6 ms·

> It wouldn't surprise me if the UK's cases are now dropping because they reached that threshold, but I doubt the US is there now. Given the enormous US Covid

> It wouldn't surprise me if the UK's cases are now dropping because they reached that threshold, but I doubt the US is there now. Given the enormous US Covid outbreak, the US is likely not far away. We're at 70% adult vaccination and had a minimum of 100 million prior Covid infections. Also throw in tens of millions of people that likely have natural immunity to Covid. The biggest question with Delta is going to be the matter of repeat infections and how long the vaccines, the vaccines + prior infections, and prior infections (without vaccination) all hold up against it. To say nothing of what variations will follow next after Delta. Is there actually herd immunity to be found with Delta, or will people just keep getting variations of Covid from here forward. I don't believe there will be herd immunity for any nations, there will just be far lower mortality rates due to prior virus exposure and the vaccines. Some non-trivial % of the vaccinated population will continue to get Covid. If there was a chance to squash Covid with the early strain via herd immunity, those days are very long gone. The great lie still being persisted for the benefit of the agitated public, is that Covid is going to go away courtesy of vaccinations. The authorities have pitched that to the public from the early days of the vaccines to try to max out the vaccination rates. Do this and Covid goes away. The vaccines are never going to stop Covid, they're going to continue to dramatically reduce the mortality rates (which is critical, however the public still doesn't widely grasp the reality of the forever Covid future yet).

sokoloff 5y ago
If the forever-COVID reality for 95+% of the population is "you really, really ought to get that annual booster shot" (instead of "get the flu shot iff it's convenient"), that's not actually so terrible. If it becomes century-long endemic in the population, kids are exposed to it, likely creating a productive exposure-related immune reaction until they're old enough to get an mRNA vaccine.
- adventured 5y ago
  Definitely. I don't think it's terrible at all given the alternative is tens or hundreds of thousands of additional people dying from Covid per year in the US. I guess we'll soon see the extent to which the public can be convinced to get booster shots every year. The governments of the world will have their jobs cut out for them, there will be a lot of resistance to forever Covid vaccinations as time goes on (and very lucrative for big pharma; Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna are going to make a stupid amount of money over the next few years). What will be interesting to find out in the near future, is if high vaccination rates + prior infections reduce Covid deaths below, say, 50k people in the US every year, or whether we're forever stuck with a sizable population killer no matter what (short of implementing elaborate forever cultural systems of lockdown; as in, those counter measures will have to become ingrained deeply into the culture, accepted and automatic). The next decade is going to be very weird and interesting on that front.
  - nradov 5y ago
    Vaccination is great but in addition to that we could also cut the ongoing death toll through public health campaigns to eliminate hypovitaminosis D. This could be done relatively cheaply. https://vitamin-d-covid.shotwell.ca/ https://vitamin-d-covid.shotwell.ca/
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    From a public health perspective, the total number of deaths in a pandemic is less important than the timing of the case load. Too many cases in too short a period of time causes havoc in the health care system, and then helps lead to deaths from conditions unrelated to the pandemic (because hospital care is unavailable). It may sound callous, but in terms of first priorities, reducing the total number of deaths from COVID19 has never been our #1 priority (to the extent that we've had any clearly formulated priorities at all). The implicit goal, as we were all saying in the spring of 2020, was/is "flatten the curve".
    - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
      The actions of my local government align with that. Keep the hospitals from being overwhelmed, but if you die because you didn’t get vaccinated, too bad so sad. Which seems the right way to handle it. Allow folks their individual freedom as much as possible, but don’t break the health care system.
      - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
        > Allow folks their individual freedom as much as possible, but don’t break the health care system. Unfortunately, these two goals, when combined with an infectious agent with a good-sized R0, are really in opposition to each other.
        autoexec 5y ago
        I don't think they need to be. At least not within reasonable bounds. There's certainly an interesting discussion to be had surrounding individual freedoms vs the common good in a pandemic, but I'm not sure as to what extent we can even have those discussions while an embarrassing number of people feel that just being asked to wear a covering over their face in public spaces is an intolerable violation of their personal freedoms. When even the smallest requirements intended to protect the public's health are treated as if they were the harshest forms of oppression imaginable there simply isn't any room left for debate. Still, for the population that believes a degree of concession can be reasonable and appropriate under such extreme conditions as a global pandemic I think it is possible to strike a good balance between individual freedom and individual and collective responsibility. I think we can work to protect freedoms while also insisting on some measures to help reduce the spread of a virus. It doesn't have to be an either-or situation at least.
nostrademons 5y ago
U.S. is only at 50% fully-vaccinated, with several states in the high 30s to 40s. I could believe 70% with at least one shot but haven't seen any statistics to that effect; it doesn't matter much since Delta is still pretty dangerous to partially-vaccinated people. We had 35M recorded COVID cases; I'd believe about a 2:1 undercount, so about 70M total cases (~22%). Vaccines + previous cases was likely past herd immunity for the original variant (hence why cases dropped dramatically after vaccines came out), but with Delta's increased herd immunity threshold we should expect another 50-70M cases within the next few weeks.
- arbuge 5y ago
  > I could believe 70% with at least one shot but haven't seen any statistics to that effect Good guess. As of today, that's the exact number: https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2021-08-02/us-hits-70-vaccination-rate-a-month-late-amid-a-surge https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2021-08-02/...
  - avhon1 5y ago
    Just for clarity, that's "70% of American adults". 18% of Americans are 15 or younger [1], below the youngest approved vaccine age (the Pfizer vaccine is approved for teenagers as young as 16), so that's (0.18 + (1-0.18) * (1-0.7) = ) ~42% of Americans who haven't even received 1 shot, and 58% who have. (There may be some error in that, if far more or far less than 70% of non-adult vaccine-eligible people (teenagers aged 16 or 17) have gotten at least one shot, but it probably doesn't change the overall percentage that much.) [1] https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/age-structure https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/age-structure
    - bialpio 5y ago
      Need to redo some numbers, Pfizer has been approved for ages 12 & up for a couple of months now [1]. Our World In Data lists that ~50% of American population is already fully vaccinated. [1] https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-authorizes-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-emergency-use https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavi...
michaelmrose 5y ago
Where are you getting 100M confirmed infections?
- neilknowsbest 5y ago
  I can't speak to what the parent comment might have been referencing, but the CDC estimates 120MM infections through May 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...
  - michaelmrose 5y ago
    Thank you
newacct583 5y ago
> The great lie still [...] is that Covid is going to go away courtesy of vaccinations. The authorities have pitched that to the public from the early days of the vaccines That is (1) outrageously hyperbolized and (2) completely wrong. Delta wasn't known to have this level of transmissibility until the last three weeks. People, experts, doctors, "authorities", whatever, you want to label them 100% believed sincerely that we were on a path to the elimination of the outbreak. Cut the bullshit, basically. Yeah, yeah, I know it's HN and everyone wants to think they're smarter than everyone else. But you aren't. You're retconning brand new science to make prior understanding into a "big lie". That's really awful.
- SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
  The relevant experts - virologists, epidemiologists, etc. - neither believed nor claimed that we were on a path to the elimination of the outbreak. They've consistently stated that the virus will be around for at least years, probably decades, possibly forever.
  - christophilus 5y ago
    Yeah. This has been my impression, too. I’m not aware of anyone who thought vaccines were a path to total elimination. But then, my only news source is HN and some science YouTube channels.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
      The vaccines are/were a path out of a pandemic. That's something to strive for, but extremely different from "elimination"
  - newacct583 5y ago
    To be clear, I meant "elimination of the outbreak" in the sense of an endemic virus that produces a steady case rate. Clearly no, no one expected this disease to be eradicated.

sokoloff 5y ago

If the forever-COVID reality for 95+% of the population is "you really, really ought to get that annual booster shot" (instead of "get the flu shot iff it's convenient"), that's not actually so terrible. If it becomes century-long endemic in the population, kids are exposed to it, likely creating a productive exposure-related immune reaction until they're old enough to get an mRNA vaccine.

adventured 5y ago
Definitely. I don't think it's terrible at all given the alternative is tens or hundreds of thousands of additional people dying from Covid per year in the US. I guess we'll soon see the extent to which the public can be convinced to get booster shots every year. The governments of the world will have their jobs cut out for them, there will be a lot of resistance to forever Covid vaccinations as time goes on (and very lucrative for big pharma; Pfizer, BioNTech and Moderna are going to make a stupid amount of money over the next few years). What will be interesting to find out in the near future, is if high vaccination rates + prior infections reduce Covid deaths below, say, 50k people in the US every year, or whether we're forever stuck with a sizable population killer no matter what (short of implementing elaborate forever cultural systems of lockdown; as in, those counter measures will have to become ingrained deeply into the culture, accepted and automatic). The next decade is going to be very weird and interesting on that front.
- nradov 5y ago
  Vaccination is great but in addition to that we could also cut the ongoing death toll through public health campaigns to eliminate hypovitaminosis D. This could be done relatively cheaply. https://vitamin-d-covid.shotwell.ca/ https://vitamin-d-covid.shotwell.ca/
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  From a public health perspective, the total number of deaths in a pandemic is less important than the timing of the case load. Too many cases in too short a period of time causes havoc in the health care system, and then helps lead to deaths from conditions unrelated to the pandemic (because hospital care is unavailable). It may sound callous, but in terms of first priorities, reducing the total number of deaths from COVID19 has never been our #1 priority (to the extent that we've had any clearly formulated priorities at all). The implicit goal, as we were all saying in the spring of 2020, was/is "flatten the curve".
  - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
    The actions of my local government align with that. Keep the hospitals from being overwhelmed, but if you die because you didn’t get vaccinated, too bad so sad. Which seems the right way to handle it. Allow folks their individual freedom as much as possible, but don’t break the health care system.
    - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
      > Allow folks their individual freedom as much as possible, but don’t break the health care system. Unfortunately, these two goals, when combined with an infectious agent with a good-sized R0, are really in opposition to each other.
      - autoexec 5y ago
        I don't think they need to be. At least not within reasonable bounds. There's certainly an interesting discussion to be had surrounding individual freedoms vs the common good in a pandemic, but I'm not sure as to what extent we can even have those discussions while an embarrassing number of people feel that just being asked to wear a covering over their face in public spaces is an intolerable violation of their personal freedoms. When even the smallest requirements intended to protect the public's health are treated as if they were the harshest forms of oppression imaginable there simply isn't any room left for debate. Still, for the population that believes a degree of concession can be reasonable and appropriate under such extreme conditions as a global pandemic I think it is possible to strike a good balance between individual freedom and individual and collective responsibility. I think we can work to protect freedoms while also insisting on some measures to help reduce the spread of a virus. It doesn't have to be an either-or situation at least.

nostrademons 5y ago

U.S. is only at 50% fully-vaccinated, with several states in the high 30s to 40s. I could believe 70% with at least one shot but haven't seen any statistics to that effect; it doesn't matter much since Delta is still pretty dangerous to partially-vaccinated people. We had 35M recorded COVID cases; I'd believe about a 2:1 undercount, so about 70M total cases (~22%). Vaccines + previous cases was likely past herd immunity for the original variant (hence why cases dropped dramatically after vaccines came out), but with Delta's increased herd immunity threshold we should expect another 50-70M cases within the next few weeks.

arbuge 5y ago
> I could believe 70% with at least one shot but haven't seen any statistics to that effect Good guess. As of today, that's the exact number: https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2021-08-02/us-hits-70-vaccination-rate-a-month-late-amid-a-surge https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2021-08-02/...
- avhon1 5y ago
  Just for clarity, that's "70% of American adults". 18% of Americans are 15 or younger [1], below the youngest approved vaccine age (the Pfizer vaccine is approved for teenagers as young as 16), so that's (0.18 + (1-0.18) * (1-0.7) = ) ~42% of Americans who haven't even received 1 shot, and 58% who have. (There may be some error in that, if far more or far less than 70% of non-adult vaccine-eligible people (teenagers aged 16 or 17) have gotten at least one shot, but it probably doesn't change the overall percentage that much.) [1] https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/age-structure https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/age-structure
  - bialpio 5y ago
    Need to redo some numbers, Pfizer has been approved for ages 12 & up for a couple of months now [1]. Our World In Data lists that ~50% of American population is already fully vaccinated. [1] https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavirus-covid-19-update-fda-authorizes-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine-emergency-use https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavi...

michaelmrose 5y ago

Where are you getting 100M confirmed infections?

neilknowsbest 5y ago
I can't speak to what the parent comment might have been referencing, but the CDC estimates 120MM infections through May 2021. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burden.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  Thank you

newacct583 5y ago

> The great lie still [...] is that Covid is going to go away courtesy of vaccinations. The authorities have pitched that to the public from the early days of the vaccines That is (1) outrageously hyperbolized and (2) completely wrong. Delta wasn't known to have this level of transmissibility until the last three weeks. People, experts, doctors, "authorities", whatever, you want to label them 100% believed sincerely that we were on a path to the elimination of the outbreak. Cut the bullshit, basically. Yeah, yeah, I know it's HN and everyone wants to think they're smarter than everyone else. But you aren't. You're retconning brand new science to make prior understanding into a "big lie". That's really awful.

SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
The relevant experts - virologists, epidemiologists, etc. - neither believed nor claimed that we were on a path to the elimination of the outbreak. They've consistently stated that the virus will be around for at least years, probably decades, possibly forever.
- christophilus 5y ago
  Yeah. This has been my impression, too. I’m not aware of anyone who thought vaccines were a path to total elimination. But then, my only news source is HN and some science YouTube channels.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    The vaccines are/were a path out of a pandemic. That's something to strive for, but extremely different from "elimination"
- newacct583 5y ago
  To be clear, I meant "elimination of the outbreak" in the sense of an endemic virus that produces a steady case rate. Clearly no, no one expected this disease to be eradicated.