Random thoughts/comments

[Secular Sanity]

You've been pushing for herd immunity. When have we achieved herd immunity without a vaccination?

Herd immunity was recognized as a naturally occurring phenomenon in the 1930s when it was observed that after a significant number of children had become immune to measles, the number of new infections temporarily decreased, including among the unvaccinated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity


Herd immunity can also be reached when a sufficient number of people in the population have recovered from a disease and have developed antibodies against future infection. For example, those who survived the 1918 flu (influenza) pandemic were later immune to infection with the H1N1 flu, a subtype of influenza A.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-cond...t-20486808

Temporarily and if you read a little further down.

The term "herd immunity" was coined in 1923. Herd immunity was first recognized as a naturally occurring phenomenon in the 1930s when A. W. Hedrich published research on the epidemiology of measles in Baltimore, and took notice that after many children had become immune to measles, the number of new infections temporarily decreased, including among susceptible children. In spite of this knowledge, efforts to control and eliminate measles were unsuccessful until mass vaccination using the measles vaccine began in the 1960s.

[Syne]

You've been pushing for herd immunity. When have we achieved herd immunity without a vaccination?

Herd immunity was recognized as a naturally occurring phenomenon in the 1930s when it was observed that after a significant number of children had become immune to measles, the number of new infections temporarily decreased, including among the unvaccinated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity


Herd immunity can also be reached when a sufficient number of people in the population have recovered from a disease and have developed antibodies against future infection. For example, those who survived the 1918 flu (influenza) pandemic were later immune to infection with the H1N1 flu, a subtype of influenza A.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-cond...t-20486808

Temporarily and if you read a little further down.

The term "herd immunity" was coined in 1923. Herd immunity was first recognized as a naturally occurring phenomenon in the 1930s when A. W. Hedrich published research on the epidemiology of measles in Baltimore, and took notice that after many children had become immune to measles, the number of new infections temporarily decreased, including among susceptible children. In spite of this knowledge, efforts to control and eliminate measles were unsuccessful until mass vaccination using the measles vaccine began in the 1960s.

And? Again, I've repeatedly said to isolate and protect the most vulnerable until a vaccine, not just rely on natural herd immunity. So yet again, you're arguing with your own straw men. Be better.

[Secular Sanity]

And? Again, I've repeatedly said to isolate and protect the most vulnerable until a vaccine, not just rely on natural herd immunity. So yet again, you're arguing with your own straw men. Be better.

Take one for the team. Is that it? You could have hidden underlying conditions that you’re not aware of. I don’t think that we could protect vulnerable populations once the virus is transmitting extensively. We’ve never achieved herd immunity before without a vaccine. To think that we could do it now is ludicrous. If it’s proven safe, a vaccine could be ready by the end of this year.

[Syne]

And? Again, I've repeatedly said to isolate and protect the most vulnerable until a vaccine, not just rely on natural herd immunity. So yet again, you're arguing with your own straw men. Be better.

Take one for the team. Is that it? You could have hidden underlying conditions that you’re not aware of. I don’t think that we could protect vulnerable populations once the virus is transmitting extensively. We’ve never achieved herd immunity before without a vaccine. To think that we could do it now is ludicrous. If it’s proven safe, a vaccine could be ready by the end of this year.

Who do you suppose that requires "taking one for the team"? The isolated and protected at-risk? Anyone with hidden, underlying conditions could just as readily succumb to the common flu, even with a vaccine (since the flu vaccine produced in a given year may not even be for the strain that becomes prevalent that year), or some other illness or complication from injury. They are basically time bombs, unbeknownst to anyone. Studies have shown that the level of antibodies retained, over time, by those infected with Covid would indicate an immunity on the order of years. And if Covid doesn't differ significantly from past epidemics, why has our response been so unprecedented? That would seem to indicate that we cannot make claims of Covid, like herd immunity, based solely on past epidemics.

As you admit yourself, we did have temporary herd immunity for measles, which provided some time to produce a vaccine. If you believe Covid follows past precedents, why wouldn't the same occur? A temporary herd immunity would protect those not known to be at-risk, and as that drops off, a vaccine takes over herd immunity.

The thing about waiting for a vaccine, as the end all, is that people are dying and having their lives shortened by the knock-on effects of lock downs alone. So you're basically trading hypothetical unknown underlying conditions for known and widespread lock down harm.

[Secular Sanity]

Who do you suppose that requires "taking one for the team"? The isolated and protected at-risk? Anyone with hidden, underlying conditions could just as readily succumb to the common flu, even with a vaccine (since the flu vaccine produced in a given year may not even be for the strain that becomes prevalent that year), or some other illness or complication from injury. They are basically time bombs, unbeknownst to anyone. Studies have shown that the level of antibodies retained, over time, by those infected with Covid would indicate an immunity on the order of years. And if Covid doesn't differ significantly from past epidemics, why has our response been so unprecedented? That would seem to indicate that we cannot make claims of Covid, like herd immunity, based solely on past epidemics.

As you admit yourself, we did have temporary herd immunity for measles, which provided some time to produce a vaccine. If you believe Covid follows past precedents, why wouldn't the same occur? A temporary herd immunity would protect those not known to be at-risk, and as that drops off, a vaccine takes over herd immunity.

The thing about waiting for a vaccine, as the end all, is that people are dying and having their lives shortened by the knock-on effects of lock downs alone. So you're basically trading hypothetical unknown underlying conditions for known and widespread lock down harm.

It looks like Pfizer is going to be reviewed by the FDA on December 10th and Moderna on the December 17th. So, it’s a moot point.

You’ll need two doses given weeks apart. Their main concern is that they’ll have a safe and effective vaccine but that people will be hesitant to get it, or because of the side effects, they won’t return for the second dose.

Be better.

┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐

[Zinjanthropos]

Hope Pfizer and Moderna legal dept prepared. Already sounding like those medicinal products shilled on daytime tv where the side effects are on a list longer than your arm. Who wants to go first?

[Leigha]

Good point ^

I’m starting to feel a bit conspiracy theory-ish in that something tells me this vaccine isn’t going to work, long term, or that it will be used to control the masses. I’m catching shades of the movie, V for Vendetta or something.

And if the vaccine is only available in the West, what happens to those traveling to the US next year (or whenever) who don’t have the vaccine available to them? It’s too soon to tell if this vaccine will prevent contracting the virus, isn’t it?

I want to break out the champagne but feeling a little skittish to celebrate just yet.

[Zinjanthropos]

Good point ^

I’m starting to feel a bit conspiracy theory-ish in that something tells me that this vaccine isn’t going to work, long term, or that it will be used to control the masses. I’m catching shades of the movie, V for Vendetta or something.

And if the vaccine is only available in the West, what happens to those traveling to the US next year (or whenever) who don’t have the vaccine available to them? It’s too soon to tell if this vaccine will prevent contracting the virus, isn’t it?

I want to break out the champagne but feeling a little skittish to celebrate just yet.

I wasn't thinking conspiracy but who knows these days? Just sounds like Big Pharma wanting to cash in and that the first couple vaccines aren't the best. There are more than two companies working on it. Personally I don't want to be first and am adopting a wait & see attitude that I hope doesn't put me at risk. However other company's lack of results could indicate there are only two on the market, so I will choose eventually, the longer this goes on.

[Leigha]

Good point ^

I’m starting to feel a bit conspiracy theory-ish in that something tells me that this vaccine isn’t going to work, long term, or that it will be used to control the masses. I’m catching shades of the movie, V for Vendetta or something.

And if the vaccine is only available in the West, what happens to those traveling to the US next year (or whenever) who don’t have the vaccine available to them? It’s too soon to tell if this vaccine will prevent contracting the virus, isn’t it?

I want to break out the champagne but feeling a little skittish to celebrate just yet.

I wasn't thinking conspiracy but who knows these days? Just sounds like Big Pharma wanting to cash in and that the first couple vaccines aren't the best. There are more than two companies working on it. Personally I don't want to be first and am adopting a wait & see attitude that I hope doesn't put me at risk. However other company's lack of results could indicate there are only two on the market, so I will choose eventually, the longer this goes on.

I hear you, I was referring to me - I’m the conspiracy theorist

Wait and see - that seems very reasonable but if it becomes a mandate like Obamacare was, you may have no choice. Not to go all deep state but. . . 

[Syne]

It looks like Pfizer is going to be reviewed by the FDA on December 10th and Moderna on the December 17th. So, it’s a moot point.

That would actually make these second lock downs the moot.

Be better.

┌∩┐(◣_◢)┌∩┐

Way to, literally, illustrate my point. Remember when we were talking about women being more emotional? Use your words.

---

Personally I don't want to be first and am adopting a wait & see attitude that I hope doesn't put me at risk. However other company's lack of results could indicate there are only two on the market, so I will choose eventually, the longer this goes on.

Considering the unintended consequences of lock downs, I'll trust my own immune system until a vaccine has proven long-term efficacy without serious side effects. God forbid years from now we find this vaccine making people sterile or something.