5 ms·

Back in February when the first fatality rates were reported, I did a calculation for total worldwide deaths assuming that we'd fail to stop the spread of COVID

Back in February when the first fatality rates were reported, I did a calculation for total worldwide deaths assuming that we'd fail to stop the spread of COVID (like most prior pandemics) and it'd eventually reach herd immunity levels on par with prior uncontrolled pandemics. The number I came up with was ~30 million deaths (1% fatality rate, with 40% of the world infected). While that sounds like a lot, that's still less than half the number of people who die every year normally (~1%). My reaction to that number was "tragic, but civilization will survive this just fine". Since then things have only improved, at least from a medical perspective.

libertine 6y ago
>(like most prior pandemics) and it'd eventually reach herd immunity levels on par with prior uncontrolled pandemics. What prior pandemic eventually reached herd immunity? To my understanding such thing has never happened, the rare ones that did happen were with human intervention.
- petertodd 6y ago
  The 2009 swine flu pandemic is one example. We didn't actually realize how widely it had spread until later when antigen testing found that 11%-21% of the world population had been infected. Given that precautions weren't being taken to stop the spread of it, that % has to be similar to the real world herd immunity threshold. It's also a % similar to what seasonal flu infects every year, and we don't take any real precautions to stop that from spreading. In the end it turned out that the 2009 swine flu was much less deadly than originally thought, leading to significant controversy in the medical community, with it even being called a fake pandemic: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2010/01/facing-inquiry-who-strikes-back-fake-pandemic-swine-flu-criticism https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2010/01/facing-inquiry-who-s... Note how the wiki page for the 2009 swine flu pandemic lists multiple uncontrolled pandemics with estimated %'s infected in the double digits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic Keep in mind that human societies aren't the uniform mixing vat that the theoretical herd immunity equations assume: the exposure graph of society isn't unform at all. So outside special cases with very high degrees of mixing and exposure, it's no surprise that these pandemics lose steam long before the theoretical maximums. Conversely, herd immunity isn't a magic barrier: infections can go beyond herd immunity thresholds in situations where the rate at which infections are happening is high.
  - libertine 6y ago
    But isn't H1N1 still present, even though it's limited to few spot like poultry farms? And it's nowhere near as contagious as this Coronavirus? >Conversely, herd immunity isn't a magic barrier: infections can go beyond herd immunity thresholds in situations where the rate at which infections are happening is high. But this is kind of my point, without human intervention the virus is arguably still around even though not in at the pandemic level. Basically we had "luck" that these virus haven't followed a mutation path that spins them into a pandemic, but they are still around and they infect people. That's why live stock farms are starting to be questioned as a potential factory for pandemics.
    - petertodd 6y ago
      > But isn't H1N1 still present, even though it's limited to few spot like poultry farms? And it's nowhere near as contagious as this Coronavirus? Re-read what I said in my comment: the 2009 H1N1 "Swine flu" pandemic infected an estimated 11-21% of the entire human population. That's what after-the-fact antigen testing found out. The thing is, it turned out to be much less deadly than originally thought. So much so that the WHO was accused of effectively faking a pandemic. This isn't conspiracy theory material either: reputable scientists in the medical community were making these accusations. Leading to, for instance, a EU panel being convened to investigate what went wrong: https://healthcare-in-europe.com/en/news/european-parliament-to-investigate-who-pandemic-scandal.html https://healthcare-in-europe.com/en/news/european-parliament... Far from being limited to a "few poultry farms" since the first 2009 pandemic, (H1N1)pdm09 continues to circulate, and was even the dominant subtype of influenza in the 2018/2019 flu season in the US: https://f1000research.com/articles/8-141 https://f1000research.com/articles/8-141
- roywiggins 6y ago
  I would have thought the 1918 flu must have done. Eventually people stopped dying of it, and it's not because there was a vaccine.
  - libertine 6y ago
    Well influenza is still around, H1N1 is still around, and we have vaccinations for it, so I think it never "ended".
    - roywiggins 6y ago
      Infection with one strain of flu doesn't provide immunity to the other strains of flu, even ones in the same family (different H1N1s, etc). That's why you need a new vaccine every year. That doesn't mean herd immunity wasn't eventually reached for the strain that killed people in 1918. If everyone is either dead or recovered, the virus is simply not going to spread like it did when it was new.

libertine 6y ago

>(like most prior pandemics) and it'd eventually reach herd immunity levels on par with prior uncontrolled pandemics. What prior pandemic eventually reached herd immunity? To my understanding such thing has never happened, the rare ones that did happen were with human intervention.

petertodd 6y ago
The 2009 swine flu pandemic is one example. We didn't actually realize how widely it had spread until later when antigen testing found that 11%-21% of the world population had been infected. Given that precautions weren't being taken to stop the spread of it, that % has to be similar to the real world herd immunity threshold. It's also a % similar to what seasonal flu infects every year, and we don't take any real precautions to stop that from spreading. In the end it turned out that the 2009 swine flu was much less deadly than originally thought, leading to significant controversy in the medical community, with it even being called a fake pandemic: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2010/01/facing-inquiry-who-strikes-back-fake-pandemic-swine-flu-criticism https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2010/01/facing-inquiry-who-s... Note how the wiki page for the 2009 swine flu pandemic lists multiple uncontrolled pandemics with estimated %'s infected in the double digits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_swine_flu_pandemic Keep in mind that human societies aren't the uniform mixing vat that the theoretical herd immunity equations assume: the exposure graph of society isn't unform at all. So outside special cases with very high degrees of mixing and exposure, it's no surprise that these pandemics lose steam long before the theoretical maximums. Conversely, herd immunity isn't a magic barrier: infections can go beyond herd immunity thresholds in situations where the rate at which infections are happening is high.
- libertine 6y ago
  But isn't H1N1 still present, even though it's limited to few spot like poultry farms? And it's nowhere near as contagious as this Coronavirus? >Conversely, herd immunity isn't a magic barrier: infections can go beyond herd immunity thresholds in situations where the rate at which infections are happening is high. But this is kind of my point, without human intervention the virus is arguably still around even though not in at the pandemic level. Basically we had "luck" that these virus haven't followed a mutation path that spins them into a pandemic, but they are still around and they infect people. That's why live stock farms are starting to be questioned as a potential factory for pandemics.
  - petertodd 6y ago
    > But isn't H1N1 still present, even though it's limited to few spot like poultry farms? And it's nowhere near as contagious as this Coronavirus? Re-read what I said in my comment: the 2009 H1N1 "Swine flu" pandemic infected an estimated 11-21% of the entire human population. That's what after-the-fact antigen testing found out. The thing is, it turned out to be much less deadly than originally thought. So much so that the WHO was accused of effectively faking a pandemic. This isn't conspiracy theory material either: reputable scientists in the medical community were making these accusations. Leading to, for instance, a EU panel being convened to investigate what went wrong: https://healthcare-in-europe.com/en/news/european-parliament-to-investigate-who-pandemic-scandal.html https://healthcare-in-europe.com/en/news/european-parliament... Far from being limited to a "few poultry farms" since the first 2009 pandemic, (H1N1)pdm09 continues to circulate, and was even the dominant subtype of influenza in the 2018/2019 flu season in the US: https://f1000research.com/articles/8-141 https://f1000research.com/articles/8-141
roywiggins 6y ago
I would have thought the 1918 flu must have done. Eventually people stopped dying of it, and it's not because there was a vaccine.
- libertine 6y ago
  Well influenza is still around, H1N1 is still around, and we have vaccinations for it, so I think it never "ended".
  - roywiggins 6y ago
    Infection with one strain of flu doesn't provide immunity to the other strains of flu, even ones in the same family (different H1N1s, etc). That's why you need a new vaccine every year. That doesn't mean herd immunity wasn't eventually reached for the strain that killed people in 1918. If everyone is either dead or recovered, the virus is simply not going to spread like it did when it was new.