
And in excess of 50 million people died before the disease burnt itself out and mutated to less fatal strains. "
So herd immunity then? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients.
Of course it matters if it's a different strain.
So decades for evidence of immunity.
Well it's hardly surprising there is no evidence to support that after 8 month lol.
A flu vaccine does not stop you getting reinfected if it's a different strain to their strains that are in this years vaccine.
As for covid19, we don't have evidence of immunity against reinfection from the same unmutated strain of it, so we should assume that we can get reinfected.
There are flu vaccines in trial that are planned to provide immunity against the range of influenza A, B and C types, which will be great news for improving health.
I guess if you dismiss the fact that more than 30 million have caught it and when they find one person who might have caught it twice it makes the news, then you could pretend there's no evidence."
Published research evidence in reputable scientific journals is the only credible evidence, amidst a swirling sea of hearsay, supposition, fake news etc.
The herd immunity, Barrington debate etc aren't plausible plans for us, as experts have outlined |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity."
Vaccines are completely and utterly of irrelevance if you cannot get immunity from this virus, a vaccine only does the exact same thing as catching it, now if this virus is completely immune from immunity then we're all fucked and it's the only virus in the entire world that acts in this way.
Now yes there may be some outliers,ie a few people who catch it twice but that's no different to ANY virus, a few people are capable of catching chicken pox twice or mumps or measels or polio, that doesn't mean the vast majority will.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients.
Of course it matters if it's a different strain.
So decades for evidence of immunity.
Well it's hardly surprising there is no evidence to support that after 8 month lol.
A flu vaccine does not stop you getting reinfected if it's a different strain to their strains that are in this years vaccine.
As for covid19, we don't have evidence of immunity against reinfection from the same unmutated strain of it, so we should assume that we can get reinfected.
There are flu vaccines in trial that are planned to provide immunity against the range of influenza A, B and C types, which will be great news for improving health.
I guess if you dismiss the fact that more than 30 million have caught it and when they find one person who might have caught it twice it makes the news, then you could pretend there's no evidence.
Published research evidence in reputable scientific journals is the only credible evidence, amidst a swirling sea of hearsay, supposition, fake news etc.
The herd immunity, Barrington debate etc aren't plausible plans for us, as experts have outlined "
Well in that case find me some published peer reviewed evidence that says herd immunity won't work.
I double dare you  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients.
Of course it matters if it's a different strain.
So decades for evidence of immunity.
Well it's hardly surprising there is no evidence to support that after 8 month lol.
A flu vaccine does not stop you getting reinfected if it's a different strain to their strains that are in this years vaccine.
As for covid19, we don't have evidence of immunity against reinfection from the same unmutated strain of it, so we should assume that we can get reinfected.
There are flu vaccines in trial that are planned to provide immunity against the range of influenza A, B and C types, which will be great news for improving health.
I guess if you dismiss the fact that more than 30 million have caught it and when they find one person who might have caught it twice it makes the news, then you could pretend there's no evidence.
Published research evidence in reputable scientific journals is the only credible evidence, amidst a swirling sea of hearsay, supposition, fake news etc.
The herd immunity, Barrington debate etc aren't plausible plans for us, as experts have outlined
Well in that case find me some published peer reviewed evidence that says herd immunity won't work.
I double dare you "
I dont know.
But my wife wants my cock so I bid you goodnight |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We'll reach infection levels needed for a form of herd immunity long before any vaccine will be in play.
What we should be doing is sheltering the vulnerable as best as possible in free hotels and single occupancy housing, the immediate starting off redemsivir or whatever the antiviral is caused which can much reduce symptoms in the vulnerable, this should be fine with immediate effect if we're really serious about reducing hospitalisations and deaths while maintaining a level of economy needed to pay for all these measures."
WHO study just concluded that Redemsivir has no effect in reducing Covid mortality. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients.
Yeah, they locked down during the Spanish flu in 1918 and waited for the vaccine. No, wait a minute, there was herd immunity and we moved on."
50 million people died - mostly people in their prime. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The percentage infected required for herd immunity reduces as the R number reduces. Also it is reduced due to non homogeneity of the population. Ie some are meeting many people and are quick to catch and spread it, others mostly isolate. This reduces the required percentage down to as little as 17 to 40 percent.
Source please- this is utter bonkers science
Here is some more understandable information on this.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/health-52473523
It's largely a mute point at this time as there is no current vaccines and no long term evidence that supports natural immunity. Therefore without either of these, there is no herd immunity.
Can you pint in the direction of a source that says someone has caught the same strain twice.
What do you define as longterm evidence ?
It is irrelevant if it was the same strain or not, the fact is that they caught it twice. Therefore their immune system did not prevent them from getting re infected. The more infections, means the greater the chance of even more mutations leading to further strains. Yet another reason to try to minimise infections before they get out of control. As for long term evidence, this it typically measured in a minimum of years, and preferably decades before long term conclusions can be drawn. Especially if the virus has the ability to persist in pockets of the bodies tissues as is starting to be suspected for long Covid patients.
Yeah, they locked down during the Spanish flu in 1918 and waited for the vaccine. No, wait a minute, there was herd immunity and we moved on.
And in excess of 50 million people died before the disease burnt itself out and mutated to less fatal strains.
So herd immunity then?"
Good to see the death toll means nothing to you. Callousness of the highest order. Spanish flu and herd immunity is also irrelevant in terms of Covid 19, they are not the same disease and the human body reacts differently to them. It's really not a hard principal to grasp, especially given the number of times it's been explained to you. Thankfully you aren't in a position to actually influence policy, otherwise I can see you bringing in other great ideas, like a new and exciting version of the Hunger Games for instance. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
