4 ms·

> if you eliminate half the transmission of a highly contagious disease, everyone may well still get it, and while you have flattened the curve, you haven’t act

> if you eliminate half the transmission of a highly contagious disease, everyone may well still get it, and while you have flattened the curve, you haven’t actually saved many lives. Assuming all other things are equal in both cases, sure. In reality though, by flattening the curve we have avoided greater collapse of health systems, we got more time to understand better what works and what doesn't when fighting the disease, we got more vaccinated people, etc. These things combined might have saved a lot of lives. I'm not sure why delaying chicken pox may have been a bad thing, what do you mean by that?

abakker 5y ago
I agree that flattening the curve should have benefitted society and saved lives. Regarding chickenpox, it becomes more and more dangerous the later in life you catch it. Getting it as a 5yo is annoying. Getting it at 15 can be quite a bit more dangerous. getting it for the first time at 40 can be lethal.
- cassianoleal 5y ago
  I see what you mean. How does that work out in reality though? There are always people in all those age groups in society and if you let the disease run amok, that just means the 40yo of now are more likely to catch it before there's a vaccine or better treatments, doesn't it? OTOH if you slow down the kids getting it, they will be less likely to spread it to the teens and middle-aged kids :D until those are available. i.e. pretty much the same, is it not? Disclaimer: I'm pulling those ideas out of my arse, I have no real data or knowlege to back my thoughts.
  - abakker 5y ago
    When I was kid, before the chickenpox vaccine, it was common practice to ensure your kids got it by intentionally exposing them. I guess our parents had all had it, so there was no risk of getting it again. Now we have a vaccine so I assume this doesn't happen anymore.
    - cassianoleal 5y ago
      Ah interesting. I didn't know that, but it does make sense. > I guess our parents had all had it, so there was no risk of getting it again. This is not the case with COVID though. Everyone is getting infected for the first time, and we're still unsure how long and how strong immunity-through-exposure is. In fact, there are multiple reports of people catching it multiple times (I know of a person who had it 5 times :-o ).
      - nradov 5y ago
        There is no serious doubt that most infections produce durable cellular immunity, just as with all similar viruses. Of course patients will occasionally be reinfected, but symptoms are typically less severe. With any disease that has infected billions of people there will be occasional statistical outliers. https://peterattiamd.com/covid-part2/ https://peterattiamd.com/covid-part2/
        LorenPechtel 5y ago
        Statistical outliers?? Sorry, but not too long ago I ran into a figure that 2/3 of Omicron cases had previously been infected with another variant. Covid is mutating fast enough that prior infection provides only limited protection. If you're lucky your body locks onto the spike protein and the protection works pretty well against all pre-Omicron variants. But you're not guaranteed that, your body might go for a much less stable target and do little against a variant. We are seeing this with the Chinese vaccines. They're killed-virus vaccines, they worked well at first. Not anymore.
        nradov 5y ago
        That is misinformation. Did you even listen to the above linked explanation by infectious disease expert Dr. Monica Gandhi? Reinfections are meaningless. What matters is severity of symptoms. Infection by earlier variants gives most recovered patients durable cellular immunity against Omicron. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01700-x https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01700-x

abakker 5y ago

I agree that flattening the curve should have benefitted society and saved lives. Regarding chickenpox, it becomes more and more dangerous the later in life you catch it. Getting it as a 5yo is annoying. Getting it at 15 can be quite a bit more dangerous. getting it for the first time at 40 can be lethal.

cassianoleal 5y ago
I see what you mean. How does that work out in reality though? There are always people in all those age groups in society and if you let the disease run amok, that just means the 40yo of now are more likely to catch it before there's a vaccine or better treatments, doesn't it? OTOH if you slow down the kids getting it, they will be less likely to spread it to the teens and middle-aged kids :D until those are available. i.e. pretty much the same, is it not? Disclaimer: I'm pulling those ideas out of my arse, I have no real data or knowlege to back my thoughts.
- abakker 5y ago
  When I was kid, before the chickenpox vaccine, it was common practice to ensure your kids got it by intentionally exposing them. I guess our parents had all had it, so there was no risk of getting it again. Now we have a vaccine so I assume this doesn't happen anymore.
  - cassianoleal 5y ago
    Ah interesting. I didn't know that, but it does make sense. > I guess our parents had all had it, so there was no risk of getting it again. This is not the case with COVID though. Everyone is getting infected for the first time, and we're still unsure how long and how strong immunity-through-exposure is. In fact, there are multiple reports of people catching it multiple times (I know of a person who had it 5 times :-o ).
    - nradov 5y ago
      There is no serious doubt that most infections produce durable cellular immunity, just as with all similar viruses. Of course patients will occasionally be reinfected, but symptoms are typically less severe. With any disease that has infected billions of people there will be occasional statistical outliers. https://peterattiamd.com/covid-part2/ https://peterattiamd.com/covid-part2/
      - LorenPechtel 5y ago
        Statistical outliers?? Sorry, but not too long ago I ran into a figure that 2/3 of Omicron cases had previously been infected with another variant. Covid is mutating fast enough that prior infection provides only limited protection. If you're lucky your body locks onto the spike protein and the protection works pretty well against all pre-Omicron variants. But you're not guaranteed that, your body might go for a much less stable target and do little against a variant. We are seeing this with the Chinese vaccines. They're killed-virus vaccines, they worked well at first. Not anymore.
        nradov 5y ago
        That is misinformation. Did you even listen to the above linked explanation by infectious disease expert Dr. Monica Gandhi? Reinfections are meaningless. What matters is severity of symptoms. Infection by earlier variants gives most recovered patients durable cellular immunity against Omicron. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01700-x https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-01700-x