Ivy League Scientist Warns that Social-Distancing Measures Could Make COVID-19 Impact WORSE

mikegriffith1

Mike Griffith
Joined
Oct 23, 2012
Messages
5,375
Reaction score
1,865
Points
380
Location
Virginia
I knew it. I just knew it. This article explains a point that I have seen made in brief comments by other experts. The author is a medical scholar at an Ivy League institution. The author recommends only requiring isolation for the elderly and the medically ill, and warns that if we continue with blanket social-distancing measures, we could see another major outbreak because we are not allowing our population to develop herd immunity. Here is an excerpt from the article:

"The only way we are going to beat COVID-19 is by developing something called “herd immunity.” Herd immunity basically means that once a certain percentage of the population develops immunity to a virus, the rest of the population will also be protected. That percentage varies, but is often around 60-70 percent. This is why we don’t need to vaccinate 100 percent of people to eradicate or severely limit the spread of infectious diseases (e.g., polio, smallpox, and measles). . . .

"In the meantime, we are being told to quarantine as much as possible so the medical system can deal with the many people who become infected. Simple, right? Unfortunately, it’s more complicated than this.

"What the media and policymakers are not telling us is that the longer we delay the development of herd immunity, the more elderly or high-risk people will become infected and die, even if we were to maintain the quarantine indefinitely. Why is this the case?

"The reason is that only young and healthy people contribute to herd immunity. Elderly and medically ill people generally do not contribute to herd immunity because their immune systems are not strong enough to develop an immune response."

 

WinterBorn

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
34,447
Reaction score
5,307
Points
1,140
Location
Atlanta
The social distancing is to keep our systems from being overwhelmed. There are only so many ICU bed in the US. Once we have exceeded our resources, people (especially the elderly) will be left to die. It sounds heartless, but it is actually triage.
 

kyzr

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
14,064
Reaction score
4,026
Points
280
Location
The AL part of PA
I'm not disagreeing, but we can get herd immunity with a flat curve instead of a very steep curve when 2.2m die.
Trump won't keep us home any longer than necessary. He's already telling the medical experts that he doesn't want the cure to be worse than the disease. I saw Dr. Fauci say that we could have multiple peaks to push back on Trump's optimism. This could get good in about 2 or 3 weeks, the MSM will go nuts when Trump encourages businesses to open while considering mitigation measures, and governors need to step up and agree or disagree.
 

progressive hunter

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
14,717
Reaction score
2,468
Points
290
The social distancing is to keep our systems from being overwhelmed. There are only so many ICU bed in the US. Once we have exceeded our resources, people (especially the elderly) will be left to die. It sounds heartless, but it is actually triage.
triage is the most severe cases first not the oldest last,,,
and you arent leaving them to die you are to busy to get to them,,,

big difference in the two
 

WTH_Progs?

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2019
Messages
2,358
Reaction score
880
Points
210
I knew it. I just knew it. This article explains a point that I have seen made in brief comments by other experts. The author is a medical scholar at an Ivy League institution. The author recommends only requiring isolation for the elderly and the medically ill, and warns that if we continue with blanket social-distancing measures, we could see another major outbreak because we are not allowing our population to develop herd immunity. Here is an excerpt from the article:

"The only way we are going to beat COVID-19 is by developing something called “herd immunity.” Herd immunity basically means that once a certain percentage of the population develops immunity to a virus, the rest of the population will also be protected. That percentage varies, but is often around 60-70 percent. This is why we don’t need to vaccinate 100 percent of people to eradicate or severely limit the spread of infectious diseases (e.g., polio, smallpox, and measles). . . .

"In the meantime, we are being told to quarantine as much as possible so the medical system can deal with the many people who become infected. Simple, right? Unfortunately, it’s more complicated than this.

"What the media and policymakers are not telling us is that the longer we delay the development of herd immunity, the more elderly or high-risk people will become infected and die, even if we were to maintain the quarantine indefinitely. Why is this the case?

"The reason is that only young and healthy people contribute to herd immunity. Elderly and medically ill people generally do not contribute to herd immunity because their immune systems are not strong enough to develop an immune response."

BINGO, Think what sterilization will do for children going forward too, can you imagine? I'm not ready to stop quarantine yet though, this indica is way too good.

That and have you noticed MFing "SAFE SPACE" has taken on new meaning?
 
Last edited:

kyzr

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
14,064
Reaction score
4,026
Points
280
Location
The AL part of PA
The cure is already worse than the disease. This could ruin every independent restaurant and bar owner in the country, and most small businesses.
Could restaurants and bars open up considering the "social distancing"? IMHO that 6' space is just too big to be practical. So how about if owners check patron's temperatures before allowing them to be seated??
 

WinterBorn

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
34,447
Reaction score
5,307
Points
1,140
Location
Atlanta
The social distancing is to keep our systems from being overwhelmed. There are only so many ICU bed in the US. Once we have exceeded our resources, people (especially the elderly) will be left to die. It sounds heartless, but it is actually triage.
triage is the most severe cases first not the oldest last,,,
and you arent leaving them to die you are to busy to get to them,,,

big difference in the two
No. Triage separates patients into 3 categories. Likely to die regardless of treatment, likely to survive whether they receive treatment or not, and those for whom immediate treatment decides whether or not they survive.
 

Likkmee

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2015
Messages
8,672
Reaction score
1,745
Points
215
The cure is already worse than the disease. This could ruin every independent restaurant and bar owner in the country, and most small businesses.
It already has. My country too_One of my best friends going from $1000-$1500 a day during tourist season and having 8-10 employees. All went to Zero pesos nearly overnight.I think the stats are about 145,000 un-under employed at the moment. Tiny in # but enormous in a "shithole" with only about 1.6 million working aged adults
 

shockedcanadian

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2012
Messages
9,992
Reaction score
4,129
Points
390
Bottom line, no mater what decision Trump makes, he will be blamed when even one more person perishes from this. The same networks, will show glowing state prepared documentaries on President Xi and what a warrior he is.

I think eventually, in Canada as well, it will be come down to a "if you are 70+, please self isolate" request. The rest of the world will have to try and go back to some normality, while exercising "safety" in the form of constant hand washing, keeping their distance where possible, and, skipping the time honoured hand shake.

Sweden has done nothing. No distancing, no quarantine, no work stoppage. They only have 10M people but they've decided, indeed, the cure is worse than the disease. They have less than 7000 cases and 400 deaths, by doing nothing. I bet the models would have predicted that have 7-10x that, even as I view this as fairly high for their size.

It's not easy to make such decisions, but I hope when Trump makes his decision and people are going back to normal, again, with some caveats, that he at least advises the world what Sweden has done. Let the media tear their scandinavian democratic (with a king) socialist apart for their recklessness.
 
Last edited:

progressive hunter

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
14,717
Reaction score
2,468
Points
290
The social distancing is to keep our systems from being overwhelmed. There are only so many ICU bed in the US. Once we have exceeded our resources, people (especially the elderly) will be left to die. It sounds heartless, but it is actually triage.
triage is the most severe cases first not the oldest last,,,
and you arent leaving them to die you are to busy to get to them,,,

big difference in the two
No. Triage separates patients into 3 categories. Likely to die regardless of treatment, likely to survive whether they receive treatment or not, and those for whom immediate treatment decides whether or not they survive.
tri·age
/trēˈäZH/
Learn to pronounce

noun

  1. (in medical use) the assignment of degrees of urgency to wounds or illnesses to decide the order of treatment of a large number of patients or casualties.
    "a triage nurse"

verb

  1. assign degrees of urgency to (wounded or ill patients).
    "victims were triaged by paramedics before being transported to hospitals"
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
58,974
Reaction score
9,770
Points
2,140
I knew it. I just knew it. This article explains a point that I have seen made in brief comments by other experts. The author is a medical scholar at an Ivy League institution. The author recommends only requiring isolation for the elderly and the medically ill, and warns that if we continue with blanket social-distancing measures, we could see another major outbreak because we are not allowing our population to develop herd immunity. Here is an excerpt from the article:

"The only way we are going to beat COVID-19 is by developing something called “herd immunity.” Herd immunity basically means that once a certain percentage of the population develops immunity to a virus, the rest of the population will also be protected. That percentage varies, but is often around 60-70 percent. This is why we don’t need to vaccinate 100 percent of people to eradicate or severely limit the spread of infectious diseases (e.g., polio, smallpox, and measles). . . .

"In the meantime, we are being told to quarantine as much as possible so the medical system can deal with the many people who become infected. Simple, right? Unfortunately, it’s more complicated than this.

"What the media and policymakers are not telling us is that the longer we delay the development of herd immunity, the more elderly or high-risk people will become infected and die, even if we were to maintain the quarantine indefinitely. Why is this the case?

"The reason is that only young and healthy people contribute to herd immunity. Elderly and medically ill people generally do not contribute to herd immunity because their immune systems are not strong enough to develop an immune response."

I disagree with this doctor. What happens to those of us who are elderly and severe medical problems when we are surrounded by all these people with the virus? The only social distancing that would work is total isolation in your home.

While there are many vaccines in testing right now, it still won't be available until early next year. It makes no sense to have half the country get this thing because we can't wait a few months longer for a cure for everybody.

What they do know is that people who recover from covid-19 created antibodies that make them immune to future exposure. Their blood can be put into people who never had it before, making them immune as well. That would be a much better and safer route to take.
 

CowboyTed

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
8,085
Reaction score
1,696
Points
290
Location
Ireland
This is fucking nuts...

Lets explain to you where are...

Look at the graph below... The steeper the line the faster it is growing, steeper means less flat... The trick is to turn it as horizontal as possible (see China and South Korea). Countries getting really badly hit are Spain and Italy, where are the US in comparison to them on the map.

Note: Discussing Sweden is a different case and I am willing to discuss on another thread... There is many other reasons for Sweden more relatively relaxed approach and less consequences..

1586094561643.png
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
58,974
Reaction score
9,770
Points
2,140
The cure is already worse than the disease. This could ruin every independent restaurant and bar owner in the country, and most small businesses.
Could restaurants and bars open up considering the "social distancing"? IMHO that 6' space is just too big to be practical. So how about if owners check patron's temperatures before allowing them to be seated??
That doesn't help for those who are asymptomatic. They may be carrying it around without the knowledge they do have it because of no signs of illness.
 

Likkmee

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2015
Messages
8,672
Reaction score
1,745
Points
215
That's why we had chicken pox and measles parties and shit 50-60 years ago. Oddly I never caught either.....I did get chicken pox from a friend of mines son when I was about 20. Damn near killed me !
I put a metal roof on my house because the very sight of "shinglez" scarez the shit outa me.
 

kyzr

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
14,064
Reaction score
4,026
Points
280
Location
The AL part of PA
The cure is already worse than the disease. This could ruin every independent restaurant and bar owner in the country, and most small businesses.
Could restaurants and bars open up considering the "social distancing"? IMHO that 6' space is just too big to be practical. So how about if owners check patron's temperatures before allowing them to be seated??
That doesn't help for those who are asymptomatic. They may be carrying it around without the knowledge they do have it because of no signs of illness.
True, but they are only contagious for a week or two, not forever. If the virus slows the number of new cases should be small. Don't let the "perfect" be the enemy of the "good". We need to get back to work, safely.
 

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
60,917
Reaction score
7,774
Points
1,830
I knew it. I just knew it. This article explains a point that I have seen made in brief comments by other experts. The author is a medical scholar at an Ivy League institution. The author recommends only requiring isolation for the elderly and the medically ill, and warns that if we continue with blanket social-distancing measures, we could see another major outbreak because we are not allowing our population to develop herd immunity. Here is an excerpt from the article:

"The only way we are going to beat COVID-19 is by developing something called “herd immunity.” Herd immunity basically means that once a certain percentage of the population develops immunity to a virus, the rest of the population will also be protected. That percentage varies, but is often around 60-70 percent. This is why we don’t need to vaccinate 100 percent of people to eradicate or severely limit the spread of infectious diseases (e.g., polio, smallpox, and measles). . . .

"In the meantime, we are being told to quarantine as much as possible so the medical system can deal with the many people who become infected. Simple, right? Unfortunately, it’s more complicated than this.

"What the media and policymakers are not telling us is that the longer we delay the development of herd immunity, the more elderly or high-risk people will become infected and die, even if we were to maintain the quarantine indefinitely. Why is this the case?

"The reason is that only young and healthy people contribute to herd immunity. Elderly and medically ill people generally do not contribute to herd immunity because their immune systems are not strong enough to develop an immune response."

Since there is no vaccine...the Ivy League scientist whose name you do not mention...needn’t worry.
 

Ray From Cleveland

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
58,974
Reaction score
9,770
Points
2,140
The cure is already worse than the disease. This could ruin every independent restaurant and bar owner in the country, and most small businesses.
Could restaurants and bars open up considering the "social distancing"? IMHO that 6' space is just too big to be practical. So how about if owners check patron's temperatures before allowing them to be seated??
That doesn't help for those who are asymptomatic. They may be carrying it around without the knowledge they do have it because of no signs of illness.
True, but they are only contagious for a week or two, not forever. If the virus slows the number of new cases should be small. Don't let the "perfect" be the enemy of the "good". We need to get back to work, safely.
They say that six feet is the minimum safety distance. I don't know how a bar can stay in business with customers that far away from each other. In a restaurant, that would be at least two empty tables away.

If you are contagious for one day, go into a crowded bar and contaminate 30 people, all it took was that one person. The two key elements to having any semblance of immediate normalcy are N-95 masks for all the public, and hand sanitizer everywhere you go. The problem is that manufacturing enough of those masks for most Americans is a long way off.
 

kyzr

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
14,064
Reaction score
4,026
Points
280
Location
The AL part of PA
The cure is already worse than the disease. This could ruin every independent restaurant and bar owner in the country, and most small businesses.
Could restaurants and bars open up considering the "social distancing"? IMHO that 6' space is just too big to be practical. So how about if owners check patron's temperatures before allowing them to be seated??
That doesn't help for those who are asymptomatic. They may be carrying it around without the knowledge they do have it because of no signs of illness.
True, but they are only contagious for a week or two, not forever. If the virus slows the number of new cases should be small. Don't let the "perfect" be the enemy of the "good". We need to get back to work, safely.
They say that six feet is the minimum safety distance. I don't know how a bar can stay in business with customers that far away from each other. In a restaurant, that would be at least two empty tables away.

If you are contagious for one day, go into a crowded bar and contaminate 30 people, all it took was that one person. The two key elements to having any semblance of immediate normalcy are N-95 masks for all the public, and hand sanitizer everywhere you go. The problem is that manufacturing enough of those masks for most Americans is a long way off.
This may be one of our rare disagreements. I'm for opening things up sooner rather than later but with reasonable mitigation measures. Otherwise those bars and restaurants will be closed permanently. Big crowds still off-limits, no stadium baseball fans, no live concerts, no golf spectators, stores open with limited number of shoppers, etc.
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Top