7 ms·

Dutch adopt controversial ‘herd immunity’ strategy

27 points by wim 7y ago

leto_ii 7y ago
It's not yet clear to me if there's a difference between what Rutte proposed and the 'flatten the curve' strategy. Isn't it the same thing by a different name? If that's the case then they're aiming for something better controlled than in the UK, where they seem to still be in denial.
lazylizard 7y ago
S.korea, taiwan, singapore...are not "locked down" either eh?
mantap 7y ago
This "herd immunity" strategy is just a sophisticated form of denial. UK announced it on Thursday and abandoned it the following Monday. It doesn't take into account the high hospitalisation rate and the fact that mortality is a function of hospital stress.
- wartijn_ 7y ago
  The Dutch government isn't in denial though. Cafes, restaurants, schools universities and day cares are closed. Large gatherings are forbidden and people are encouraged to work from home and be sensible about having contact with other people. According to the PM, the chosen strategy should prevent both a super high hospitalization rate and a lengthy lock-down of the entire country.
  - Pecs 7y ago
    They are closed because members of the public wanted them to be closed. If you look at this https://www.elsevierweekblad.nl/nederland/achtergrond/2020/03/tijdlijn-coronacrisis-in-tweets-rivm-743404/ https://www.elsevierweekblad.nl/nederland/achtergrond/2020/0... you'll see a pattern of denial.
- desertedisland 7y ago
  You simplify too much. Hospitalisation rate (and in particular admission to ICU) + mortality rate are strongly dependendent on age and health - no children have yet died of Coronavirus. The Italians have one of the most elderly populations in the world; in the UK all of the deaths have involved people who are elderly and / or infirm. You seem to think the simple answer is blanket lockdown + quarantine. This can only delay (not stop) infection. And how long do you think your lockdown is sustainable when millions of people are going to be thrown out of work / unable to pay their bills and entire economies go into meltdown? Two months? Three at the most? What happens after that?
TeeWEE 7y ago
There are not a lot of other choices. The Netherlands is doing the same as other countries but our prime minister is more fair/ open about the virus. Yes most people will get the virus anyway, anywhere. All measures are there to "flatten the curve". https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/13/815502262/flattening-a-pandemics-curve-why-staying-home-now-can-save-lives https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/13/8155022... Netherlands has all the policies in place to flatten the curve. Work from home, schools closed, no big events. etc. Its only fair that the prime minister says: everybody will get it. heck 50% to 75% of the cases are asymptomatic.
- zozbot234 7y ago
  > Netherlands has all the policies in place to flatten the curve. Work from home, schools closed, no big events. etc. This is not nearly enough, unfortunately; we know this because other countries tried it initially and failed to keep the outbreak contained. You should stay at home as much as possible, and minimize your interactions with others if you must go out for whatever reason. Also, you should definitely be wearing protective equipment when outside the home. If only to protect others who might be vulnerable.
  - TeeWEE 7y ago
    You are describing the Dutch policy...
  - mstolpm 7y ago
    > Also, you should definitely be wearing protective equipment when outside the home. Here in Austria, you can't even get masks or single-use hand gloves anymore. And I hear the same is happening in Germany. Moreover, we are advised _not_ to buy protective gear for individual use because that is needed for workers with much exposition to other people (like cashiers in supermarkets, helpers and medial staff). We have a lockdown, so everyone should stay at home and only go outside if necessary.
    - zozbot234 7y ago
      > Moreover, we are advised _not_ to buy protective gear for individual use because that is needed for workers with much exposition to other people There's no real reason for this - not for low-grade ("surgical" or even "dust-proof") masks at least, and these are most critical in order to protect others in case you're sick and asymptomatic. Chinese suppliers are shipping those out as fast as they can make them, and many factories that normally make e.g. textiles and the like could retool and start making them if it came to that.
fyp 7y ago
China has shown that it's possible to contain the virus even though they were initially criticized for it being "draconian". They've capped out at under 100k cases (at least for the first wave) with 3k deaths: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2020_coronavirus_patients_in_China.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2020_coronavirus_patients... Imagine if china had gone for the herd immunity strategy instead. With a population of 1.4billion and letting everyone get infected you are looking at 42 million deaths. If draconian measures is what it takes, that is what the world should do.
- azepoi 7y ago
  China had no choice left because they suppressed and censored the epidemy. But after that strong measures were necessary. Other countries could have opted for the Korean or Taiwanese strategy: test early, often and broadly + quarantine suspected cases. But it's too late for that in most countries now. Confinement it is!
  - fyp 7y ago
    Confinement by itself is not enough. See Donald McNeil's interview on what china is doing: https://youtu.be/e3gCbkeARbY?t=32 https://youtu.be/e3gCbkeARbY?t=32
  - cjhopman 7y ago
    It's kind of racist to describe the chinese response as suppressing and censoring and then for others its, "well woops, we were a little slow on response".
    - pwinnski 7y ago
      The Chinese government silenced the doctor first raising the issue and blocked him from communicating about the disease. If other countries do that, then they will also be suppressing and censoring. Have other countries done that?
      - cjhopman 7y ago
pubkraal 7y ago
It seems a lot of the media is focused on the fact that people are being exposed to the virus. However, the Dutch are adopting a controlled way of doing this while protecting those at risk. All measures to limit contact are in place, in a big departure from what others who claim "herd immunity" are doing. Any comparison to the (previously?) British approach where in the weekend even concerts weren't cancelled and people are still being forced to go to the office by their employers doesn't quite hit the mark.
whb07 7y ago
This is going to be one of the costliest panics in history. A 1000 person test case was ran in isolation and they found this disease to not be very deathly, and this population was skewed toward the elderly. Half the world’s population lives in a 2 hour flight away from Wuhan, and even without testing, there have been no random spikes in deaths especially considering most of that world is significantly poorer and without proper healthcare infrastructure. The tragedy here isn’t about the immediate health impacts, of which are low, but of the second and third order effects to society and the world. That office cleaning night crew ain’t getting paid. New tax revenues to fund potential research at universities isn’t raised. Those with still less fashionable diseases, will have even less money for their cause.
- bpeebles 7y ago
  What "1000 person test case"? Every thing about what is actually happening in many places is the reverse if what you're saying.
  - whb07 7y ago
    Where’s many places ? Let me guess you’ll say Italy and err Iran? You know there’s like 200 other countries. Furthermore, there are 2 billion+ people living an hour or two away from China. Why aren’t they saying it’s end of days. Please don’t just respond with a “simple they aren’t testing”. You don’t need a test for a massive spike in deaths.
    - bpeebles 7y ago
      The specific question I asked was about the test case you mentioned since I couldn't find it with a quick search. Also, I haven't really seen anyone saying it's the end of days, but more to use the US as an example, we're trying to reduce the likely death toll of millions (330M). It's heartening that it looks there's evidence that's some natural maximum coming out of China, but some US hospitals are already close to their capacity so we're trying to avoid a medical system breakdown here. From another comment, you said why "aren’t all dead" in existing regions, when literally no one has ever said they'd all die. The most pessimistic studies I see are like, 50% of population gets it and ~5% die after the hospitals run out of capacity (and another 10% have a really, really scary few weeks), so 2.5% of the population
onyva 7y ago
They’ve just reverted.
- onyva 7y ago
  That was the UK, not NL.
RickJWagner 7y ago
Man, what a pickle. Every country, every world leader, is faced with agonizing decisions. All are shades of right/wrong. All are simply trying to do the best job they can. Not an easy time for anyone.

27 points by wim 7y ago

It's not yet clear to me if there's a difference between what Rutte proposed and the 'flatten the curve' strategy. Isn't it the same thing by a different name? If that's the case then they're aiming for something better controlled than in the UK, where they seem to still be in denial.

lazylizard 7y ago

S.korea, taiwan, singapore...are not "locked down" either eh?

mantap 7y ago

This "herd immunity" strategy is just a sophisticated form of denial. UK announced it on Thursday and abandoned it the following Monday. It doesn't take into account the high hospitalisation rate and the fact that mortality is a function of hospital stress.

wartijn_ 7y ago
The Dutch government isn't in denial though. Cafes, restaurants, schools universities and day cares are closed. Large gatherings are forbidden and people are encouraged to work from home and be sensible about having contact with other people. According to the PM, the chosen strategy should prevent both a super high hospitalization rate and a lengthy lock-down of the entire country.
- Pecs 7y ago
  They are closed because members of the public wanted them to be closed. If you look at this https://www.elsevierweekblad.nl/nederland/achtergrond/2020/03/tijdlijn-coronacrisis-in-tweets-rivm-743404/ https://www.elsevierweekblad.nl/nederland/achtergrond/2020/0... you'll see a pattern of denial.
desertedisland 7y ago
You simplify too much. Hospitalisation rate (and in particular admission to ICU) + mortality rate are strongly dependendent on age and health - no children have yet died of Coronavirus. The Italians have one of the most elderly populations in the world; in the UK all of the deaths have involved people who are elderly and / or infirm. You seem to think the simple answer is blanket lockdown + quarantine. This can only delay (not stop) infection. And how long do you think your lockdown is sustainable when millions of people are going to be thrown out of work / unable to pay their bills and entire economies go into meltdown? Two months? Three at the most? What happens after that?

TeeWEE 7y ago

There are not a lot of other choices. The Netherlands is doing the same as other countries but our prime minister is more fair/ open about the virus. Yes most people will get the virus anyway, anywhere. All measures are there to "flatten the curve". https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/13/815502262/flattening-a-pandemics-curve-why-staying-home-now-can-save-lives https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/03/13/8155022... Netherlands has all the policies in place to flatten the curve. Work from home, schools closed, no big events. etc. Its only fair that the prime minister says: everybody will get it. heck 50% to 75% of the cases are asymptomatic.

zozbot234 7y ago
> Netherlands has all the policies in place to flatten the curve. Work from home, schools closed, no big events. etc. This is not nearly enough, unfortunately; we know this because other countries tried it initially and failed to keep the outbreak contained. You should stay at home as much as possible, and minimize your interactions with others if you must go out for whatever reason. Also, you should definitely be wearing protective equipment when outside the home. If only to protect others who might be vulnerable.
- TeeWEE 7y ago
  You are describing the Dutch policy...
- mstolpm 7y ago
  > Also, you should definitely be wearing protective equipment when outside the home. Here in Austria, you can't even get masks or single-use hand gloves anymore. And I hear the same is happening in Germany. Moreover, we are advised _not_ to buy protective gear for individual use because that is needed for workers with much exposition to other people (like cashiers in supermarkets, helpers and medial staff). We have a lockdown, so everyone should stay at home and only go outside if necessary.
  - zozbot234 7y ago
    > Moreover, we are advised _not_ to buy protective gear for individual use because that is needed for workers with much exposition to other people There's no real reason for this - not for low-grade ("surgical" or even "dust-proof") masks at least, and these are most critical in order to protect others in case you're sick and asymptomatic. Chinese suppliers are shipping those out as fast as they can make them, and many factories that normally make e.g. textiles and the like could retool and start making them if it came to that.

fyp 7y ago

China has shown that it's possible to contain the virus even though they were initially criticized for it being "draconian". They've capped out at under 100k cases (at least for the first wave) with 3k deaths: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2020_coronavirus_patients_in_China.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2020_coronavirus_patients... Imagine if china had gone for the herd immunity strategy instead. With a population of 1.4billion and letting everyone get infected you are looking at 42 million deaths. If draconian measures is what it takes, that is what the world should do.

azepoi 7y ago
China had no choice left because they suppressed and censored the epidemy. But after that strong measures were necessary. Other countries could have opted for the Korean or Taiwanese strategy: test early, often and broadly + quarantine suspected cases. But it's too late for that in most countries now. Confinement it is!
- fyp 7y ago
  Confinement by itself is not enough. See Donald McNeil's interview on what china is doing: https://youtu.be/e3gCbkeARbY?t=32 https://youtu.be/e3gCbkeARbY?t=32
- cjhopman 7y ago
  It's kind of racist to describe the chinese response as suppressing and censoring and then for others its, "well woops, we were a little slow on response".
  - pwinnski 7y ago
    The Chinese government silenced the doctor first raising the issue and blocked him from communicating about the disease. If other countries do that, then they will also be suppressing and censoring. Have other countries done that?
    - cjhopman 7y ago

pubkraal 7y ago

It seems a lot of the media is focused on the fact that people are being exposed to the virus. However, the Dutch are adopting a controlled way of doing this while protecting those at risk. All measures to limit contact are in place, in a big departure from what others who claim "herd immunity" are doing. Any comparison to the (previously?) British approach where in the weekend even concerts weren't cancelled and people are still being forced to go to the office by their employers doesn't quite hit the mark.

whb07 7y ago

This is going to be one of the costliest panics in history. A 1000 person test case was ran in isolation and they found this disease to not be very deathly, and this population was skewed toward the elderly. Half the world’s population lives in a 2 hour flight away from Wuhan, and even without testing, there have been no random spikes in deaths especially considering most of that world is significantly poorer and without proper healthcare infrastructure. The tragedy here isn’t about the immediate health impacts, of which are low, but of the second and third order effects to society and the world. That office cleaning night crew ain’t getting paid. New tax revenues to fund potential research at universities isn’t raised. Those with still less fashionable diseases, will have even less money for their cause.

bpeebles 7y ago
What "1000 person test case"? Every thing about what is actually happening in many places is the reverse if what you're saying.
- whb07 7y ago
  Where’s many places ? Let me guess you’ll say Italy and err Iran? You know there’s like 200 other countries. Furthermore, there are 2 billion+ people living an hour or two away from China. Why aren’t they saying it’s end of days. Please don’t just respond with a “simple they aren’t testing”. You don’t need a test for a massive spike in deaths.
  - bpeebles 7y ago
    The specific question I asked was about the test case you mentioned since I couldn't find it with a quick search. Also, I haven't really seen anyone saying it's the end of days, but more to use the US as an example, we're trying to reduce the likely death toll of millions (330M). It's heartening that it looks there's evidence that's some natural maximum coming out of China, but some US hospitals are already close to their capacity so we're trying to avoid a medical system breakdown here. From another comment, you said why "aren’t all dead" in existing regions, when literally no one has ever said they'd all die. The most pessimistic studies I see are like, 50% of population gets it and ~5% die after the hospitals run out of capacity (and another 10% have a really, really scary few weeks), so 2.5% of the population

onyva 7y ago

They’ve just reverted.

onyva 7y ago
That was the UK, not NL.

RickJWagner 7y ago

Man, what a pickle. Every country, every world leader, is faced with agonizing decisions. All are shades of right/wrong. All are simply trying to do the best job they can. Not an easy time for anyone.