5 ms·

Overly cautious about the herd immunity stuff here. We're not going to eliminate the virus completely. That's a given, we should stop aiming for that. If we g

Overly cautious about the herd immunity stuff here. We're not going to eliminate the virus completely. That's a given, we should stop aiming for that. If we get to a point where there's a stable number of daily deaths then we're good. (like we have for literally every single fatal illness.)

SECProto 6y ago
> (like we have for literally every single fatal illness) Smallpox. And if you consider within the borders of a given country, a dozen others (polio, measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox).
- 0xffff2 6y ago
  Which countries have eliminated the latter 4? I would consider an illness "eradicated" if the vaccine is no longer regularly given. At least 10 years ago (when I was in the field), MMR and Chickenpox vaccines were still regularly administered in the US.
  - SECProto 6y ago
    > I would consider an illness "eradicated" if the vaccine is no longer regularly given Fair enough. I would consider a virus eradicated when the general population gives zero thought to it, and effectively no one dies from it. Doesn't meet the strict medical definition, but I thought the description of "If we get to a point where there's a stable number of daily deaths then we're good" was overly pessimistic.
  - ksk 6y ago
    >I would consider an illness "eradicated" if the vaccine is no longer regularly given. That's not how it works. Just because you don't see an outbreak for a while, that is never a reason to stop immunizing children. Pathogens can and do have natural reservoirs. This is why when some idiots stopped taking the Measles vaccines we had an outbreak here in the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_reservoir https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_reservoir
    - 0xffff2 6y ago
      Of course that's how it works. We don't regularly administer small pox vaccines anymore because it has been eradicated except for a couple of very tightly controlled samples. That's what "eradication" means. My memory is slightly hazy, but I think we might have skipped Polio as well for anyone not going oversees, because Polio largely meets the definition of "eradicated" in the US. Meanwhile, we continue to administer MMR and Chickenpox vaccines because those diseases still exist in the wild. The very fact that Measles has returned is ipso facto proof that it was never eradicated, and the fact that (normal) people never stopped giving that vaccine to their kids is proof that no one ever believed it was.
- breakfastduck 6y ago
  None of those are a common type of Flu, which we've never been able to cure, though.
  - SECProto 6y ago
    Covid-19 isn't a "common type of flu" either. The diseases I mentioned were certainly widespread and endemic. And they're all different types of virus.
  - rsynnott 6y ago
    How can people possibly still think COVID is a type of flu? This was perhaps forgivable in February, but...
- artursapek 6y ago
  COVID-19 is a slice of apple pie compared to Smallpox
nradov 6y ago
The moving average of daily deaths in the US has been stable or declining for the past two months. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
- ffdjjjffjj 6y ago
  That was true until last week. Deaths are now rising again, and daily new cases are approaching the level of the summer peak.
  - irq11 6y ago
    There has been a slight uptick in weekly deaths, roughly on par with what was observed in the last week of September. Given the trend of the line and the delayed reporting from most states, it’s more accurate to say that deaths have flattened: https://covid-19.direct/US?tab=daily https://covid-19.direct/US?tab=daily
  - breakfastduck 6y ago
    Daily new cases means nothing - it's a completely artificial figure that can be inflated or deflated by simply changing how many tests are conducted. Deaths is the only relevant measure.
    - ffdjjjffjj 6y ago
      It doesn’t “mean nothing”, it’s another data point. If you see test positivity rate remaining low but cases increasing - which we do in many areas with sufficient testing - then it does suggest more people are getting the virus. You can also corroborate this by comparing it to new hospitalizations, which are also up. “Deaths is the only relevant measure” - not sure where to start with this except to say that this is not at all what epidemiologists seem to think and I won’t address it further without some very dramatic reasoning and evidence.
      - irq11 6y ago
komali2 6y ago
Doing so would ignore the sometimes dramatic effects survivors experience - from the people I know alone, this ranges anywhere from previous marathon runners still huffing and puffing their way up stairs despite having been otherwise symptom free for 6 months, to a man who survived by the skin of his teeth and it now appears will never be able to taste or smell again. I don't know about you but I'm feeling like simply "getting to a stable number of daily deaths" doesn't cut it. Also, that statement alone doesn't make sense to me - a fatality rate of 50% could potentially maintain a stable rate of daily deaths... Of thousands.

SECProto 6y ago

> (like we have for literally every single fatal illness) Smallpox. And if you consider within the borders of a given country, a dozen others (polio, measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox).

0xffff2 6y ago
Which countries have eliminated the latter 4? I would consider an illness "eradicated" if the vaccine is no longer regularly given. At least 10 years ago (when I was in the field), MMR and Chickenpox vaccines were still regularly administered in the US.
- SECProto 6y ago
  > I would consider an illness "eradicated" if the vaccine is no longer regularly given Fair enough. I would consider a virus eradicated when the general population gives zero thought to it, and effectively no one dies from it. Doesn't meet the strict medical definition, but I thought the description of "If we get to a point where there's a stable number of daily deaths then we're good" was overly pessimistic.
- ksk 6y ago
  >I would consider an illness "eradicated" if the vaccine is no longer regularly given. That's not how it works. Just because you don't see an outbreak for a while, that is never a reason to stop immunizing children. Pathogens can and do have natural reservoirs. This is why when some idiots stopped taking the Measles vaccines we had an outbreak here in the US. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_reservoir https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_reservoir
  - 0xffff2 6y ago
    Of course that's how it works. We don't regularly administer small pox vaccines anymore because it has been eradicated except for a couple of very tightly controlled samples. That's what "eradication" means. My memory is slightly hazy, but I think we might have skipped Polio as well for anyone not going oversees, because Polio largely meets the definition of "eradicated" in the US. Meanwhile, we continue to administer MMR and Chickenpox vaccines because those diseases still exist in the wild. The very fact that Measles has returned is ipso facto proof that it was never eradicated, and the fact that (normal) people never stopped giving that vaccine to their kids is proof that no one ever believed it was.
breakfastduck 6y ago
None of those are a common type of Flu, which we've never been able to cure, though.
- SECProto 6y ago
  Covid-19 isn't a "common type of flu" either. The diseases I mentioned were certainly widespread and endemic. And they're all different types of virus.
- rsynnott 6y ago
  How can people possibly still think COVID is a type of flu? This was perhaps forgivable in February, but...
artursapek 6y ago
COVID-19 is a slice of apple pie compared to Smallpox

nradov 6y ago

The moving average of daily deaths in the US has been stable or declining for the past two months. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

ffdjjjffjj 6y ago
That was true until last week. Deaths are now rising again, and daily new cases are approaching the level of the summer peak.
- irq11 6y ago
  There has been a slight uptick in weekly deaths, roughly on par with what was observed in the last week of September. Given the trend of the line and the delayed reporting from most states, it’s more accurate to say that deaths have flattened: https://covid-19.direct/US?tab=daily https://covid-19.direct/US?tab=daily
- breakfastduck 6y ago
  Daily new cases means nothing - it's a completely artificial figure that can be inflated or deflated by simply changing how many tests are conducted. Deaths is the only relevant measure.
  - ffdjjjffjj 6y ago
    It doesn’t “mean nothing”, it’s another data point. If you see test positivity rate remaining low but cases increasing - which we do in many areas with sufficient testing - then it does suggest more people are getting the virus. You can also corroborate this by comparing it to new hospitalizations, which are also up. “Deaths is the only relevant measure” - not sure where to start with this except to say that this is not at all what epidemiologists seem to think and I won’t address it further without some very dramatic reasoning and evidence.
    - irq11 6y ago

komali2 6y ago

Doing so would ignore the sometimes dramatic effects survivors experience - from the people I know alone, this ranges anywhere from previous marathon runners still huffing and puffing their way up stairs despite having been otherwise symptom free for 6 months, to a man who survived by the skin of his teeth and it now appears will never be able to taste or smell again. I don't know about you but I'm feeling like simply "getting to a stable number of daily deaths" doesn't cut it. Also, that statement alone doesn't make sense to me - a fatality rate of 50% could potentially maintain a stable rate of daily deaths... Of thousands.