9 ms·

According to this yahoo article about 65 - 70% of the population needs to be vaccinated until we can get back to normal. That said there still may be mutations

According to this yahoo article about 65 - 70% of the population needs to be vaccinated until we can get back to normal. That said there still may be mutations or other complicating factors that could throw a wrench in things. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/around-65-75-of-the-population-needs-to-take-a-90-effective-coronavirus-vaccine-johns-hopkins-expert-says-185102526.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/around-65-75-of-the-populatio...

repsilat 6y ago
That number has been thrown around for here immunity. But I don't think it answers the GP's question because * Herd immunity numbers assume no ongoing vaccination -- they more or less say, "If life went back to normal, would the virus slow down or speed up?" * Age-related mortality and age-related vaccination rates are important. If we vaccinate all of the people who are at serious risk, the danger is mostly gone. There have obviously been deaths in populations not at serious risk, but not in proportion to the economic costs of locking down the economy. And as an aside, vaccine immunity is estimated to be about as good as post-infection immunity. And most estimates of the actual infection rate put them several times (some estimate 8-10x, but that's looking unlikely IMO) the measured case rate.
- randmeerkat 6y ago
  Imho you’re underestimating the impact of the disease in general. Disease is much more than who lives or dies, there’s also people who “survive”. A number of asymptomatic covid patients have severe lung damage. Vaccinating “at risk” people who might die doesn’t account for all the people who might live permanently disabled lives as a result of a covid infection. https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2021/01/14/asymptomatic-covid-lung-damage/ https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2021/01/14/asymptomatic-covid-l...
  - DenisM 6y ago
    There are three X-rays in this article, and the covid one is completely bogus. Kind of stains the credibility of the article and the company the produced it.
  - packetlost 6y ago
    Considering the source for that is a single trauma surgeon on Twitter, I'm going to wait until there's something formally published on the matter. We have no information on the condition of the patient with "covid lung", or even a comparison between asymptomatic patients vs patients put on ventilators. Not saying you're wrong, but that article seems sensationalized and quite honestly lacking in relevant information.
    - disgruntledphd2 6y ago
      As an anecdote, my sister had Covid in March and had lung damage in October when she went for a checkup. Also, we're not going to get much research on this until after the pandemic is over, because of pandemic related lack of routine medical care.
  - irq11 6y ago
    The micrograph shown in that link was taken from this NEJM article, which clearly says that the patients in the study died from Covid: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2015432 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2015432 Dying from Covid is not “asymptomatic Covid”. So your evidence for this phenomenon consists of a local news article where they’ve quoted the opinion of one person, mis-represented a figure from a journal article, and showed x-rays with no citations or context.
cperciva 6y ago
Immunized, not vaccinated. In particular, patients who have recovered from COVID-19 are (mostly) immune and count towards "herd immunity". (Obviously vaccination is by far the preferable of those two options!)
- guscost 6y ago
  You’re not wrong, but the right people cannot profit or accumulate power via the spread of natural immunity, and not at all coincidentally it is unpopular to mention. “But the risk is far too great not to pay trillions and surrender our freedom,” retorts a frightened chorus of people.
  - EamonnMR 6y ago
    It's probably more along the lines of us not being able to correctly guess who has recovered from CoVID because most people are asymptomatic.
    - guscost 6y ago
      Not buying that for a second. This same industry ran PR to squash efforts at developing competing vaccines in human challenge trials[0]. I try to remind myself that most individual players don’t act with malice, but the system as a whole runs purely on profit-taking and corruption, and it has managed to do horrific damage. [0] https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/23/challenge-trials-live-coronavirus-speedy-covid-19-vaccine/ https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/23/challenge-trials-live-co...
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - metamet 6y ago
    Research suggests that after infection with some coronaviruses, reinfection with the same virus — though usually mild and only happening in a fraction of people — is possible after a period of months or years. Further research is needed to determine the protective effect of antibodies to the virus in those who have been infected. Even if infection with the COVID-19 virus creates long-lasting immunity, a large number of people would have to become infected to reach the herd immunity threshold. Experts estimate that in the U.S., 70% of the population — more than 200 million people — would have to recover from COVID-19 to halt the epidemic. If many people become sick with COVID-19 at once, the health care system could quickly become overwhelmed. This amount of infection could also lead to serious complications and millions of deaths, especially among older people and those who have chronic conditions. [1] Which would result in ~1.3M dead Americans. So no. The concept of defeating COVID by relying on a "natural herd immunity" is a bad idea on all fronts. [1] https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/herd-immunity-and-coronavirus/art-20486808 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/i...
tzs 6y ago
Do those kind of calculations assume that the people who are vaccinated are spread fairly uniformly throughout the population, or do they take into account that people who will not take the vaccine will have a tendency to clump so that we are likely to have some cities or counties with high vaccination rates and other cities or counties with low vaccination rates?

repsilat 6y ago

That number has been thrown around for here immunity. But I don't think it answers the GP's question because * Herd immunity numbers assume no ongoing vaccination -- they more or less say, "If life went back to normal, would the virus slow down or speed up?" * Age-related mortality and age-related vaccination rates are important. If we vaccinate all of the people who are at serious risk, the danger is mostly gone. There have obviously been deaths in populations not at serious risk, but not in proportion to the economic costs of locking down the economy. And as an aside, vaccine immunity is estimated to be about as good as post-infection immunity. And most estimates of the actual infection rate put them several times (some estimate 8-10x, but that's looking unlikely IMO) the measured case rate.

randmeerkat 6y ago
Imho you’re underestimating the impact of the disease in general. Disease is much more than who lives or dies, there’s also people who “survive”. A number of asymptomatic covid patients have severe lung damage. Vaccinating “at risk” people who might die doesn’t account for all the people who might live permanently disabled lives as a result of a covid infection. https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2021/01/14/asymptomatic-covid-lung-damage/ https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2021/01/14/asymptomatic-covid-l...
- DenisM 6y ago
  There are three X-rays in this article, and the covid one is completely bogus. Kind of stains the credibility of the article and the company the produced it.
- packetlost 6y ago
  Considering the source for that is a single trauma surgeon on Twitter, I'm going to wait until there's something formally published on the matter. We have no information on the condition of the patient with "covid lung", or even a comparison between asymptomatic patients vs patients put on ventilators. Not saying you're wrong, but that article seems sensationalized and quite honestly lacking in relevant information.
  - disgruntledphd2 6y ago
    As an anecdote, my sister had Covid in March and had lung damage in October when she went for a checkup. Also, we're not going to get much research on this until after the pandemic is over, because of pandemic related lack of routine medical care.
- irq11 6y ago
  The micrograph shown in that link was taken from this NEJM article, which clearly says that the patients in the study died from Covid: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2015432 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2015432 Dying from Covid is not “asymptomatic Covid”. So your evidence for this phenomenon consists of a local news article where they’ve quoted the opinion of one person, mis-represented a figure from a journal article, and showed x-rays with no citations or context.

cperciva 6y ago

Immunized, not vaccinated. In particular, patients who have recovered from COVID-19 are (mostly) immune and count towards "herd immunity". (Obviously vaccination is by far the preferable of those two options!)

guscost 6y ago
You’re not wrong, but the right people cannot profit or accumulate power via the spread of natural immunity, and not at all coincidentally it is unpopular to mention. “But the risk is far too great not to pay trillions and surrender our freedom,” retorts a frightened chorus of people.
- EamonnMR 6y ago
  It's probably more along the lines of us not being able to correctly guess who has recovered from CoVID because most people are asymptomatic.
  - guscost 6y ago
    Not buying that for a second. This same industry ran PR to squash efforts at developing competing vaccines in human challenge trials[0]. I try to remind myself that most individual players don’t act with malice, but the system as a whole runs purely on profit-taking and corruption, and it has managed to do horrific damage. [0] https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/23/challenge-trials-live-coronavirus-speedy-covid-19-vaccine/ https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/23/challenge-trials-live-co...
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- metamet 6y ago
  Research suggests that after infection with some coronaviruses, reinfection with the same virus — though usually mild and only happening in a fraction of people — is possible after a period of months or years. Further research is needed to determine the protective effect of antibodies to the virus in those who have been infected. Even if infection with the COVID-19 virus creates long-lasting immunity, a large number of people would have to become infected to reach the herd immunity threshold. Experts estimate that in the U.S., 70% of the population — more than 200 million people — would have to recover from COVID-19 to halt the epidemic. If many people become sick with COVID-19 at once, the health care system could quickly become overwhelmed. This amount of infection could also lead to serious complications and millions of deaths, especially among older people and those who have chronic conditions. [1] Which would result in ~1.3M dead Americans. So no. The concept of defeating COVID by relying on a "natural herd immunity" is a bad idea on all fronts. [1] https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/herd-immunity-and-coronavirus/art-20486808 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/i...

tzs 6y ago

Do those kind of calculations assume that the people who are vaccinated are spread fairly uniformly throughout the population, or do they take into account that people who will not take the vaccine will have a tendency to clump so that we are likely to have some cities or counties with high vaccination rates and other cities or counties with low vaccination rates?