5 Filters

'herd immunity' - clarification request

Please help.

I’ve never understood the notion that herd immunity is a disgraceful approach to a virus threat.

As far as I have understood, surely it is the only approach.

One approach is: let the virus rip, and you will achieve herd immunity (all through natural immunity), with casualties on the way.

The other approach is: slow the virus spread, to give time for vaccine development and deployment; and then you will achieve herd immunity (some natural, some through vaccine), with casualties on the way.

So surely herd immunity is the only way to defeat a virus.

1 Like

Hi @rippon

As far as I understand our predicament, you’re completely correct. The questions pretty much all focus on this piece:

This (I think) was the original Dom Cummings plan (perhaps a little more gung-ho than that). The question is how to do that? The (albeit problematic) modelling that was done in march showed that there was almost no way to do that, given what we knew about the virus, without totally overwhelming our already gutted NHS… We couldn’t flatten the curve enough to avert a crisis.

The very situation we now find ourselves in.

As far as I know, there are three proposed approaches

1 - the great Barrington approach.
2 - the current government lockdown approach
3 - the Indy SAGE, locally run test, trace and supported isolation.

I’ve argued here several times that I think the Indy SAGE approach is by far the best of the three. Others have a different opinion…

Whatever happens, ultimately enough people will get sick, recover and become immune (we hope), or get vaccinated and be immune (although we know the vaccine doesn’t give you immunity…), or die. The sum total of which is that we ultimately gain herd immunity…

If the world had acted fast, in the way that New Zealand did, for example, we could have completely eradicated SC2 within about 3 months, and now we wouldn’t be facing this conversation. That’s exactly what we did with the original Sars.

We chose not to do that this time, however.

Cheers
PP

Surely the virus cannot be erradicated anywhere. Surely NZ simply has, currently, zero cases. But sooner or later the virus will pop up there. Surely NZ have simply flattened the curve so extremely that covid cannot make any dent of strain upon their NHS. Presumably, NZ, too, ultimately want sufficient people to catch and recover from SC2 so that, for them too, the virus will simply be part of the background noise in public health.

The only way known to ecologists for a novel pathogen to be overcome in its initial attack is for the already strong immune systems of the host creatures to fight off the pathogen with any previously-acquired immunities which happen to fit it fairly well. This is often a bloody affair: lots of individuals with insufficient personal immune strength succumbing, whilst others recover, with more immune responses now included in their arsenals, specifically for the new ill, which thus sinks back into endemic status, and becomes a minor recurring nuisance, easily dealt with by the newly-acquired herd immunity. Like common colds.

The immune survivors of the original cull then breed back to balanced-population level, passing on their library of immunities to their offspring.

I watched this process happen with rabbits and myxomatosis, and I’m still watching it with elms coming back from dutch elm disease.

Even as a mere witness, the natural process is traumatic, but rarely - never? - to extinction level. The problem for hom sap is that we - at least in the sick-souled West - have a ridiculous attitude to death; knowing it’s universally inevitable, but wild-goose-chasing for a total eradication - which is never going to happen.

The best approach to these matters is, as Pam Popper discusses in the video you posted, R, genuine public health work, as a social good, which prepares as many individuals as fate will allow to meet novel pathogens with strength, leading to an eventual immunity-giving victory. Added to this approach needs to be some degree of protection for vulnerable individuals, as far as is practicable, though it will always be imperfect.

But another missing ingredient in the current disastrous approach which we’re suffering is to get our heads straight about death. Part of the deal of being alive is that you avoid death every way you can. But you acknowledge that it’s inevitable and necessary. It is in fact what makes the life-deal worthwhile, because it offers repeated re-runs of lives, as many as your soul wants, aiming always to do better next time than previous times in being what the Yiddishers call a gut mensch.

Seen in this light, the sober, wise approach to dealing humanely and effectively with illnesses becomes self-evident: Prevent, ameliorate and cure as much as is practical, using whatever is found in clinical practice to work. And work energetically at all times to promote sound public health, based on sound diet and lifestyle. And prevent commercialising gangsters from ever perverting public health policy as it has been perverted so badly in the West.

Do this, and most vaccines would die of lack of need. Humankind’s supposedly ‘improved’ ways to combat illness simply don’t measure up to Gaia’s ancient, anciently-refined way. We get slapped down savagely - as now - whenever we refuse like dolts to listen to her.

2 Likes

hi @rippon

I think it could have been. The way coronaviruses seem to spread (i.e. overuse of superspreaders, only aerosolized in certain special conditions etc) means that had we acted as NZ did, early on in April, all affected countries could have eradicated this virus and it would now be gone. The original SARS virus is now gone - it doesn’t exist anywhere on the planet. We could have wiped out this one too… the two seem to have been pretty similar.

Of course maybe I’m wrong, and we wouldn’t have. But we would have certainly flattened the curve to the point of being almost non-existent at that point, and we could have investigated all treatment options at our leisure. If we had tried to follow the Indy Sage advice in April we could have avoided almost all lockdowns while working on this problem.

However. Not only has the horse bolted that particular stable, it burned down the stable on the way out…

I am rather doubtful. Could it really have been eradicated in, say, China? It’s one thing to stop it dead in a fairly thinly populated island country far from just about anywhere. On top of that, I have many times now read reports that there were cases in the US and Italy already back in 2019. Given the way it spreads, it seems to me highly unlikely it could have been stopped the way the original SARS apparently was.

Secondly, at what cost? Is a strongly authoritarian state that checks everyone’s movements, restricting it when deemed necessary a way to live? https://thegreggjarrett.com/new-zealand-announces-quarantine-camps-where-positive-patients-will-be-forcibly-placed/

Yeah, you could be right W. As Nick Taleb has said, some problems can only really be solved in the egg. Once it hatches it gets exponentially worse.

I did read that Scotland had effectively eradicated the virus by May/June and then reimported it via the flight corridors “air bridges” (which were, of course meaningless from a scientific point of view, just like the “eat out to help out” scheme). The lack of quarantine meant that they just got sucked back down.

I think a concerted effort could have stopped it globally. But, perhaps not. I know that we never tried that, preferring to go straight for a “managed herd immunity” strategy and then actively stopping the fledgling track and trace system we had at the time, instead of quickly building up capacity.

As for forced quarantine, personally I think that’s the least harmful solution. Those that got seriously ill after being infected were always heading to hospital anyway, and at least this way there will be a bed for them. For those that don’t get (very) sick, then a fully paid 10-14 day stay at home or in a hotel or similar, on full salary and free meals delivered is the price to pay. This way everyone else lives normal lives.

Local restaurants, hotels etc could have had extra business instead of closing down. We could have had an army of local people running the track and trace, either paid or volunteer, checking on those in quarantine, making sure all is well. Life for everyone else is minimally impacted. Hospitals are not overrun and after 10-14 days you come out hopefully immune having infected zero other people. Maybe you get a medal :wink:

I don’t know. Personally I would have gladly accepted that “regime”.

In any case, it’s sort of moot. We did none of that, preferring the questionable policy of lockdowns and a devastated health system… It’s not entirely moot though. We still need a plan to come into effect in 3-5 weeks from today, when the surge through the hospitals calms down and case numbers start to come way back down. What will likely happen, based on our historically stellar performance, is that the gov will ease up restrictions and cases will start to rise again into yet another wave while we desperately try and plug as many people with our experimental vaccine as possible…

Personally, I’d like a better strategy than the rinse and repeat cycle we seem such on. I doubt that will happen though…

PS - is also worth repeating that we seem to have a reasonably effective treatment protocol that should definitely be implemented too. Vit C/D + ivermectin + blood thinners and steroids for those in hospital and the other bits and pieces that seem to work. We could have this situation in hand, even if we didn’t fully eradicate it…

Rinse and repeat is music to the power junkies. They’re loving the feel of enhanced control over the ghastly plebs which they’re getting right now. Right on cue, comes the ‘news’ babble this past couple of days about stricter policing of house-arrest scoffers: ‘Get used to being ordered about by goons in black, plebs! Just shut it, pay the fines, and do as you’re told!’

Oh the bliss of living in a state with a clearly-defined basic constitution and bill of rights. Though in that other place across the Atlantic which actually has these things, the outcome doesn’t seem much batter.

1 Like