Huh? Premise is wrong. "Current infections" doesn't tell you how many have already recovered and developed immunity. How does anyone not understand that?
He didn't say anything about "60%."Given people generally seem to take a month to recover (or die) from the virus (though, in fact, over 40 Diamond Princess passengers are still ill after 3 months), if a snapshot reveals only a 2.5% infection rate after 3 months, are you really suggesting it's likely that it's gone through 60% of the population in that preceding 3 months?
How would that work, mathematically?
The people who are "still ill" months later are almost certainly ill due to lung (and other organ) damage. If they were having that much trouble fighting the virus they should be dead I think.Given people generally seem to take a month to recover (or die) from the virus (though, in fact, over 40 Diamond Princess passengers are still ill after 3 months), if a snapshot reveals only a 2.5% infection rate after 3 months, are you really suggesting it's likely that it's gone through 60% of the population in that preceding 3 months?
How would that work, mathematically?
Evil genius!
New and improved hybrid viruses from different species? Good grief.
He didn't say anything about "60%."
He's just pointing out an obvious error. I don't know if it is an error with the person writing this up using the wrong words (most likely) or a procedural error with the research. Either way, it doesn't matter. What matters is that anyone seeing it knows to look deeper if they care.
Ichinisan didn't say anything about herd immunity either. ...but, yes, "consider mathematics" and we know that a snapshot of current infections really wouldn't tell us much even when considering progress toward herd immunity. "Reaching" herd immunity would imply that we are not there yet and things would obviously slow as you got there.60% is the level generally considered necessary for 'herd immunity'. If you 'look deeper' you'd consider the mathematics and ask how you could have achieved 'herd immunity', i.e 60 having had it and recovered when a snapshot shows only a 2.5% infection level after 3 months.
But even assuming that immunity is long-lasting, a very large number of people must be infected to reach the herd immunity threshold required. Given that current estimates suggest roughly 0.5 percent to 1 percent of all infections are fatal, that means a lot of deaths.
Perhaps most important to understand, the virus doesn’t magically disappear when the herd immunity threshold is reached. That’s not when things stop — it’s only when they start to slow down.
Once enough immunity has been built in the population, each person will infect fewer than one other person, so a new epidemic cannot start afresh. But an epidemic that is already underway will continue to spread. If 100,000 people are infectious at the peak and they each infect 0.9 people, that’s still 90,000 new infections, and more after that. A runaway train doesn’t stop the instant the track begins to slope uphill, and a rapidly spreading virus doesn’t stop right when herd immunity is attained
I think we all agree.As I posted in P&N, reaching herd immunity levels is not some magical bullet to stopping this pandemic and is actually a pretty horrific policy to pursue as scores more would have to be infected and potentially die.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/01/opinion/sunday/coronavirus-herd-immunity.html
Fauci says there is a chance the new virus vaccine may not provide immunity for very long -
Dr. Anthony Fauci says there's a chance coronavirus vaccine may not provide immunity for very long
If Covid-19 acts like other coronaviruses, "it likely isn't going to be a long duration of immunity," Dr. Fauci warns.www.cnbc.com
This is a possibility but not really a huge problem I don't think especially if more convenient ways of administering the vaccines at scale are deployed like the micro needle patches. Slapping one of those on every 6 months or year would be a trivial matter.
if we all stuck to it the virus could go extinct.
But behind the scenes, it was a much different story, one of significant delays by China and considerable frustration among WHO officials over not getting the information they needed to fight the spread of the deadly virus, The Associated Press has found.
Despite the plaudits, China in fact sat on releasing the genetic map, or genome, of the virus for more than a week after three different government labs had fully decoded the information. Tight controls on information and competition within the Chinese public health system were to blame, according to dozens of interviews and internal documents
I do see a bit of a flaw in thisRegardless even if it is a yearly or semi yearly vaccination that would be a huge improvement and if we all stuck to it the virus could go extinct.
I do see a bit of a flaw in this
Yeah, I suppose I do remember getting tested for TB when we'd move to another country when I was a kid.It's probably not required for every single person in the country to be inoculated to achieve eradication. The virus would eventually dead end in the unprotected part of the population presuming natural immunity lasts sufficiently long. Just require visitors and returning citizens to have proof of a current vaccination to avoid imported cases.
So much time and energy wasted on a relatively implausible treatment. Highlights one of the huge downsides to science directed by public megaphoneJust stick a fork in the anti-malarial drugs, they don't help.
Brazil has one of the, if not THE, worst rate in the world for percentage of positive cases VS conducted tests, with 63.94% of all tests coming back as positive, according to worldometer.Per Al Jazeera, Brazil has 1,473 deaths from the virus within the last 24 hours.
Yeah, but are they only testing people they have reason to believe may have it?Brazil has one of the, if not THE, worst rate in the world for percentage of positive cases VS conducted tests, with 63.94% of all tests coming back as positive, according to worldometer.
Here are some percentages of other countries:
- USA --- 9.72%
- Portugal --- 3.89%
- Sweden --- 15.59%
- Russia --- 3.73%
- Spain --- 7.07%
- UK --- 5.43%
- India --- 5.38%
- Mexico --- 33.65%
This is a chart i made a while back with infected cases in 13 countries, including Brazil, USA, Sweden, New Zealand and others (click for full picture):
View attachment 22351
The Y-axis in this chart is logarithmic base 2, starting @ 40 so every horizontal line represents a doubling of the previous one, but the purpose is to show how horizontal a country's curve is: the more horizontal it is, the better whatever measures that have been put into effect are working. Even though USA has a lot more cases than Brazil, Brazil has by far the worst curve of the chart.
There may be other countries like Mexico, India, Peru that have similar curves to Brazil's but i haven't included them in the chart so i can't say for sure.
Yeah, but are they only testing people they have reason to believe may have it?
No. I can get tested for free today with no reason and my state encourages it because they wanted to get testing numbers up. Many smaller countries like Iceland and Luxembourg had huge percentages of per-capita testing very early on. China has been testing entire cities.And so is every other country, no?