Another thing that is annoying as hell, is people running around talking about herd immunity as the end point to open things up. Herd immunity right now is not really a useful concept. It is a simply a measure of how many people have got infected and recovered. At some point when a significant majority of the population has been infected and recovered, likely 70-95% them the virus no longer would spread effectively. How is that useful.
If there was a vaccine then there could be immunity without an infection first. But a vaccine produced so quickly is sketchy to me. There simply isn’t enough of a clinically observed window to prove it’s safety.
The whole concept of herd immunity being useful is only in the setting of a vaccine, and mostly meaningless even in that context. If everyone gets the vaccine they developed their own immunity, they don’t need protection from herd immunity. Well, that’s not 100% true. Anti-Vaccer’s do benefit in the sense that there is less exposure risk in the population. But talking about herd immunity as some meaningful endpoint or strategy to get back to normal is nonsense.
Coronavirus 'disappearing' so fast Oxford vaccine has 'only 50% chance of working'
Professor Adrian Hill describes the efforts to create a vaccine as a "race against the virus disappearing, and against time".
news.sky.com
Do we even need herd immunity or a vaccine?
Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum:
Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.