Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Total quarantine or herd immunity

Discussion in 'GatorNana's Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by CRIMDEFgator, Jun 4, 2020.

  1. CRIMDEFgator

    CRIMDEFgator GC Hall of Fame

    1,172
    48
    248
    Apr 10, 2007
    I apologize if this should be on an existing thread. I was going to post on Swamp Gas but it was locked. I do NOT intend this thread to be politically provocative nor do I think my personal political affiliation, or that of those who disagree with my post, is relevant to the best way for the country to handle this. But I expect some salty responses since this THFSG after-all.
    So this is what I’ve learned: Instead of just trusting in Fauci and other Government employees I have listened to a lot of immunologists and virologists on podcasts, in blogs and in articles (often peer reviewed). It seems to boil down to to two ways to handle a highly virulent plague that kills the most vulnerable people in our society. You either: 1) Shut down all but the most essential services and keep everyone at home until it goes away or we find a cure; or 2) Try for herd immunity by keeping your vulnerable at home (those over 70, people with cancer, COPD, diabetes, etc).

    The advantage to choice 1 is fewer people get sick Immediately and IF we can find a vaccine soon then we saved thousands of lives. The disadvantage is if a vaccine is years in the making then option 1 is illusory and masks may be a sign of virtue but once we declare “all safe” we get a second wave from those who still have it circulating amongst us.

    Furthermore, option 1 is problematic in that it requires a shut-down of huge portions of the US economy. Some businesses will take years to recover and some never will.

    In years to come I venture to guess studies will show that there was a tremendous cost for this to people in terms of suicide, child malnutrition, domestic violence and etc. General despair.

    So what about 2? Herd immunity? Tough love. We could’ve said “Keep your sick, elderly and otherwise at-risk at home on your own honor. Elementary through college kids should keep going to school (also freeing up a parent having to home-school with a lap-top to go back to work).“ People under 30 have essentially zero risk of dying unless he/she is a cancer patient.

    Risk here is more immediate death and infection. But the brutal truth is, if enough healthy people catch it, even if they deal with a nasty flu for a week (although millions of especially young people will never know they had it) it will lead to herd immunity. Experts define that as a level of population with anti-bodies that is so high that vulnerable people can join them in a crowd and have a low likelihood of getting enough airborne virus load to get it.

    We actually learned this has already happened here when virologists were puzzled by LA’s low COVID mortality despite massive Chinese travel (they later discovered as many as 2 million Californians had already had it, didn’t know and now carried anti-bodies)

    One of the few major countries to do herd-immunity was Sweden. They experienced a GDP growth in the first quarter while the US and most of the rest of the western democracies... well you know. Gigantic staggering losses. 40 million out of work here.

    I am firmly convinced that herd immunity is not only the best way to get past this, but the only way (and I say this as guy with: a 96 year old grandmother, a good friend with COPD, on oxygen and another close relative who is dependent on an insulin pump.

    But here is the problem... and it applies to both parties and all of our government. We really did neither. We pretended to do 1 and wrecked our economy something good. But meanwhile we have people in some states and cities partying in bars and on beaches. And now we have rioting and demonstrations on our streets (for a very good reason) but all of a sudden we hear no concerns about COVID.

    This has been sadly and horrifically botched on both sides. The only silver lining is something I heard a doc say on a podcast during a jog the other day. He said “The US didn’t fully quarantine nor did it go for herd. Now we have no choice. It’s herd immunity”.

    So by default we are in #2. Let’s hope it works out. I’m a glass half full guy who actually hopes for a Gator kickoff in September. ;). God bless you all and Go Gators!
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. mutz87

    mutz87 #restinpowerrbg VIP Member

    36,034
    3,126
    2,186
    Aug 30, 2014
    FTR, Sweden was being talked about for a few months because they went the *herd immunity route* Their top epidemiologist apologized the other day because it was wrong and cost many more lives. Not to mention they still suffered extreme negative economic effects.

    The core of the problem is that we can not do #1 forever, not without government doing something massive in helping get necessities to sustain life. This would come at unimaginable costs. #2 is a big problem because as Sweden is learning and as many public health experts have been saying almost since Day 1, we don't know what the full antibody effects will be and thus we are not guaranteed herd immunity, at least not to the level of protection many seem to think. Even Fauci came out and said it's possible that it would only be short lived.

    There's still more we need to know, but today as it was a month ago, two months ago, we are still facing real dangers heading into the future.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    7,115
    1,852
    1,128
    Oct 30, 2017
    Neither. Take precautions, trace and isolate people who are sick, and shut down when necessary until there's a vaccine. We don't need to remain shutdown the entire time if the government is doing its job.
     
    • Winner Winner x 5
    • Like Like x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  4. CRIMDEFgator

    CRIMDEFgator GC Hall of Fame

    1,172
    48
    248
    Apr 10, 2007
    Thanks for the highly intelligent reply. I was pleasantly surprised. I agree with everything you said. And I hope my post didn’t sound flippant or didactic about herd immunity. This is simply the conclusion I’ve come to. I have a small law firm and I’ve just become concerned about non-COVID human costs here in Florida. I have many, many clients who want to work and are trying to get back to work and I think I have valid questions about the actual COVID death rate of healthy people balanced against the Government shut-down. That’s all I’m saying.

    And Sweden did post up some good GDP numbers.

    As for your point on number 2, I get it. But what real choice do we have? It’s herd or we’re done. We can’t keep 40-50-60 million Americans out of work or we’re done. That’s it. So we keep our vulnerable at home and go to work or we just give up.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  5. CRIMDEFgator

    CRIMDEFgator GC Hall of Fame

    1,172
    48
    248
    Apr 10, 2007
    The Government? Doing its job? It’s job is to get its pension. None of them give a crap about us or our families.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 3
  6. docspor

    docspor GC Hall of Fame

    2,351
    858
    533
    Nov 30, 2010
    there're no absolutes....

    2 might be the best option now. But, it was not very attractive 2 months ago. Hell, when this started we did not know who was vulnerable & who was not. Given its novelty & high level of contagion, 1 made sense at the time b/c it gave us a chance to get our shit together. If it turns out that in the end no one is really better off than Sweden, some may think that 2 was THE RIGHT choice, but that is not how situations with incomplete information work & that is an outcome bias. It's not like the guy who buys a lottery ticket & wins made a better decision than the guy who bought one & lost.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. docspor

    docspor GC Hall of Fame

    2,351
    858
    533
    Nov 30, 2010
    This makes little sense to me. First, given that we have some say in gov, I am not sure we don't give a crap about ourselves, but I get your pt. Second, they need not give a crap about us. If we structure incentives correctly, they will behave as if they give a crap about us. (my city gov is coming to my house tomorrow to install municipal internet) You say that "their" job is to get its pension, so it seems they have incentives to get that & therefore I would think there would be at least a correlation between their decisions & actions & their pension. If there is not, we are to blame.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. mutz87

    mutz87 #restinpowerrbg VIP Member

    36,034
    3,126
    2,186
    Aug 30, 2014
    At this point, I just don't know. These are very strange times to me, especially with protests and rioting kinda blowing mitigation to hell. Meanwhile many of us continue to stay home and distanced *extremely* (I support the reasons for the protesting and the emotional outburst but this couldn't have come at a worse time). Opening back up more has to occur, but yet there is immense concern about numbers spiking again, and then what do we do? It would not be as if we have some choice to ignore it. And balancing means making choices about likely deaths--and to the extent that this happens, it's not truly balancing against economic considerations, which in some ways are secondary. This is not unlike what we'd experience in war if we were invaded; we'd have to deal with the immediate problem first, which is the invasion.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  9. CRIMDEFgator

    CRIMDEFgator GC Hall of Fame

    1,172
    48
    248
    Apr 10, 2007
    Thanks for the reply. What a great defense of Federalism you give. None of us can control what the head of the FBI or Nancy Pelosi does but all of us have the right to complain to our Mayor or show up at City or County Commission meetings and many of us know one of those folks. And if we don’t line what they’re doing we vote them out and they know it! Most power should he in cities and counties. A little more in States. Feds should control borders, army, navy and Air Force.
     
  10. docspor

    docspor GC Hall of Fame

    2,351
    858
    533
    Nov 30, 2010
    You make things that are different in degree sound like they are different in kind. Mathematically my "control" over who my Mayor is & who my Prez is may go from 1/100,000 to 1/10,000,000, but who gives a shit? & in this day in age it is exceedingly naive to think that the Feds SHOULD have so little on their plate. Despite what ZZ top sez, we're bad, we're global.
     
  11. thegator92

    thegator92 Premium Member

    7,926
    193
    288
    Apr 3, 2007
    Option 1 was chosen because there was very little knowledge of how the virus operates, and there was a fear that hospital systems would be overwhelmed. Decisions have to be made in the face of incomplete information.

    Option 2 is not a slamdunk. "Herd immunity" is not some sort of scientific law. It is an abstract concept used to explain the purpose of vaccinations. One obvious issue is that we do not know anything about COVID immunity. We are all exposed to the common cold, yet people still get it because there is no lasting immunity. We are mostly all exposed to influenza yet we are still vulnerable each year because of slightly different strains.

    What we are doing right now is not sustainable, and I don't think it was meant to be permanent. It was the best choice at the time. But are we pulling out of it too early?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  12. 96Gatorcise

    96Gatorcise GC Hall of Fame

    9,101
    1,225
    723
    Aug 6, 2008
    Tampa
    Man Behind Sweden’s Controversial Virus Strategy Admits Mistakes

     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2020
  13. GatorGuyDallas

    GatorGuyDallas VIP Member

    10,700
    2,654
    1,468
    Apr 3, 2007
    Plano, Texas
    At this point only Belgium, the UK, Spain and Italy have a higher death per million than Sweden. They’ve been steadily climbing that list. Their Nordic neighbors rate is about 89% below Sweden.

    And, they don’t have anything remotely resembling herd immunity.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  14. BigCypressGator1981

    BigCypressGator1981 Premium Member

    1,062
    278
    478
    Oct 11, 2011
    Epidemiologists were predicting approximately 400,000 deaths in the US in 2020 if nothing was shut down.

    We are just over 100,000 now. If it was 300,000 more most of us would have been personally affected in some way by knowing people who died from this. Hospitals would have been overrun. The scenes depicted in the media would have been horrific. Pandemonium would have ensued. The economy absolutely would NOT have continued as it was regardless of the governments actions to shut down.

    The virus caused the recession. Not the government.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Winner Winner x 3
  15. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    5,737
    886
    588
    Apr 16, 2007
    What if there’s no such thing as “herd immunity”?

    Even today, they don’t know how long the antibodies will last. How can a credible epidemiologist or virologist present you with this “herd immunity” concept as a legitimate policy option when they don’t even know how long or how effective individual immunity is? Answer; they can’t. Anyone who presents such false options shreds whatever credibility they had on the subject (whether fake or credentialed). I would seriously question the credibility of these podcasts. Nothing wrong with listening to them, but there should be a high degree of skepticism. Sounds like this stuff is turning into or an extension of the anti-vaxxer movement which is mostly based on misinformation.

    You raised a point about govt not caring about you. You think the podcasts care about you? Talk radio? Most of them are in it for the clicks, most of the “experts” are fake. Esp the deeper down you go. There’s some basic common sense here. Real experts aren’t wasting their time on twitter or on podcasts.
     
  16. AndyGator

    AndyGator GC Hall of Fame

    3,231
    290
    268
    Apr 10, 2007
    Actually that is exactly why we should have had a national policy in place mitigating the pandemic. Did you not see how some of the US Navy ships were grounded because of lack of planning and preparedness? Totally made our national security vulnerable. Never have I seen a political party abandon national security like the modern Republicans have done. All to support the emperor with no clothes on. Your kind of "federalism" is damned dangerous. :rolleyes:
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Dislike Dislike x 2
  17. AgingGator

    AgingGator GC Hall of Fame

    1,784
    356
    408
    Apr 24, 2007
    Andy’s response above is indicative of why things like this has become the issue that it has.

    Political opportunism. From politicians as well as partisans and of course our corrupt media. The opportunists wanted to create a panic and they did. What this situation required more than anything in the world was honesty, and it was no where to be found. Not from China, not from the WHO, and of course not from our politicians on BOTH sides.

    This was going to be a rough period no matter what we did. Just like an earthquake , just like a tornado or hurricane. There is no “good” outcome.

    A viral infection with limited information. The best course of action would have been for the so called experts to connect what we know with what we don’t know. Fauci failed miserably here. The information that he did give out was vague, and then he didn’t reign it in when the media started taking the vague information into all kinds of worst case scenarios. Fauci should have given several statements like the one Mueller had to make on January 18, 2019 because the media was reporting erroneous, dishonest information.

    There was never a “one size fits all” solution to this. We knew that viruses spread faster in densely populated urban areas and that they don’t like warm weather. Both of those were poo-poo’ed by the media because we didn’t have 100% proof. Those two points should have been the cornerstones to any policy actions.
     
    • Disagree x 3
    • Like x 2
    • Agree x 2
    • Winner x 2
    • Creative x 1
  18. CRIMDEFgator

    CRIMDEFgator GC Hall of Fame

    1,172
    48
    248
    Apr 10, 2007
    Andy had to make it party based but if you want to do that look at hardest hit cities and states. All run by Dems. Why did Cuomo kill thousands of nursing home patients by ordering COVID positive people back in and then limit busing and subway schedules to pack more people in to get it? Easy to Monday morning QB a lot of people. I do agree with poster who pointed out a very real reason to go with 1 was fear of surge overwhelming our hospitals. I agreed with that rationale. But after it didn’t happen some political leaders hung on to draconian rules for no other reason I could see except they seem to like the power. Case in point is the Floyd demonstrations. Those same leaders like “drag you out of the ocean” DeBlasio suddenly don’t give a crap. The rest of you are also right that we don’t know enough about the virus to know herd immunity works. But two central points of mine remain true. First, we had to end quarantine at some point knowing it would come back or we’d all starve to death so then what was the point (other than preventing surge)? Second Sweden had GDP growth while we had massive contraction (which our enemy who caused this in great part, China, is gleefully taking full advantage of). There was zero point in wrecking the lives of tens of millions of Americans when we could’ve isolated our vulnerable and acted normally. Actual COVID mortality, now that we know more about true infection rates, is working out to be about 2x that of seasonal flu. This all started with insane projections from a Brit, who no one should listen to ever again, who said the UK would have 200x more Swine Flu deaths than they actually did a few years back. How come these people are never held to account? As for my local elected officials? I know some, or know people who do. I’m more confident in getting redress of my grievances locally than federally (from people of either party). I continue to not view this politically. It’s a question of what is the rational way to approach a unique and very troubling problem.
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 4
  19. CRIMDEFgator

    CRIMDEFgator GC Hall of Fame

    1,172
    48
    248
    Apr 10, 2007
    Great post AgingGator. Let’s give Andy a pass since everyone is upset and scared. But everything you said is spot damn on. If I saw your post before I typed my last I wouldn’t have bothered to write it. Lol. Cheers and God bless my friend. Go Gators everyone. Okay, off to work.
     
  20. Crusher

    Crusher GC Hall of Fame

    2,184
    198
    388
    Apr 19, 2007
    Hate to say this but scientific knowledge of corona viruses indicate that a vaccine may not be a long-term solution. It may only give temporary immunity. I suspect that humans will just have to acquire a herd immunity to the current form of the virus. A lot of scientists predicted that this would become a seasonal virus now that it has jumped to humans similar to the other known Corona viruses that infect humans, because of constant mutations of the virus. Hopefully, mutations will also reduce its severity such that it will be more like the seasonal flu (still dangerous to certain populations) or the common cold.

    Those waiting on a vaccine may just be mining fool's gold, although trying to slow its eventual spread to the population down is smart because of the huge amount of resources that it takes to treat patients who do become very ill.