The Coronavirus, not the beer

msstate7 said:
A New Understanding of Herd Immunity

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/614035/
Click to expand...

Effects like this—“selective depletion” of people who are more susceptible—can quickly decelerate a virus’s spread. When Gomes uses this sort of pattern to model the coronavirus’s spread, the compounding effects of heterogeneity seem to show that the onslaught of cases and deaths seen in initial spikes around the world are unlikely to happen a second time. Based on data from several countries in Europe, she said, her results show a herd-immunity threshold much lower than that of other models.

“We just keep running the models, and it keeps coming back at less than 20 percent,” Gomes said. “It’s very striking.”

--------

I love when people completely discount my background in mathematics and data analysis.

Whatever, you guys will see in the end I was the 'most right' from.tbe beginning.

Dealing with a population without replacement. Herd immunity was always closer than it seemed.
 
thethe said:
I was the 'most right' from.tbe beginning.
Click to expand...

thethe said:
If a vaccine can be developed before the second wave hits I think business will come back.

This virus will also propel a restricting of the supply chain and encourage more businesses not only in the states but in all of north America. Long term that will be for the best.
Click to expand...

So yeah, you were right back then, when we have a vaccine we'll be through this.
 
thethe said:
Herd immunity doesn't need to be 60%. We just need to be around 20% to significnatly impair the rate of spread to where its 'safe' for older and immune compromised individuals to go about their lives.
Click to expand...

Where are you getting your R0(or Rt, if that proves to be the case)value on Covid?
 
thethe said:
A virus doesn't have a R naught in a vacuum. There are man external factors which end up determining its value
Click to expand...

I'm well aware of how it works. And the best estimates we have right now place it at 2-3, which would mean we are looking at around 66%.
 
Dalyn said:
I'm well aware of how it works. And the best estimates we have right now place it at 2-3, which would mean we are looking at around 66%.
Click to expand...

That completely ignores how a contagious virus behaves in a population without replacement.

There is an inflection point where the R naught decreases and its earlier than most think.

The Atlantic article does a great job echoing what I said with infinitely more science behind it.
 
And, just for clarification, when you hear scientists talking about herd immunity, they are almost all talking in terms where we end up with a vaccine.
 
thethe said:
That completely ignores how a contagious virus behaves in a population without replacement.

There is an inflection point where the R naught decreases and its earlier than most think.

The Atlantic article does a great job echoing what I said with infinitely more science behind it.
Click to expand...

The 2-3 estimate is taking all variables into consideration. There are zero legitimate numbers out there saying we can achieve herd immunity with this thing at 20%.
 
July 14th and mage/trumpers still arguing for herd immunity and against masks when virus got here in February

ffs, no wonder we are banned from going anywhere
 
Dalyn said:
That's not herd immunity.
Click to expand...

when the r naught begins to decrease because of population exposure that is the time when the life of the virus is meeting its end. Thats what we are seeing in sweden and New York and what we also saw in western Europe.
 
thethe said:
when the r naught begins to decrease because of population exposure that is the time when the life of the virus is meeting its end. Thats what we are seeing in sweden and New York and what we also saw in western Europe.
Click to expand...

It is a good sign, and a step in the right direction. It is not herd immunity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top