Herd immunity. Where is the evidence it is not an option?

pgj2015

When will we get herd immunity in Ireland?

Podge201

When the marts open, phase 2.

bazza1

When Coppers reopens!

pgj2015

after hours answers there. obviously no one knows exactly when we will get herd immunity but does anyone have any idea when we might?

Danno

pgj2015 wrote: »

When will we get herd immunity in Ireland?

One of three scenarios that I can think of right now:

1: The virus has been here since early winter and we already are nearing it.
2: The lockdown was implemented early enough and it's measures will ensure the disease dies out in the local population - but when the airports re-open for regular travel we'll be back at square one.
3: When there is a vaccine.

noodler

Need 70% infected I think.

Staplor

pgj2015 wrote: »

after hours answers there. obviously no one knows exactly when we will get herd immunity but does anyone have any idea when we might?

Has it been confirmed that herd immunity is possible for this?

Del Griffith

Staplor wrote: »

Has it been confirmed that herd immunity is possible for this?

It's the most likely scenario and has not been disproven so is a reasonable working assumption

Del Griffith

Danno wrote: »

2: The lockdown was implemented early enough and it's measures will ensure the disease dies out in the local population - but when the airports re-open for regular travel we'll be back at square one.

This is true and really just shows how pointless the lockdown really is.
Vulnerables really should have been cocooned while the rest get on with it and build community immunity.

wakka12

pgj2015 wrote: »

after hours answers there. obviously no one knows exactly when we will get herd immunity but does anyone have any idea when we might?

Well at this rate, never. Depends completely on how many cases emerge after lockdown, will probably be a similar rate of infection as Sweden is experiencing. Apparently some time in May 30% of the population of the city of Stockholm will have been infected at some point

Beasty

We don't even know if we can get any material immunity from this

Assetbacked

Some recent reports have come out to estimate it takes between 10-20% population infection to achieve herd immunity. We almost certainly have many multiples of people infected beyond the official reported cases which means, potentially, we are not far off herd immunity.

afatbollix

When theres a vaccine and 70% of the population has had one.

Jim Bob Scratcher

Never, if we keep these over the top restrictions in place

Still waters

Can we even get herd immunity for a virus like covid19, i could get it next week and get it again in 3 months time, i still wouldn't be immune to it

ShineOn7

Assetbacked wrote: »

Some recent reports have come out to estimate it takes between 10-20% population infection to achieve herd immunity. We almost certainly have many multiples of people infected beyond the official reported cases which means, potentially, we are not far off herd immunity.

Eh?

Every report I've read says 60/70%

wakka12

Assetbacked wrote: »

Some recent reports have come out to estimate it takes between 10-20% population infection to achieve herd immunity. We almost certainly have many multiples of people infected beyond the official reported cases which means, potentially, we are not far off herd immunity.

How could herd immunity possible take effect if the vast majority of people dont have the virus. That just makes no sense, why is there ever any panic about virus outbreaks in general if it only takes 10% to achieve herd immunity

Del Griffith

Del Griffith wrote: »

It's the most likely scenario and has not been disproven so is a reasonable working assumption

That's a whopping big assumption and one only the media and politicians are making. No medical personnel are saying this.

There is no evidence whatsoever that one is immune following infection with many physicians emphasising this at every opportunity.

I hope it is a thing and between that and a vaccine, we'll be sorted, but as of right now, there is not one piece of evidence backing up the herd immunity theory.

MadYaker

afatbollix wrote: »

When theres a vaccine and 70% of the population has had one.

This is the answer.

MadYaker

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That's a whopping big assumption and one only the media and politicians are making. No medical personnel are saying this.

There is no evidence whatsoever that one is immune following infection with many physicians emphasising this at every opportunity.

I hope it is a thing and between that and a vaccine, we'll be sorted, but as of right now, there is not one piece of evidence backing up the herd immunity theory.

There’s loads of evidence that people who get the infection develop antibodies and so should be immune. How long the immunity lasts is the big unknown I think.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/one-in-five-new-yorkers-may-have-had-covid-19-antibody-tests-suggest-1.4237417

Lucifer31

Jim Bob Scratcher wrote: »

Never, if we keep these over the top restrictions in place

Exactly right. How can you possibly get herd immunity if you're hiding at home, while your immune system weakens, if anything.

Peregrinus

Lucifer31 wrote: »

Exactly right. How can you possibly get herd immunity if you're hiding at home, while your immune system weakens, if anything.

You can get it by vaccinating a critical mass of the population.

Will we get herd immunity without a vaccine? Probably not, no, just like we don't have herd immunity to measles or flu or the common cold without a vaccine.

dePeatrick

Danno wrote: »

One of three scenarios that I can think of right now:

1: The virus has been here since early winter and we already are nearing it.
2: The lockdown was implemented early enough and it's measures will ensure the disease dies out in the local population - but when the airports re-open for regular travel we'll be back at square one.
3: When there is a vaccine.

1: Everyone who had a sniffle in early winter likes to think they had Covid, not true.

2: The lockdown was two weeks too late, sfa we can do about that now and the virus is not going away anytime soon, agreed about airports.

3: There won't be a vacinne, not now, not ever, a treatment yes, one after another some better than others some not.

Just calling it as I see it Danno, not a time to be beating around the bush.

Del Griffith

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That's a whopping big assumption and one only the media and politicians are making. No medical personnel are saying this.

There is no evidence whatsoever that one is immune following infection with many physicians emphasising this at every opportunity.

It's completely logical and even the WHO are saying it:

https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1254160937805926405?s=09

There is zero confirmed cases reinfection aswell, some early testing issues, that's all. Safe assumption is immunity after infection like practically everything else.

Del Griffith

Still waters wrote: »

Can we even get herd immunity for a virus like covid19, i could get it next week and get it again in 3 months time, i still wouldn't be immune to it

Not correct

Del Griffith

ShineOn7 wrote: »

Eh?

Every report I've read says 60/70%

Here is the study: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.27.20081893v1

(For a synopsis check the comments)

Calina

dePeatrick wrote: »

1: Everyone who had a sniffle in early winter likes to think they had Covid, not true.

2: The lockdown was two weeks too late, sfa we can do about that now and the virus is not going away anytime soon, agreed about airports.

3: There won't be a vacinne, not now, not ever, a treatment yes, one after another some better than others some not.

Just calling it as I see it Danno, not a time to be beating around the bush.

Can you please outline why you think there will never be a vaccine? There are at least 110 ongoing research processes some of which are highly promising. The issue is the time it can take to get these to being deliverable at the point of care if and when a viable option is identified.

In general, for herd immunity, you need a vaccine and for highly infectious illnesses, we tend to like to have about 95% of the population covered. So speculation about 20% or 60-70% does not tie in with reality and we have seen measles return when MMR take up drops below 90% vaccine coverage.

The early UK policy which conflated herd immunity as a result of letting everyone get infected was amoral and frankly ignorant. Isolation has the benefit of reducing potential hosts in the population. It works but it needs global efforts. The UK and the US have been so fundamentally negligent here that the western countries are all at risk here despite cleaning out their own houses.

Supercell

Another consideration is whether immunity to one strain confers immunity to another strain, it doesn't for the flu, hence the need for an annual jab for vunerable groups. There are several known strains of this circulating in the global population currently.

jill_valentine

Herd immunity requires about 90% of the population to be immune. We haven't even achieved it with Measles.

is_that_so

jill_valentine wrote: »

Herd immunity requires about 90% immunity. We haven't even achieved that with Measles.

Measles is extremely transmissable and we have a very cooperative vector at work there! 60%-70% is estimated for COVID-19 but we've very little evidence of how many people have acquired immunity so far, just lots of guesses. Personally reckon we'll need some form of mitigation via treatment availability.

Del Griffith

jill_valentine wrote: »

Herd immunity requires about 90% of the population to be immune. We haven't even achieved it with Measles.

That's only measles. Flu herd immunity 30 - 44%.

Beasty

Del Griffith wrote: »

It's completely logical and even the WHO are saying it:

https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1254160937805926405?s=09

There is zero confirmed cases reinfection aswell, some early testing issues, that's all. Safe assumption is immunity after infection like practically everything else.

"expect" not "will"

There have been some reports of reinfection but it may well be they never got rid of it in the first place. We simply do not know at this stage.

Even if we do is it immunity for a year? 6 months? Life?

No one knows at this stage so it's dangerous to assume anything about any immunity that may arise

El_Duderino 09

Danno wrote: »

One of three scenarios that I can think of right now:

1: The virus has been here since early winter and we already are nearing it.
2: The lockdown was implemented early enough and it's measures will ensure the disease dies out in the local population - but when the airports re-open for regular travel we'll be back at square one.
3: When there is a vaccine.

You're forgetting the other obvious scenario: it takes a couple of years for enough people to get it to reach the 70% Mark. The old and vulnerable can't be expected to get it so the young and healthy will all have to get it and work up from there.

The vulnerable people will be at high risk until this thing is over. They will need to cocoon for the next year or two or take their chances, of course.

Nermal

Beasty wrote: »

"expect" not "will"

There have been some reports of reinfection but it may well be they never got rid of it in the first place. We simply do not know at this stage.

Even if we do is it immunity for a year? 6 months? Life?

No one knows at this stage so it's dangerous to assume anything about any immunity that may arise

There have been no credible reports of reinfection - that in itself is proof that infection grants immunity for some period.

There has been scaremongering, media-hyped testing cock-ups (particularly in South Korea) that have been quietly retracted later.

Yes, we don't know for how long. But then, our current plans are based on getting a vaccine.

Which is the more dangerous assumption? Which is the more sane path?

Let 0.25%-0.35% of the population die, or impoverish ourselves sitting indoors waiting for a vaccine that might never come?

I wouldn't imagine we are anywhere close in Ireland. Our hospitals are nowhere even remotely close to capacity.

You need more and more less risky people to catch it to achieve herd immunity.

We are on some bizarre mission to get the numbers as low as possible. To what end? Nobody seems to know.

seamie78

I think its said that the actual fatality rate is between 0.1% and 0.37% based on our death figures to date and bear in mind some havnt been reported yet,, you could make an assumption that up to 1,375,000 could potentially have been infected or at the lower end of that scale 370,000. its very possible we are not that far off herd immunity

El_Duderino 09

Nermal wrote: »

Yes, we don't know for how long. But then, our current plans are based on getting a vaccine.

Which is the more dangerous assumption? Which is the more sane path?

Let 0.25%-0.35% of the population die, or impoverish ourselves sitting indoors waiting for a vaccine that might never come?

Most governments say they are waiting for a vaccine but in reality we will probably have herd Immunity before a vaccine. The vaccine will be great for vulnerable people so it's very important to find one eventually butthe reality is that young and healthy people are better off getting on with life and eventually getting the disease.

The key is to manage the level of infection to make sure the health service can cope.

Nermal

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

The key is to manage the level of infection to make sure the health service can cope.

That strategy would involve lowering restrictions so that health service capacity was utilised to the absolute maximum, so that herd immunity could be achieved as quickly as possible with minimum economic cost.

Under that strategy, spare ICU beds are a sign that the lockdown needs to be lifted.

We're clearly not doing that though, we're following suppression.

El_Duderino 09

Nermal wrote: »

That strategy would involve lowering restrictions so that health service capacity was utilised to the absolute maximum, so that herd immunity could be achieved as quickly as possible with minimum economic cost.

Under that strategy, spare ICU beds are a sign that the lockdown needs to be lifted.

We're clearly not doing that though, we're following suppression.

For now, that's how it seems. The current approach is falling between two stools. I think once the first restrictions are lifted there will be pressure to lift more and more restrictions. Every industry will lobby for restrictions to be lifted on them and then transmission levels will soar. So its important to give themselves some headroom in ICU.

So right now we're trying to suppress it and I think we'll be following the herd Immunity route once we start lifting restrictions.

wakka12

seamie78 wrote: »

I think its said that the actual fatality rate is between 0.1% and 0.37% based on our death figures to date and bear in mind some havnt been reported yet,, you could make an assumption that up to 1,375,000 could potentially have been infected or at the lower end of that scale 370,000. its very possible we are not that far off herd immunity

New York antibody testing is the closest thing there currently is to 'proof' of a fatality rate and it is 0.8%. Another smaller German antibody study estimated 0.36%.

0.1% is an impossibility, seeing as far greater than 0.1% of the populations of several regions of the world have died of the virus already

Judging by the excess deaths stats presented yesterday, Dublin, a few adjoining counties and a few border counties are the only ones with any level of infections needed to be anywhere near it. The rest of the country is
a. largely free of it, or
b. the old and vulnerable people are somehow already immune (totally unlikely).

Even Cork is doing relatively well considering it has 1/2 million in the hinterland of Cork City.

Further to this, the majority of deaths are in care homes, we have nearly no infections in the community here. The second wave will wipe us out.

These stats were gathered from rip.ie, so would be accurate for home addresses, not hospital or care home locations.

https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2020/0505/1136496-death-notices-ireland-coronavirus/

JimmyVik

Deleted User wrote: »

I wouldn't imagine we are anywhere close in Ireland. Our hospitals are nowhere even remotely close to capacity.

You need more and more less risky people to catch it to achieve herd immunity.

We are on some bizarre mission to get the numbers as low as possible. To what end? Nobody seems to know.

Well that would be to save the lives of our elderly and our at risk people in the population. These lives matter you know.

JimmyVik

JimmyVik wrote: »

Well that would be to save the lives of our elderly and our at risk people in the population. These lives matter you know.

Save them so they can be killed in a second wave?

saabsaab

No one knows but if it follows the 1918 pandemic about a year without vaccine. There was also a second wave and third wave.

JJJJNR

Totally confused about how to keep my immunity topped up for when things do return I think wearing ppe now might be the wrong message to be sending out.. I think people are suffering ptsd under the circumstances.

Our bodies are constantly battling things that don't effect us because we are exposed to them on a daily basis, various strains of the cold and flu. I've a feeling the more we are in lock down the more dangerous these normal bugs will be and the longer we put off a return to normality the worse its going to get. What if the people who are asymptomatic to covid19 become symptomatic to another strain because of social distancing.

I'm really confused about it..

CalamariFritti

We won't know until we do testing of a representative subset. But we only test people with many symptoms. As of late we are testing people with just one symptom. Increasing the number of tests all the time.

This may be a good method for curbing the virus. But its not a good method for getting any meaningful numbers. We do 500 tests today we do 2000 tomorrow. Of course we are going to find more infected tomorrow. No surprise as we are doing more tests the percentage of 'hits' goes down all the time. Its wildly distorting the numbers.

Not saying it was/is the wrong strategy. But if were looking for answers to your question, this isn't it. We'd have to select a few thousand people that are representative for the population of Ireland and test all of them. Symptoms or not.

El_Duderino 09

JJJJNR wrote: »

Totally confused about how to keep my immunity topped up for when things do return I think wearing ppe now might be the wrong message to be sending out.. I think people are suffering ptsd under the circumstances.

Our bodies are constantly battling things that don't effect us because we are exposed to them on a daily basis, various strains of the cold and flu. I've a feeling the more we are in lock down the more dangerous these normal bugs will be and the longer we put off a return to normality the worse its going to get. What if the people who are asymptomatic to covid19 become symptomatic to another strain because of social distancing.

I'm really confused about it..

I really wouldn't worry about it. The normal cold and flu are really not worth worrying about unless you're vulnerable. But the vulnerable will have to cocoon until either herd Immunity or a vaccine so we're talking 12-18 months in either case.

If you're not vulnerable then just get on with it. When you get it, you deal with it. Chances of having a very bad experience are low. Most people are fine.

pgj2015

JJJJNR wrote: »

Totally confused about how to keep my immunity topped up for when things do return I think wearing ppe now might be the wrong message to be sending out.. I think people are suffering ptsd under the circumstances.

Our bodies are constantly battling things that don't effect us because we are exposed to them on a daily basis, various strains of the cold and flu. I've a feeling the more we are in lock down the more dangerous these normal bugs will be and the longer we put off a return to normality the worse its going to get. What if the people who are asymptomatic to covid19 become symptomatic to another strain because of social distancing.

I'm really confused about it..

I heard zinc and vitamin d are helpful in the fight against covid 19.

Nermal

wakka12 wrote: »

New York antibody testing is the closest thing there currently is to 'proof' of a fatality rate and it is 0.8%. Another smaller German antibody study estimated 0.36%.

0.1% is an impossibility, seeing as far greater than 0.1% of the populations of several regions of the world have died of the virus already

'Died with' vs. 'died of'...

JimmyVik

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

I really wouldn't worry about it. The normal cold and flu are really not worth worrying about unless you're vulnerable. But the vulnerable will have to cocoon until either herd Immunity or a vaccine so we're talking 12-18 months in either case.

If you're not vulnerable then just get on with it. When you get it, you deal with it. Chances of having a very bad experience are low. Most people are fine.

The problem is all these bullet proof people catching it or even moving the virus around without catching it, will be spreading it to others and so on until it hits someone who dies from it. And if the people who think they are bullet proof would cop on, others wouldnt have to die. Pure selfishness.

wakka12

Nermal wrote: »

'Died with' vs. 'died of'...

Vast majority died of
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-warning-as-major-study-finds-most-elderly-victims-would-not-have-died-otherwise-11980675