OT Coronavirus: America in chaos, News and Updates. One million Americans dead and counting (2 Viewers)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

The "herd immunity" development plans I've seen are nowhere near as reckless and careless as you suggest. Generally the idea is to isolate the high-risk population, and let the low-risk population develop herd immunity, thus mitigating hospitalizations and avoiding "crashing" the health care system.

I know...I've read a couple of the plans. I was explaining to TB how the 2.2M dead number was derived

by the way, those 'controlled' herd plans seem pretty unworkable to me, besides the fact we don't know enough about the virus to have any confidence they would work in the first place

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/25/us/who-immunity-antibodies-covid-19/index.html

any hope of herd immunity is based upon assumption at this point
 
seems you're advocating for the path of 'herd immunity'. Basically, let the virus run wild, do nothing, allow the health care system & hospitals everywhere to crash & burn, and hopefully develop herd immunity. But to have effective herd immunity, the standard is a minimum of around 75-80% of the population infected. 4 out of 5 people with the antibodies that make them immune. That's how that 2.2M number came about, and it was with an assumption of anywhere from 0.7-1.0% mortality

in other words, you're ridiculing the 2.2M dead as some kind of political overreaction or panic, then immediately turning around and advocating for the policy that could make that number of dead a reality

and the foundation of that plan is cleared patients developing an immunity; and there is mounting evidence that individual immunity might be either weak or non-existent in a significant number of the people who have had the virus. Basically, it's possible that we will never develop herd immunity to Covid without a vaccine. Which could mean that implementing a policy of developing herd immunity would be chasing a mirage
You're assertion that I'm ridiculing 2.2M dead is just a strawman. I'm saying that those models were inaccurate and took a lot of assumptions to get there. Most herd immunity plans aren't nearly as bad as you want to make it out to be either that's just full of hyperbole. I said exactly what I meant to say if herd immunity was/is possible the way it's been handled it has made it so that it won't occur for months (if it ever does). If they wanted to do a lockdown to kill it then a hard quarantine made more sense then what they did. The half-sies plan ensured that this will be a months-long or year+ phenomenon. The way it's been handled has ensured that it will be months and months and months of it.
 
Why is it a herd and not a pack? Dogs travel in packs. Pack immunity has to be better than herd immunity.
 
I know...I've read a couple of the plans. I was explaining to TB how the 2.2M dead number was derived

by the way, those 'controlled' herd plans seem pretty unworkable to me, besides the fact we don't know enough about the virus to have any confidence they would work in the first place

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/25/us/who-immunity-antibodies-covid-19/index.html

any hope of herd immunity is based upon assumption at this point
So is any hope of developing a vaccine or that the virus will just 'die out'.
 
Do you know the actual context of that quote? It actually meant almost the opposite of what most people think it meant.



thanks for that....I didn't know the context, and It's kind of important; and a little LOL at such noble words originating in a tax debate. (and reading up on William Penn & his family is interesting)

anyway, Franklin may have been fully in favor of stay-at-home orders

ditto. Thanks. Like most, i had no idea.
 
You're assertion that I'm ridiculing 2.2M dead is just a strawman. I'm saying that those models were inaccurate and took a lot of assumptions to get there.

how do you know they were inaccurate?

we're a long way from being thru this pandemic and being safe on the other side.

If they wanted to do a lockdown to kill it then a hard quarantine made more sense then what they did.

there was no plan to 'kill' the virus. All the restrictions were about keeping the health care system from crashing and trying to save lives; run the clock a little till some effective treatments were available. Make a margin to collect and collate data in order to set good policy. Basically, we were caught like deer in headlights and the stay-at-home orders and other restrictions were the best tools we had in a very limited toolbox

The half-sies plan ensured that this will be a months-long or year+ phenomenon. The way it's been handled has ensured that it will be months and months and months of it.

stay-at-home orders have no impact on developing treatments or vaccines. And if there's no herd immunity possible, the "months and months and months" of this was always inevitable
 
how do you know they were inaccurate?

we're a long way from being thru this pandemic and being safe on the other side.



there was no plan to 'kill' the virus. All the restrictions were about keeping the health care system from crashing and trying to save lives; run the clock a little till some effective treatments were available. Make a margin to collect and collate data in order to set good policy. Basically, we were caught like deer in headlights and the stay-at-home orders and other restrictions were the best tools we had in a very limited toolbox



stay-at-home orders have no impact on developing treatments or vaccines. And if there's no herd immunity possible, the "months and months and months" of this was always inevitable
So you're saying they handled it correctly.
 


be_like_sweden.jpg
 
So is any hope of developing a vaccine or that the virus will just 'die out'.

I haven't seen anybody claiming the virus will 'die out'...colds and flus are still with us, year after year

and yes, developing a vaccine is not guaranteed. But at this point it sure seems to be a much better bet than herd immunity (or pack immunity).

I'm not sure what you're arguing for. I mean, Ive seen you criticize the stay-at-home and closed business policies before so I'm assuming you want restrictions lifted? But to what end? If there's no immunity for a significant number of the people who get Covid, and only short term (as in weeks) for most others, the economy will just crater further. Surge after surge while the death toll mounts

I think this gets back to what Dr. Fauci (and many others) have been saying for weeks: we need more data before we can implement good policy.

in the meantime, while we play it safe, to a degree, there is hopeful news on the treatment side, and a little positive vibe on the vaccine track
 
So you're saying they handled it correctly.

depends on who you're talking about. The trump administration?...nope. the CDC? many demerits...Cuomo? quite badly at first....Fauci? yes....the left coast governors? yes...the idiots packing assault weapons at the protests? no because they are idiots....Sly with all his jokes and memes? yeah, but don't pet him and encourage more leg humping
 
No one tell them Sweden is Socialist!

or that their death rate per 1M is even worse than ours. (they are #10 on the worst in the world by that measure, we are #16). Israel, that has about the same population (8.5M vs 10M for Sweden) has 1/10 the death rate as Sweden.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top