2019-2020 coronavirus pandemic (Vaccination 2021 Edition)

[Silvanus]

The indication that the antibody numbers they've reached are meaningful toward herd immunity IS that it comes alongside similar drops across Europe. All of western Europe and the US northeast are experiencing the effects of herd immunity. That is why there's a bell curve at all. If you look at the graph of new cases, the graph in the flatten the curve image, the slope of the graph is an illustration of of the changing R value of the virus. When it's going up, R >1, when it's flat R=1, when it's going down R<1. R depends on a combination of factors: the natural qualities of the virus, the behavior of the population, the immunity of the population, etc. If your measures to stop the virus are sufficient to drive R below 1, you'd still see a short term increase because of the lag from the incubation period, but after a week or so the number of new cases would immediately start dropping. Look at South Korea for that, they started responding near the end of February and cases dropped precipitously about 1 incubation period later. If your measures are insufficient, you continue increasing. Europe did that. European countries had policies that slowed the rate of spread but did not push the rate of growth below 1, the number of cases continued to rise for a month or more after measures were put in place. So why did the number of new cases come back down? Either the people in every hotspot all decided to behave more responsibly over time to slowly drive down the rate of growth in exactly the pattern you'd expect to be caused by herd immunity, or the obvious explanation that there were fewer people available to infect.

If people's behavior is constant, you expect a bell curve as people become increasingly immune. Better control measures don't give you a smaller peak of the same duration, it either gives you a smaller peak with a much shorter duration because you've cut the virus off (but your population remains susceptible to outbreaks indefinitely sans vaccine), or it gives you a shorter peak with a longer duration that the total number of infections is the same but spread out. Nowhere in Western Europe is the pandemic behaving as though the virus was suppressed without the effects of herd immunity. They are all approaching herd immunity.

This is an enormous misunderstanding of what herd immunity actually is. It isn't just fewer people to infect, slowing the infection rate; that happens to some degree with almost every virus in history, and yet very few can be said to reach herd immunity. It's a level of immunity which provides society at large significant protection from the likelihood of outbreak.

Bell curves can, and do, flatten without ever reaching herd immunity, because there's a hundred factors which can impact the spread of a virus. The idea that the term "herd immunity" applies when we're still in the first wave, with recurrent outbreaks, is nonsense; that's simply not what the term means.

 

[Palindromemordnilap]

We're still doing far better than we did with the Spanish Influenza, so it's a bit comforting for me to know that we've at least improved our ability to deal with this, but it still hasn't run its course so we'll see if that continues in the long run.

Spanish Flu hit during World War I. I don't think us doing better now is a particularly high bar to pass

 

[tstorm823]

This is an enormous misunderstanding of what herd immunity actually is. It isn't just fewer people to infect, slowing the infection rate; that happens to some degree with almost every virus in history, and yet very few can be said to reach herd immunity. It's a level of immunity which provides society at large significant protection from the likelihood of outbreak.

Bell curves can, and do, flatten without ever reaching herd immunity, because there's a hundred factors which can impact the spread of a virus. The idea that the term "herd immunity" applies when we're still in the first wave, with recurrent outbreaks, is nonsense; that's simply not what the term means.

It is what the term means. If you have sufficient numbers of immune people to resist outbreaks, that's herd immunity. If you have decreasing numbers of new outbreaks due to an increasing number of immune people, that's approaching herd immunity.

The wave patterns in some previous pandemics are from extreme seasonality. Yes, changes in other factors than just communal immunity can drive down the spread of a disease. I had expected there to be a summer break followed by a fall wave, but the fact that it's managed to continue relatively uninhibited through seasons suggests there will only be a single wave. Just remember that wave doesn't happen everywhere at once. If you live somewhere that has peaked locally and then dropped again, feel free to celebrate, you survived the pandemic.

 

[Agema]

It is what the term means. If you have sufficient numbers of immune people to resist outbreaks, that's herd immunity. If you have decreasing numbers of new outbreaks due to an increasing number of immune people, that's approaching herd immunity.

Herd immunity implies a level of protection such that outbreaks are guaranteed to be very limited and disappear rapidly. Effectively, you'll get a small number of sporadic cases, with occasional mini-outbreaks that will rapidly dissipate even if no preventative measures are taken.

We're a long way off that.

Let's say the average person infects 2.5 people without any preventative measures. Therefore a back of a beermat estimate would suggest that 1.5 out of 2.5 (60%) of people would need to be immune for the number of people catching the disease to remain roughly stable. Hence why experts suggest 60-70%. It may be less in practice because of disproportionately high levels of immunity amongst "super-spreaders", but I'm deeply skeptical it's as low as the 10-20% you've been touting off someone's unpublished modelling paper.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

It is what the term means. If you have sufficient numbers of immune people to resist outbreaks, that's herd immunity. If you have decreasing numbers of new outbreaks due to an increasing number of immune people, that's approaching herd immunity.

The wave patterns in some previous pandemics are from extreme seasonality. Yes, changes in other factors than just communal immunity can drive down the spread of a disease. I had expected there to be a summer break followed by a fall wave, but the fact that it's managed to continue relatively uninhibited through seasons suggests there will only be a single wave. Just remember that wave doesn't happen everywhere at once. If you live somewhere that has peaked locally and then dropped again, feel free to celebrate, you survived the pandemic.

I agree that if you have say 20% of the population infected, recovered, and immune; it's harder for the virus to spread, but it's still going to spread as the R0 is still going to be well above 1. It's not like people in NYC can just go completely back to normal and not have as bad (or worse) a situation than they had back in March. There's no place that has "peaked" yet because we shut everything down before it peaked. Florida is perfect example of a place that has more immunity than other places and has more infections. Sure, in theory, if State_A had 10% immunity and State_B had 5% immunity and all things were equal (public behavior, population density, etc.), State_A would have less overall infections and be further on the curve but it wouldn't be that much better than State_B. Looking at curves right now is basically pointless though because of the drastic changes in behavior; the only reason to look at curves to see if infections are trending up or down. The strategy is not to have people getting infected in mass to drive up immunity. As other countries have shown, you can do rather simple things to greatly curve the spread of the virus, there's no reason to build to herd immunity.

 

[tstorm823]

but I'm deeply skeptical it's as low as the 10-20% you've been touting off someone's unpublished modelling paper.

Hey! I've been touting that theory since well before that unpublished paper was posted!

And like, you all should be skeptical of what I'm saying. If my statistical argument doesn't convince you, only time will prove me right or wrong, and otherwise you're wholly justified in dismissing me.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Hey! I've been touting that theory since well before that unpublished paper was posted!

And like, you all should be skeptical of what I'm saying. If my statistical argument doesn't convince you, only time will prove me right or wrong, and otherwise you're wholly justified in dismissing me.

New York state is already past 20% (assuming 10x infected for every official infection). Any place that isn't doing a shitty job won't see the virus go past 20%.

 

[Satinavian]

While the Us is now on the way to 60k cases per day, it seems the UK has gotten it under control by now as well.. It certainly was a rough start there, but it seems to be done.

 

[stroopwafel]

While the Us is now on the way to 60k cases per day, it seems the UK has gotten it under control by now as well.. It certainly was a rough start there, but it seems to be done.

Yep, Netherlands as well. Seems to be down to only 100 cases with pretty much no new admissions on a population of ca 17 million. It's now a rare disease. There is still social distancing in public places like bars and supernarkets and large gatherings/festivals/night clubs etc(ie 'superspreading events') are still prohibited but other than that many of the restrictions have loosened up.

 

[tstorm823]

It certainly was a rough start there, but it seems to be done.

It seems to be done because it was a rough start.

 

[Silvanus]

It is what the term means. If you have sufficient numbers of immune people to resist outbreaks, that's herd immunity. If you have decreasing numbers of new outbreaks due to an increasing number of immune people, that's approaching herd immunity.

The wave patterns in some previous pandemics are from extreme seasonality. Yes, changes in other factors than just communal immunity can drive down the spread of a disease. I had expected there to be a summer break followed by a fall wave, but the fact that it's managed to continue relatively uninhibited through seasons suggests there will only be a single wave. Just remember that wave doesn't happen everywhere at once. If you live somewhere that has peaked locally and then dropped again, feel free to celebrate, you survived the pandemic.

This really isn't how the term is understood, or how it's used by scientists. It implies a level of protection that makes outbreaks very hard to occur, and we're a long way off from that if 90% of people can still get it and pass it on. Quite a few places that have begun loosening restrictions have seen spikes; that would be near-impossible if we had what scientists term "herd immunity": a high level of protection that serves even without behavioural restrictions.

If there was some strong evidence, sure, we can reevaluate the assumptions underpinning the concept; but we don't have that. We have a gradual reduction that could be attributable to a hundred different factors, and we have really shaky or insignificant data on immunity levels, mostly from self-selecting samples.

 

[tstorm823]

It implies a level of protection that makes outbreaks very hard to occur, and we're a long way off from that if 90% of people can still get it and pass it on.

I understand this. I'm suggesting that's not true. I know you don't get herd immunity if 90%of people are susceptible, my theory here is that much fewer people are.

Quite a few places that have begun loosening restrictions have seen spikes; that would be near-impossible if we had what scientists term "herd immunity".

Name a place that experienced a significant wave of covid-19 and lowered it back down that had a resurgence later on. None of the areas that were hit hard are showing signs of resurgence. Germany was reopening schools months ago. Where's the spike?

 

[Silvanus]

I understand this. I'm suggesting that's not true. I know you don't get herd immunity if 90%of people are susceptible, my theory here is that much fewer people are.

Wait. If 10% of people are immune, and less than 90% are not immune, who else is there?

Name a place that experienced a significant wave of covid-19 and lowered it back down that had a resurgence later on.

Leicester (UK), Echinos (Greece), Rheda-Wiedenbrueck (Germany), Göttingen (Germany), Texas, California, Utah, Arkansas.

To a degree this is to be expected when long-standing changes to behaviour begin to change back. But it would be impossible if we had what scientists understand as "herd immunity".

 

[tstorm823]

Wait. If 10% of people are immune, and less than 90% are not immune, who else is there?

It's not 10% of people are immune. It's 10% of people have acquired immunity. If that is the only immunity, I agree that we are far, far from the effects of herd immunity. If I am correct however, a much larger pool of people are combating the virus successfully with the body's innate immunity measures and are neither getting sick nor developing an antibody response. So in my theory, it's ~10% acquired immunity alongside ~80% innate immunity to reach herd immunity.

Leicester (UK), Echinos (Greece), Rheda-Wiedenbrueck (Germany), Göttingen (Germany), Texas, California, Utah, Arkansas.

You're supposed to be finding me places that got hit and resurged. You're naming me places (mostly rural or remote places) that weren't previously epicenters. The idea I'm expressing is that when a place gets hit such that ~10% of the population or more develops antibodies, it doesn't resurge. That you can point to places that didn't experience that surging now perfectly fits the pattern I'm talking about. Like, right now, there looks like a mild resurgence in my state, Pennsylvania. But there isn't actually, the surge is in western PA, which has 100 miles of wilderness between it and the east coast megacity that was the US epicenter early on. You're not getting resurgent outbreaks in Wuhan, or northern Italy, or Gangelt Germany, or New York, or London, or Madrid. Like, Madrid was hell. They reopened restaurants a month ago. It didn't cause a resurgence, Spain recently lifted its state of emergency entirely.

Regions that were epicenters aren't anymore. Regions that weren't epicenters are now. Literally exactly the effect you would expect from sufficient acquired immunity. Europe overall is staying down because it got wrecked. Places in Europe that didn't get wrecked still have local outbreaks. The parts of the US that got wrecked are staying down. The states that avoided the early outbreaks are having outbreaks still. Other parts of the world like India were much less effected early on, and now they're in the middle of the pandemic. It's not a complicated pattern.

It is, however, a pattern that should indicate to you that the US still gaining cases is not a sign of ineptitude, but rather a sign that we actually held back the virus in certain places more successfully than elsewhere.

 

[Silvanus]

It's not 10% of people are immune. It's 10% of people have acquired immunity. If that is the only immunity, I agree that we are far, far from the effects of herd immunity. If I am correct however, a much larger pool of people are combating the virus successfully with the body's innate immunity measures and are neither getting sick nor developing an antibody response. So in my theory, it's ~10% acquired immunity alongside ~80% innate immunity to reach herd immunity.

80% innate immunity to the novel coronavirus?

There's not a shred of supporting evidence for that, no reason to think it's the case, and its never been seriously suggested by any expert in the field. A downward trend in deaths and hospitalizations doesn't count for much at all for that.

You're supposed to be finding me places that got hit and resurged. You're naming me places (mostly rural or remote places) that weren't previously epicenters. The idea I'm expressing is that when a place gets hit such that ~10% of the population or more develops antibodies, it doesn't resurge. That you can point to places that didn't experience that surging now perfectly fits the pattern I'm talking about. Like, right now, there looks like a mild resurgence in my state, Pennsylvania. But there isn't actually, the surge is in western PA, which has 100 miles of wilderness between it and the east coast megacity that was the US epicenter early on. You're not getting resurgent outbreaks in Wuhan, or northern Italy, or Gangelt Germany, or New York, or London, or Madrid. Like, Madrid was hell. They reopened restaurants a month ago. It didn't cause a resurgence, Spain recently lifted its state of emergency entirely.

Regions that were epicenters aren't anymore. Regions that weren't epicenters are now. Literally exactly the effect you would expect from sufficient acquired immunity. Europe overall is staying down because it got wrecked. Places in Europe that didn't get wrecked still have local outbreaks. The parts of the US that got wrecked are staying down. The states that avoided the early outbreaks are having outbreaks still. Other parts of the world like India were much less effected early on, and now they're in the middle of the pandemic. It's not a complicated pattern.

It is, however, a pattern that should indicate to you that the US still gaining cases is not a sign of ineptitude, but rather a sign that we actually held back the virus in certain places more successfully than elsewhere.

They are all places that saw downward trends, loosened behavioural restrictions, and then saw upward trends.

Whether they were "epicentres" is irrelevant; whether they're rural or remote is irrelevant (as if Leicester is either anyway). If a country can be said to have "herd immunity", it would serve to make that impossible, regardless of whether its rural or urban or how hard it was hit in the past.

You can't say City A hasn't got herd immunity but City B down the motorway does, and therefore the country does. If City A doesn't, the country doesn't: it needs to be blanketed, because people move and mix.

 

[Palindromemordnilap]

You're supposed to be finding me places that got hit and resurged. You're naming me places (mostly rural or remote places) that weren't previously epicenters.

Leicester is the 13th most populous city in the UK, the hell you talking about remote and rural? Please tell me you don't think its just London and then pigshit countryside everywhere else

 

[Satinavian]

Göttingen is a bit smaller but neither remote nor rural as well.

 

[Agema]

80% innate immunity to the novel coronavirus?

It's feasible that people with antibodies to some coronaviruses may also have some level of resistance immunity to covid-19.

If I am correct however, a much larger pool of people are combating the virus successfully with the body's innate immunity measures and are neither getting sick nor developing an antibody response.

In responding to infection, cells of the innate immune system "tell" cells of the adaptive immune system about pathogens so they can generate antibodies. The idea that this just doesn't happen for lots of covid-19 cases is very unlikely.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Name a place that experienced a significant wave of covid-19 and lowered it back down that had a resurgence later on. None of the areas that were hit hard are showing signs of resurgence. Germany was reopening schools months ago. Where's the spike?

Opening schools is not some radical idea, Michael Osterholm said closing schools wasn't a great idea way back in the beginning of March. The fact that kids barely show symptoms of the virus means most likely that the virus is barely replicating in them, which leads to them not being able to transmit the virus like adults can. So kids going back to school isn't going to lead to much of an increased spread. And, it's not like viruses affecting different age groups differently is some new thing either, the Spanish flu was the opposite and much more deadly to younger people.

 

[Palindromemordnilap]

Göttingen is a bit smaller but neither remote nor rural as well.

And while my knowledge of Arkansas and Utah are a bit sketchy I'm pretty sure neither the entire state of Texas nor the entire state of California count as those either...