4 ms·

> No scenario when we 'let it rip' involves being able to give Oxygen to all young people who need it, and there will be extra deaths due to overload. This is

> No scenario when we 'let it rip' involves being able to give Oxygen to all young people who need it, and there will be extra deaths due to overload. This is highly speculative. Considering the exposure and infection rates among the younger population, particularly those of school age, can't we say we did let it rip? Infection seroprevalence in blood-donors was at 20% by July[1]. How much worse could it possibly be? https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2784013?alert=article https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2784013?al...

yyyk 5y ago
>How much worse could it possibly be? (Ominous music) >Infection seroprevalence in blood-donors was at 20% by July[1] Seriously though, two points: A) I have doubts about this measurement - that level (83.3% with antibodies!) should have been enough for herd immunity in May 2021, yet we don't see it in the US, cases being broadly static in the last month*. Perhaps American blood donors are highly nonrepresentative even after demographic adjustments? Or they're catching people with very low levels of antibodies but without true immunity? The paper is thorough regarding geographic and demographic factors, but isn't very clear on the technical details of the measurement itself beyond 'we did it, here are the results'. Or we could argue the US had herd immunity in May yet lost it two months after, that's not very encouraging, not even for 'natural' immunity. B) Assuming the researchers are correct, that's 20% for over a year. That's very different from having it way quicker. >can't we say we did let it rip? School closures, remote learning, masks even at that age. Obviously there have been (arguably way overzealous) efforts at controlling COVID even at the youngest ages. * There's a very recent fall, it's probably reporting lag - or it's really down, but per the research that should have already happened long ago.
- incrudible 5y ago
  > I have doubts about this measurement - that level (83.3% with antibodies!) should have been enough for herd immunity in May 2021, yet we don't see it in the US, cases being broadly static in the last month The 83% includes immunity from vaccination which, as we know now, is not sufficient for herd immunity. Natural immunity may not be sufficient either. > School closures, remote learning, masks even at that age. Obviously there have been (arguably way overzealous) efforts at controlling COVID even at the youngest ages. In many cases, schools didn't get closed during much of the Delta wave and incidence in the young population was particularly high. As for masks: They have a modest effect at best (20% risk reduction). https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7021e1-H.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7021e1-H.pdf

yyyk 5y ago

>How much worse could it possibly be? (Ominous music) >Infection seroprevalence in blood-donors was at 20% by July[1] Seriously though, two points: A) I have doubts about this measurement - that level (83.3% with antibodies!) should have been enough for herd immunity in May 2021, yet we don't see it in the US, cases being broadly static in the last month*. Perhaps American blood donors are highly nonrepresentative even after demographic adjustments? Or they're catching people with very low levels of antibodies but without true immunity? The paper is thorough regarding geographic and demographic factors, but isn't very clear on the technical details of the measurement itself beyond 'we did it, here are the results'. Or we could argue the US had herd immunity in May yet lost it two months after, that's not very encouraging, not even for 'natural' immunity. B) Assuming the researchers are correct, that's 20% for over a year. That's very different from having it way quicker. >can't we say we did let it rip? School closures, remote learning, masks even at that age. Obviously there have been (arguably way overzealous) efforts at controlling COVID even at the youngest ages. * There's a very recent fall, it's probably reporting lag - or it's really down, but per the research that should have already happened long ago.

incrudible 5y ago
> I have doubts about this measurement - that level (83.3% with antibodies!) should have been enough for herd immunity in May 2021, yet we don't see it in the US, cases being broadly static in the last month The 83% includes immunity from vaccination which, as we know now, is not sufficient for herd immunity. Natural immunity may not be sufficient either. > School closures, remote learning, masks even at that age. Obviously there have been (arguably way overzealous) efforts at controlling COVID even at the youngest ages. In many cases, schools didn't get closed during much of the Delta wave and incidence in the young population was particularly high. As for masks: They have a modest effect at best (20% risk reduction). https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7021e1-H.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/pdfs/mm7021e1-H.pdf