3 ms·

"Second, flattening the curve assumes that you actually don’t go too far and that much of the population actually becomes infected and then immune. Immunity fro

by Zenst 7y ago

"Second, flattening the curve assumes that you actually don’t go too far and that much of the population actually becomes infected and then immune. Immunity from Covid-19 is still an open scientific question but, let’s assume that is more likely to be true than not. If you reduce the infection rate too far, then most of the population does not become infected and that means that once you stop policies such as social distancing the virus can emerge once more and we all have to do this again." So timing of such measures important and too early can be more damaging than too late, overall. Guess more eye's will be upon the UK now after reading this.

eecc 7y ago
And the NL. Seems that Rutte (NL prime minister) is betting the farm on herd immunization and minimizing economic disruption while letting the virus spread “under control”. If it sounds a lot like the Chernobyl script it’s because it is.
- Zenst 7y ago
  They are going for managed infection of those who need medical intervention with the majority not needing such intervention. Ergo, managing capacity in a way that is mindful that winter 20/21 will come around faster than we realise. After all the West has just entered spring, so 6 months from now we are in Autumn and the seasonal impacts like normal flu etc start to traction up again. May well be a case sadly to say that every extra death now, will mean two or more less deaths in the comming winter. Sadly it may well get right down to that uncomfortable truth. Hard to say and honestly, not sure how anybody could articulate that without upsetting anybody in some way, shape or form. But that does seem to be the jist of it.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
notahacker 7y ago
The logic of the UK position is well articulated in this very HN-friendly article by a UK epidemiologist unaffiliated with the govt scientific advice team [complete with graphs, the Python code of his illustratory models and an appropriate caveat about the magnitude of the uncertainties of the assumptions the scientific advisory team's models will have made] https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/thomas.house/blog/modelling-herd-immunity.html https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/thomas.house/bl... nb the UK has since issued stronger isolation guidelines and downplayed herd immunity in the media. Longer paper about their current model https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s...
- baq 7y ago
  the article hints at a solution: > The reason that this happens is that social distancing measures do not lead to herd immunity, so once they are lifted the epidemic starts again. In the absence of a vaccine, it is therefore meaningless to speak about whether a policy 'aims' to get herd immunity or not, since every country in the world will reach herd immunity unless it is able to implement social distancing for an indefinite period of time. i predict this is exactly what will happen: indefinite social distancing. impact may be reduced with fast tests and large scale testing so isolation and contact quarantining is immediate.
  - notahacker 7y ago
    It's plausible that COVID-19 will lead to behavioural change around hygiene and remote work, greater travel restrictions and possibly even a degree of acceptance of periodic lockdowns, but the idea humanity as a whole is going to permanently shift towards social distancing after millennia of doing the opposite stretches credulity. At risk groups moving towards social distancing, maybe [for some old people that won't even be much of a change], but that's where the theoretical possibility of herd immunity of the general population not in permanent isolation comes into play.
    - baq 7y ago
      indefinite does not mean infinite. effectively until a vaccine is deployed globally or global herd immunity is achieved after ten years of pandemic or however long it takes.
      - notahacker 7y ago
        One of the few things epidemiologists can be certain of in their assumptions is that our economy and society won't sustain indefinite lockdowns. Extended localised lockdowns, until R0 drops below 1, yes. Repeated localized lockdowns, maybe but decreasingly so. Let's wait until we have a vaccine or something, no.

by Zenst 7y ago

eecc 7y ago

And the NL. Seems that Rutte (NL prime minister) is betting the farm on herd immunization and minimizing economic disruption while letting the virus spread “under control”. If it sounds a lot like the Chernobyl script it’s because it is.

Zenst 7y ago
They are going for managed infection of those who need medical intervention with the majority not needing such intervention. Ergo, managing capacity in a way that is mindful that winter 20/21 will come around faster than we realise. After all the West has just entered spring, so 6 months from now we are in Autumn and the seasonal impacts like normal flu etc start to traction up again. May well be a case sadly to say that every extra death now, will mean two or more less deaths in the comming winter. Sadly it may well get right down to that uncomfortable truth. Hard to say and honestly, not sure how anybody could articulate that without upsetting anybody in some way, shape or form. But that does seem to be the jist of it.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

notahacker 7y ago

The logic of the UK position is well articulated in this very HN-friendly article by a UK epidemiologist unaffiliated with the govt scientific advice team [complete with graphs, the Python code of his illustratory models and an appropriate caveat about the magnitude of the uncertainties of the assumptions the scientific advisory team's models will have made] https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/thomas.house/blog/modelling-herd-immunity.html https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/thomas.house/bl... nb the UK has since issued stronger isolation guidelines and downplayed herd immunity in the media. Longer paper about their current model https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s...

baq 7y ago
the article hints at a solution: > The reason that this happens is that social distancing measures do not lead to herd immunity, so once they are lifted the epidemic starts again. In the absence of a vaccine, it is therefore meaningless to speak about whether a policy 'aims' to get herd immunity or not, since every country in the world will reach herd immunity unless it is able to implement social distancing for an indefinite period of time. i predict this is exactly what will happen: indefinite social distancing. impact may be reduced with fast tests and large scale testing so isolation and contact quarantining is immediate.
- notahacker 7y ago
  It's plausible that COVID-19 will lead to behavioural change around hygiene and remote work, greater travel restrictions and possibly even a degree of acceptance of periodic lockdowns, but the idea humanity as a whole is going to permanently shift towards social distancing after millennia of doing the opposite stretches credulity. At risk groups moving towards social distancing, maybe [for some old people that won't even be much of a change], but that's where the theoretical possibility of herd immunity of the general population not in permanent isolation comes into play.
  - baq 7y ago
    indefinite does not mean infinite. effectively until a vaccine is deployed globally or global herd immunity is achieved after ten years of pandemic or however long it takes.
    - notahacker 7y ago
      One of the few things epidemiologists can be certain of in their assumptions is that our economy and society won't sustain indefinite lockdowns. Extended localised lockdowns, until R0 drops below 1, yes. Repeated localized lockdowns, maybe but decreasingly so. Let's wait until we have a vaccine or something, no.