DiscussMormonism.com

It has been a while since Chap mentioned this phrase. It was used publicly in England but was treated with disfavor in the United States. The phrase implies a lot of people dying so the preferred phrase her has been flattening the curve. I can see how that plan helps hospitals cope by spreading out the people needing hospitalization. However I do not see much to create a downward side of the curve except the development of herd immunity.

an article wherein Sweden is optamistic about developing this immunity.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/22/no-lock ... weeks.html
I cannot help but wonder if the conclusion is premature. Still I hear little that sounds clearly realistic on how we ease back into business. It is almost as unclear as how people expect the food supply to continue with food processing facing shutdowns due to the virus. There have been a few observations that the working class continues work in conditions favoring contagion in order to keep the managerial and owner class able to maintain social distancing.Is that really maintainable?

Has everybody maintained their two year food supply? I have not.(ok I heard it was shorter now but still looking like it could become useful)

Vrooom!

Herd immunity is a common term used when talking about infectious disease. At this point, nobody knows whether COVID-19 infection will confer immunity that lasts long enough for us to reach herd immunity. That’s why there it’s so much effort expended on developing a vaccine.

If the curve you are talking about flattening is new cases or deaths per day, anything that slows down transmission can reduce those numbers: social distancing, containment, vaccination, herd immunity. There are several problems with a pure herd immunity strategy. First, we don’t know whether it will work. Second, a fairly high percentage of the population has to get infected. Third, you risk an overrun of hospitals. I wish Sweden good luck. If they succeed, we’ll have another option. But I wouldn’t want to be a lab rat in that experiment.

Res Ipsa, I was not intending to make a proposal but to think about a few things. I also wish Sweden luck. I think it is way to soon to know how their strategy works.

To my mind you present a couple of questions. First if getting the virus itself does not give people recovering some immunity I cannot imagine how a vaccine could possibly work. If that is the case we will have to just live with the disease, survival of those who survive.

Of course a vaccine is best deal. An effective treatment would be good as well
In the meantime. I can see that slowing the spread reduces the deaths per day, does it reduce the total number of people who die of the virus? Well at least some if treatment facilities can be kept from being totally overrun.

More to the point of the OP

huckelberry wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 22, 2020 11:15 pm

...
Has everybody maintained their two year food supply?

is this some sort of ironic/facetious statement given the "herd" topic of this thread?

subgenius wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 23, 2020 3:18 am

More to the point of the OP

Did you cut off the Twitter name at the top of this tweet because you don’t want anyone to see that you use Bill Mitchell as a source?

Bill Mitchell. Incredible

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 23, 2020 1:31 am

Herd immunity is a common term used when talking about infectious disease.

I may be wrong, but isn't 'herd immunity' typically discussed in the context of vaccines? Such as you have to vaccinate a certain percentage of the population (It doesn't have to be 100%) to reach herd immunity. I've heard Covid-19 requires 70% of the population to be immune to achieve herd immunity. But without a vaccine, it would require making 70% of the population sick, in which case some of them would die, and since they're contagious, they would infect the other 30%. When I hear people like Sean Hannity say we just need to let everyone get sick and we will achieve herd immmunity, I don't understand how that is a strategy? Am I missing something?

subgenius wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 23, 2020 3:18 am

More to the point of the OP

It could be because those states have a lot of people in them. But I like your logic that voting democrat is a risk factor for Covid-19.