Live data from Hacker News

Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

wsj.com

11–20 of 381 posts

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#11
post #7
post #3

Just wait until you get the British variant. Edit: to explain my point a bit: the British variant has a higher reproductive number. The existing immunity and measures in some cases can be enough to reduce the numbers of the traditional variants, while not being enough to stop the growth of the British variant. This is happening in Germany for instance right now. Currently the numbers are suddenly stagnating and soon…

Why spread FUD? Both vaccines in the US seem to be effective against variants.

Pfizer has stated that their virus might not have the same efficacy against some of the variants - in particular the ones that have included changes to the spike protein.

This includes one of the two British variants (the one from Bristol rather than the one from Kent).

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#12
Note that we still don't have much data on whether and by how much vaccinations do reduce transmission. The objective of the vaccines was to minimize serious cases. But transmissions are a different story. It could easily be that the vaccine prevents serious cases in 95% of people but transmission is not impacted significantly. We just don't know yet.

Why is this relevant? Because the whole concept of "herd immunity" is only about transmission.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#13
The author, Marty Makary, is a surgon. He does not have any expertise regarding viruses or epidemiology.

He's completely ignoring all other reasons why infection might go down, the most important one being effective countermeasures, like wearing masks and social distancing. He's also ignoring that the case rates are stagnating due to the British variant. Germany is in that phase now. Cases of the British variant are in exponential growth, current lockdown measures are not effective against it.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#14

Note that we still don't have much data on whether and by how much vaccinations do reduce transmission. The objective of the vaccines was to minimize serious cases. But transmissions are a different story. It could easily be that the vaccine prevents serious cases in 95% of people but transmission is not impacted significantly. We just don't know yet. Why is this relevant? Because the whole concept of "herd immunity"…

For BioNTech it looks good: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-21/pfizer-bi...

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#15
How much of that drop is because of the change in threshold of PCR testing, or do to the overall reduction in testing? Personally I think the testing has been poor since the beginning and we shouldn't trust the numbers we currently have. If the numbers change dramatically in the near future, why should we trust them? Or maybe the truth is that the numbers that come in April are the actual truth and what we have seen is do to failures in testing.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#16
I really want to see positive news, and the vaccination rollout (despite how uneven it is) is definitely positive.

But the focus on herd immunity, if conflated with immunity after infection, is misleading:

Look at what's happening in Manaus:

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n394

The news there are definitely sobering :(

Unfortunately, the multiplication of strains of covid19 was inevitable, due to the decision of multiple countries to let the disease spread almost unchecked through its population :/

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#17
post #10
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why spread FUD? Both vaccines in the US seem to be effective against variants.

The British variant spreads faster than you can possibly vaccinate people. In Germany the case numbers are still going down, but if you look at the wildtype and B.1.1.7 separately, the wildtype is going down while the British variant is in full exponential growth. And that is in spite of a full nationwide hard lockdown.

*than Germany can possibly vaccinate people

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#18
I wonder if Humanity will shut itself out of existence if we start counting every single pathology on that affects Humans on big banners and "social-media-fy" it. I mean, there were 3x more deaths by overdose in SF than by Covid. There are 2x more deaths in India by TB, and a lot more from malnutrition and poverty.

Why are the Americans doing this propaganda op ? Ionnidis' latest paper even points to lockdowns not being particularly helpful across multiple countries.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#19

Note that we still don't have much data on whether and by how much vaccinations do reduce transmission. The objective of the vaccines was to minimize serious cases. But transmissions are a different story. It could easily be that the vaccine prevents serious cases in 95% of people but transmission is not impacted significantly. We just don't know yet. Why is this relevant? Because the whole concept of "herd immunity"…

Minor quibble: the vaccines were tested on their ability to minimize symptomatic cases of any kind, not just serious cases. In fact, the Pfizer study didn't have any data on serious cases at all (they had a total of 4 serious cases, one in the vaccine group, three in the control group - not enough to make any prediction at all on the effect against serious cases.

The other studies fare a little better, but we know a lot more about the effects on any kind of Covid19 than on serious cases, or on transmission of SARS-COV-2 itself.

Re: Opinion: We’ll Have Herd Immunity by April

#20
post #13

The author, Marty Makary, is a surgon. He does not have any expertise regarding viruses or epidemiology. He's completely ignoring all other reasons why infection might go down, the most important one being effective countermeasures, like wearing masks and social distancing. He's also ignoring that the case rates are stagnating due to the British variant. Germany is in that phase now. Cases of the British variant are…

The author’s point is that by now, something at least 50% of the US population has had the virus and 15% have had the vaccine. And that for some reason, the official sources are just putting their hands on their ears and saying “LALALALALALALALALA” at the mere mention of herd immunity.

There is a resistance to accepting that this pandemic is soon going to end the way that just about every pandemic in the entirety of human history and pre-history has ended: enough people have had the virus and developed some level of immunity to prevent pandemic-level spread. The only difference is that we are giving the natural process a little boost through vaccination (but not by much since we got a late start because we refused to do challenge trials, so the vaccine that was done in May was not distributed until December because more tedious and less accurate non-challenge trials had to be done).

I think there will be a hesitancy to accept this because lockdowns[0] and universal vaccination, reasonable ideas, have moved on from being points of pragmatic policy to being points of political dogma, such that they are resistant even to changing facts. And after being fed the nonsensical “if it saves even one life” line by their political heroes, it will be difficult for many people to accept that the real calculation involves accepting some “advanced” deaths (a strange concept because old folks on their death bed succumbing to the next common cold are usually not considered to have died earlier than they “should have”) for the sake of getting on with life, just like we do every year with all sorts of diseases in circulation.

It also represents of failure by the public health officials and experts. Because the vaccine was needlessly delayed, not many more lives were saved than if the virus was just allowed to run its course sometime last summer (once we discovered that ventilators were actively harmful in many cases) along with some basic precautions for vulnerable populations. We were held back by rigid medical ethics requirements banning challenge trials. So while individual cities could have hundreds or thousands of new cases per day, deliberately infecting a few hundred healthy people for the purpose of testing the vaccine was PROHIBITED. We lost half a year to this, trillions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of lives, and millions of livelihoods. All because we let a bunch of medical ethics theorists in ivory towers told us that we couldn't run common-sense low-risk trials.

Post reply on HN