Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe • Hacker News Board

Re: Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

#141

Post by jgwil2 » Mon, May 03, 2021, 7:13 PM UTC

lol768 wrote: post #2

> Polls show that about 30 percent of the U.S. population is still reluctant to be vaccinated. That number is expected to improve but probably not enough. “It is theoretically possible that we could get to about 90 percent vaccination coverage, but not super likely, I would say,” said Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. This is really poor, positive vaccine sentiment in…

I think a big part of it is how genuinely fucked up the US healthcare system is. This sows a lot of distrust towards all related industries, including the pharmaceutical industry. Not at all saying this is a true or justified belief, but from what I can gather many of the skeptics think this is a scam designed to profit Big Pharma. Others are equally disposed to distrust government in general. And on top of that you had a president who politicized the pandemic from the very beginning, meaning for many people there is simply no way for them to view the situation rationally or objectively.

Re: Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

#142

Post by _-david-_ » Mon, May 03, 2021, 7:14 PM UTC

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #127

_-david-_ wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue with changing their statements is not so much that they changed their statements, but how certain they were with their original statements. Some of the scientists did not start their statements with stuff like "with the available data we believe". They made it sound like what they were saying was 100% determined. Anybody who disagreed (even if it is now the prevailing view) was called anti-science. It is no…

I wince thinking back to that interview with Fauci early in the pandemic when he explicitly told people that we didn't need to wear masks. That statement became a massive weapon in the hands of the anti-maskers. The problem is, I'm not sure what Fauci could have said that would have been better. People are irrational , and he knew that if he recommended masks right away, then people would have begin hoarding them ASA…

I understand why the scientists lied (about masks), but it causes people to not trust them. You lie one to many times and people will stop believing anything you have to say. Fauci and other scientists should have re-read The Boy Who Cried Wolf before lying multiple times.

Also, just to be clear it wasn't strictly Fauci. The CDC and the Surgeon General made similar remarks about masks as well. If it was just Fauci I think that would have been less damaging, but to have multiple government agencies / officals all lying just looks bad.

Re: Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

#143

Post by Sohcahtoa82 » Mon, May 03, 2021, 7:15 PM UTC

laGrenouille wrote: post #53

I strongly suspect that the U.S. will largely return to some version of 'normal' by the end of the summer at the latest. No required masks, minimal social distancing, and a return to pre-pandemic levels of domestic travel. Under this scenario, it seems that either enough people in a region will be vaccinated to reach local herd immunity or the virus (unstopped by masks/lockdowns/distancing) will quickly infect the re…

Not sure why you're being downvoted, because I think this is accurate.

We will reach a point, probably in a couple months, where everyone in the US who wants the vaccine will have gotten one. By that time, restrictions will be lifted, mask mandates will be gone, lockdowns ended, etc.

The virus will continue to spread among the unvaccinated. And I will have zero sympathy for the people who choose not to get the vaccine and end up hospitalized because of the virus. (Note my emphasis on CHOOSE: I still have sympathy for those that can't get the vaccine and end up infected)

Re: Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

#144

Post by cipher_system » Mon, May 03, 2021, 7:15 PM UTC

jimbob45 wrote: post #102

mr_cyborg wrote: post #28

I wanted to add that a lot of the people I know who are “vaccine hesitant” are just waiting a little longer to see how things go. I don’t see a whole lot of representation of folks who intend to get the vaccine this summer when I read publications and articles about it, but I would wager that there’s more people intending to get it but not quite yet than we think.

I know this is anecdotal but I’ve been closely following my friends who have been on the fence about getting vaccines in several states and the number one blocking issue they encounter is bad website design in signing up for the vaccine. I’ve had friends all ready to such up even though they’re not 100% on board who get bored after five minutes of not being able to sign up and just leave. For example, at HEB, I signe…

I got a call today from my district health care center and they told me I have an appointment for Saturday. Took no more than a couple of seconds and only required me to press one button.

Super convenient and it was so much easier than booking a covid test through our health regions app.

I work with web stuff but often dislike using it, maybe someday we can make it so that it's as easy as receiving or making a call.

Re: Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

#145

Post by jgwil2 » Mon, May 03, 2021, 7:16 PM UTC

2lwxxtj wrote: post #19

lol768 wrote: post #2

> Polls show that about 30 percent of the U.S. population is still reluctant to be vaccinated. That number is expected to improve but probably not enough. “It is theoretically possible that we could get to about 90 percent vaccination coverage, but not super likely, I would say,” said Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. This is really poor, positive vaccine sentiment in…

People in the US rightly don't trust the pharmaceutical industry or the government. They may not be able to pinpoint why, but when they look around they see that every year the people around them are more obese and have more chronic health conditions. They may not be able to tie those things together consciously, but it leaves the powerful subconscious feeling that the government and pharmaceutical industries do not…

Not sure why you're being downvoted; this is exactly the mentality of many people. I don't even think it's subconscious necessarily: many people think this is a conspiracy to ensure profits for Big Pharma.

EDIT: to be clear, I do not endorse such a view. I am merely stating that I have observed others espousing it.

Re: Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

#146

Post by kosievdmerwe » Mon, May 03, 2021, 7:16 PM UTC

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #133

kosievdmerwe wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Polio and Smallpox are terrible diseases, causing terrible deformities or scarring, while COVID is essentially a slightly more dangerous flu.

"Slightly" is incredibly wrong. Estimates are that it's around 10x as deadly, and that's only counting death, and not the permanent lung damage some survivors are experiencing.

Either way, my point stands, one set of diseases leaves obvious physical marks, the other just kills your or leaves invisible harm.

Which do you think will prompt people to be more happy to get a vaccine? Some invisible injury, if that, or knowing people with permanent deformities from a long time scourge?

Re: Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

#147

Post by kickout » Mon, May 03, 2021, 7:19 PM UTC

devonbleak wrote: post #92

kickout wrote: post #40

This story is also an example of the conflicting stories we get out of leaders? How it is possible we'll _never_ reach herd immunity? They were saying we needed that just last summer! That loss of trust in giving us correct/congruent information from leaders is absolutely hurting America right now

It's not conflicting. New evidence changes science-based understanding and decisions. This is at the core of how science works. It's impossible to know everything about everything immediately so you make the best decisions you can based on the information you do have. Herd immunity is still the holy grail of dealing with an infectious disease like this. If new evidence says we're not going to reach it, for whatever r…

I have never been a 'information is etched in stone' type. It is very much dynamic But the people making these calls are unaccountable.

We don't have herd immunity for _many_ pathogens, yet this is the one we irrevocably change society (in ways I would argue are more harmful to humans than this particular virus)? Nobody has a black and white information, yet our leaders are treating that way and refuse to outline off-ramps to these restrictions.

Re: Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

#148

Post by Sohcahtoa82 » Mon, May 03, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

kickout wrote: post #134

Sohcahtoa82 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Downvoted. I'd like to snuff out this notion that changing your story after receiving new information is a negative thing. Research, especially on something like a new virus, takes time. We know more about the virus now than we did a year ago, so of course predictions and recommendations are going to change. That is not weakness, that is science.

Agree that updating your story/viewpoint with new information is a good trait to have. However, the updating appears to be one-sided (more restrictive/slower re-opening etc.). Why do vaccinated people still need to wear masks and why are outdoor activities being curtained when the evidence is clear they are low risk. Again, the updating of information _appears_ to be one-sided

> Why do vaccinated people still need to wear masks and why are outdoor activities being curtained when the evidence is clear they are low risk.

Because they're still collecting data on whether or not vaccinated people can still be transmitters of the virus. And when visiting a business, the business doesn't know who is and isn't vaccinated, so it's easier to just still require masks on everybody.

Also, imagine if we decide to reopen, unmask, and gather again, only for COVID cases to have a massive spike, and have to shut down again. They're playing it safe until we either have more data, or enough people have been vaccinated that it doesn't matter.

Re: Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

#149

Post by rportugal » Mon, May 03, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

laurent92 wrote: post #48

mr_cyborg wrote: post #28

I wanted to add that a lot of the people I know who are “vaccine hesitant” are just waiting a little longer to see how things go. I don’t see a whole lot of representation of folks who intend to get the vaccine this summer when I read publications and articles about it, but I would wager that there’s more people intending to get it but not quite yet than we think.

France here, I’m just waiting for the end of the state of emergency + two months. I’ll vaccinate when the press is free to discuss the problems (and does it). I estimate we can’t know the truth about vaccines as long as the press is mandated by law to say what the president mandates them to say, and there is no reason to trust a president who holds his “conseil des ministres” in a bunker (“conseil de défense sanitair…

My exact position, but I'm in the UK. However, you can't have a civilised discussion about any of this, without being labeled anti-vax...

Re: Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ from Covid Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

#150

Post by rsynnott » Mon, May 03, 2021, 7:24 PM UTC

kickout wrote: post #139

ashtonbaker wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"They" don't set the goalposts - reality does. Also, they are not saying that no level of vaccination is good enough - they are saying that the level of vaccination needed is dependent on a variety of factors, and that level is becoming increasingly difficult to reach due to variants and vaccine hesitancy. From the article: > Early on, the target herd immunity threshold was estimated to be about 60 to 70 percent of t…

when did transmissibility become a defining metric? There are more transmissible pathogens (colds, flu), but we don't change society for those. I was told that mortality was the defining metric (and thus the reason for the restrictions, to save lives), so if B.1.1.7 is less lethal, why would the transmissibility play in? Also why isn't immunization from natural infection counting? I've seen to reason to _discount_ it…

> so if B.1.1.7 is less lethal, why would the transmissibility play in?

I mean, if it was a _lot_ less lethal, and became permanently dominant, then the problem goes away. I think your mistake is in assuming that it is less lethal. What gave you that idea? It is believed to probably be _more_ lethal.

> Also why isn't immunization from natural infection counting?

It 'counts', but less so than vaccine immunity, because some variants defeat it while not defeating most vaccines (there's some messiness at the edges here; for instance AZ may not work very well for the South African variant).