Older People Being 'Airbrushed' Out Of Virus Figures

[RossyG]

Genocide is probably the wrong word. Try euthanasia.

We have herd immunity to smallpox. Is that euthanasia?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

We have herd immunity to smallpox. Is that euthanasia?

The smallpox vaccine eradicated smallpox. I still have the scar on my arm. My son, born in 1970 didn't have to be vaccinated because it was eradicated.

 

[RossyG]

The smallpox vaccine eradicated smallpox. I still have the scar on my arm. My son, born in 1970 didn't have to be vaccinated because it was eradicated.

Yes, the vaccine created herd immunity which meant the virus had no human hosts to latch onto and it died.

 

[darkwolf666]

Herd immunity in itself means that we are immune either completely or to the point that it’s not too serious. That’d be a good thing.

You know how a common cold is a mere inconvenience to us yet could wipe out a remote village of eskimos? That’s because we have herd immunity and they don’t.

The fact that you liken it to genocide shows you how poorly the media have covered this (and hysteria on social media has been even worse).

I will let my wife know that if she catches the virus, that dying for the good of the herd is a good thing. I am sure she will appreciate that sentiment.

 

[darkwolf666]

Do you think having herd immunity to various diseases is a bad thing?

I claim my £5 prize, you ARE Dominic Cummings!

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Yes, the vaccine created herd immunity which meant the virus had no human hosts to latch onto and it died.

Smallpox was contagious not infectious. It was not a virus.

Viruses mutate.

 

[sparkie]

Yes, the vaccine created herd immunity which meant the virus had no human hosts to latch onto and it died.

No one is saying that we shouldn't create herd immunity with a COVID-19 vaccine.

The plan which is being criticized is the plan to create it without a vaccine.

That is too 'the ends justifies the means' for some, and a philosophy that some don't want society to subscribe to.

 

[Rugrat]

How to stimulate and manage herd immunity in the case of Covid 19? One way: keep the vulnerable and elderly isolated and let the under 60s carry on as normal. After a month or two you’d have the necessary 60% plus of people with antibodies.

Hang on .... you put 40M+ 'back to normal' and think that those that die (wouldn't mind your estimate of numbers by the way) would be similar numbers to those that would have died anyway in car accidents and such like?

How many of those infected (estimate please) will require hospital and ICU treatment and how many more of our frontline medical heroes lose their lives?

Thank f**k we don't have people leading this country of similar views .... well I certainly hope not

 

[RossyG]

I will let my wife know that if she catches the virus, that dying for the good of the herd is a good thing. I am sure she will appreciate that sentiment.

Herd immunity does not mean culling the weak. It doesn’t mean sitting back and letting the virus do it’s worst (although herd immunity could be a side effect of that)

Herd immunity means that as a group of people we aren’t as badly effected by viruses. The common cold, for example.

Herd immunity is good and is brought about either by natural means: antibodies; or scientific means: a vaccine.

If a vaccine for Covid 19 is developed and your wife is given it, she’ll have herd immunity.

I don’t think I can say this any more simply.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

One man's 'good thing' sails pretty close to being another man's 'near genocide' tho eh?

Lest we forget, herd immunity = allowing hundreds of thousands of people die while utterly swamping all available NHS resources. To be honest, as 'good things' go, I've heard better

I posted yesterday that to obtain herd immunity we need abut 40 million of us to have contracted the virus and survived (not my data, but published data). However current mortality rate in the UK, France, Italy and Spain is 1 in 8. That means to obtain herd immunity, 5 million will die in the UK.

If we have overestimated the mortality rate by a factor of ten, and the true rate is 1 in 80, we will still see half a million deaths before herd immunity is reached. Now, I can imagine the fact we are testing only the sick may mean we are not diagnosing as 'infected' all those people who have had the virus and been asymptomatic. But this would mean that only one in ten who get the virus gets ill. That would be astonishingly better than the assumed 1 in 1, if true. But it still means half a million deaths.

And is it likely to be true? The equivalent figure for ordinary flu, the number who become infected and stay symptomless is around 16% (I posted the source paper on this yesterday). That is nothing like the 90% necessary if the true recovery rate for COVA is 1 in 80 rather than the current reported 1 in 8, due to undiagnosed asymptomatic cases.

To get the death rate down to the 'good result' of 20,000 deaths, and end the pandemic via herd immunity (rather than a vaccine) the true mortality rate needs to be not 1 in 8, not 1 in 80 but a staggeringly low 1 in 2,000. Now I can accept that our current 1 in 8 is a falsely high value owing to the omission of the asymptomatic cases who have not tested positive because they haven't been tested. And we need to up testing. But to have the current estimate of the mortality rate, and the numbers currently infected incorrect by a factor of 250 fold is beyond the realms of credibility. And it isn't just us, it is France, Spain and Italy as well.

No, planning our salvation based on acquisition of herd immunity is a mentalist strategy in the absence of a vaccine.

 

[RossyG]

No one is saying that we shouldn't create herd immunity with a COVID-19 vaccine.

The plan which is being criticized is the plan to create it without a vaccine.

That is too 'the ends justifies the means' for some, and a philosophy that some don't want society to subscribe to.

My point was that herd immunity is herd immunity. It’s a scientific term that means we have a natural resistance.

Many people, including several in this thread, think it’s a codeword for letting the virus do its worst and the devil take the hindmost. That’s the point I was trying to make, but people still either don’t understand what I’ve said or aren’t bothering to read it and just responding to what they think I’ve said.

Not unusual on the Internet, it must be said.

 

[RossyG]

Hang on .... you put 40M+ 'back to normal' and think that those that die (wouldn't mind your estimate of numbers by the way) would be similar numbers to those that would have died anyway in car accidents and such like?

How many of those infected (estimate please) will require hospital and ICU treatment and how many more of our frontline medical heroes lose their lives?

Thank f**k we don't have people leading this country of similar views .... well I certainly hope not

The figures of how many that’d need hospitalisation are out there. Just look at the figures of those under 60 (excluding those with preexisting conditions).

Actually Sweden and Japan didn’t lockdown, so we can see how they cope although it won’t be like for like, of course.

And if we don’t do this what do we do? Stay locked up? For how long? What if a vaccine can’t be made? It took thirty years to get one for AIDS and over ten for SARS.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

My point was that herd immunity is herd immunity. It’s a scientific term that means we have a natural resistance.

Many people, including several in this thread, think it’s a codeword for letting the virus do its worst and the devil take the hindmost. That’s the point I was trying to make, but people still either don’t understand what I’ve said or aren’t bothering to read it and just responding to what they think I’ve said.

Not unusual on the Internet, it must be said.

The only way to get natural resistance is to recover from the illness, or be vaccinated. There are many many vulnerable people with asthma, COPD, those being treated for cancer, and immunosuppressant that cannot be allowed to catch it.
What do you propose to do with them? Isolate them for the rest of their lives?

A valid vaccine is many many months away. Even the flu jab which I have every October is revamped every Spring because as I said before, viruses mutate.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The two care homes that my family and inlaws are involved with went into lockdown many weeks ago before Mothers Day, so any disease transmission is done by carers, some of whom are going from home to home.

So, even worse than I suggested.

I am increasing of a mind that these herd immunity clowns advising the innumerate government need to be put in stocks.

I have been doing my calculations on he back of an envelope in between doing other stuff. The government have unlimited resources and computational excellence at their disposal. Making life-changing decisions (life and death decisions in fact) needs better data and judgement than mine.

What concerns me is we may find later that thousands (maybe more than thousands) have been, in effect, allowed (or, indeed, condemned) to die for the greater good, when there was no greater good. I'll be delighted to come back at some point in the future and say 'thank goodness (and indeed thank God if that's your arbiter), that I was wrong'.

 

[RossyG]

The only way to get natural resistance is to recover from the illness, or be vaccinated. There are many many vulnerable people with asthma, COPD, those being treated for cancer, and immunosuppressant that cannot be allowed to catch it.
What do you propose to do with them? Isolate them for the rest of their lives?

A valid vaccine is many many months away. Even the flu jab which I have every October is revamped every Spring because as I said before, viruses mutate.

If we got herd immunity the way I mentioned above then hopefully the vulnerable could then return to a more normal life as transmission would be massively reduced.

And a vaccine may never come or may take many years. What do we do then?

It’s a horrible situation and whatever choice we go with people will die. But this lockdown can’t continue forever.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

If we got herd immunity the way I mentioned above then hopefully the vulnerable could then return to a more normal life as transmission would be massively reduced.

And a vaccine may never come or may take many years. What do we do then?

It’s a horrible situation and whatever choice we go with people will die. But this lockdown can’t continue forever.

I agree it can't continue forever, but what is being pointed out, is that those in care homes are sitting ducks.
My sister in law was asked to sign a DNR two weeks ago, for her mother. Two years ago she got a secondary chest infection following a water infection (very common amongst the old) and developed sepsis. Basically, that means, she won't even be admitted to hospital now, because of the infections already there. Two years ago, drastic treatment saved her life, ie antibiotics straight into her heart. Now, at this time, that won't happen.

 

[RossyG]

I agree it can't continue forever, but what is being pointed out, is that those in care homes are sitting ducks.
My sister in law was asked to sign a DNR two weeks ago, for her mother. Two years ago she got a secondary chest infection following a water infection (very common amongst the old) and developed sepsis. Basically, that means, she won't even be admitted to hospital now, because of the infections already there. Two years ago, drastic treatment saved her life, ie antibiotics straight into her heart. Now, at this time, that won't happen.

It’s a horrible situation. Ideally care homes would be isolated for a few weeks with careers living in and all Covid patients should go to specific hospitals like Nightingale while the other hospitals go back to normal as best they can.

Easier said than done, obviously.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

It’s a horrible situation. Ideally care homes would be isolated for a few weeks with careers living in and all Covid patients should go to specific hospitals like Nightingale while the other hospitals go back to normal as best they can.

Easier said than done, obviously.

You haven't read the article, have you? One of the biggest care home providers has said CV19 is already in two thirds of the homes they manage.

As I pointed out earlier, some carers work in different homes ie a few hours in one and then a few hours in another. The horse has bolted, the stable door is open.

 

[pastafarian]

My point was that herd immunity is herd immunity. It’s a scientific term that means we have a natural resistance.

Many people, including several in this thread, think it’s a codeword for letting the virus do its worst and the devil take the hindmost. That’s the point I was trying to make, but people still either don’t understand what I’ve said or aren’t bothering to read it and just responding to what they think I’ve said.

Not unusual on the Internet, it must be said.

Quite.

That Vallance chap was quite clear, we shouldn’t let the virus do its worst now

"What we don't want is everybody getting it in a short period of time so we swamp an overwhelmed NHS services.”

He seemed quite clear they were not pursuing that all at once now, but over a return of the virus each year herd immunity will play its part.

"We think this virus is likely to be one that comes year on year, becomes like a seasonal virus.”
"Communities will become immune to it and that's going to be an important part of controlling this longer term”

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11164977/millions-uk-coronavirus-herd-immunity/

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...f-defends-uk-measures-criticism-herd-immunity

And yet there are still irresponsible twits scaremongering saying we are pursuing a policy of Euthanasia…..astonishing.

Probably the same people who were saying incorrectly that Johnson had said we were going to take it on the chin all in one go and allow it to move through the whole population

 

[RossyG]

You haven't read the article, have you? .

I have read it, but I was more commenting on the tone of the reporting to begin with.