Despite every attempt to preserve and prolong the "pandemic"From yesterday:
What if Herd Immunity is Closer Then We Think? NYT’s
"We’ve known from the beginning how the end will arrive. Eventually, the coronavirus will be unable to find enough susceptible hosts to survive, fading out wherever it briefly emerges."
We've talked this topic previously- Farr's Law: Coronavirus Death Predictions Bring New Meaning to Hysteria- Farr's Law & Epidemics
"To achieve so-called herd immunity — the point at which the virus can no longer spread because there are not enough vulnerable humans — scientists have suggested that perhaps 70 percent of a given population must be immune, through vaccination or because they survived the infection.
In interviews with The New York Times, more than a dozen scientists said that the threshold is likely to be much lower: just 50 percent, perhaps even less. If that’s true, then it may be possible to turn back the coronavirus more quickly than once thought."
Based on my understanding/reading and thinking I'd say that herd immunity is likely reached at 40-50 percent. But, I'd be willing to go 30 percent. (an opinion based on information consumed over a lifetime)
" In parts of New York, London and Mumbai, for example, it is not inconceivable that there is already substantial immunity to the coronavirus, scientists said.“I’m quite prepared to believe that there are pockets in New York City and London which have substantial immunity,” said Bill Hanage, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. “What happens this winter will reflect that.” Assuming the virus ferrets out the most outgoing and most susceptible in the first wave, immunity following a wave of infection is distributed more efficiently than with a vaccination campaign that seeks to protect everyone, said Tom Britton, a mathematician at Stockholm University"
I'm going to repeat the above highlighted statement. Twice. In red. And an entirely different font. So you stop and read it." immunity following a wave of infection is distributed more efficiently than with a vaccination campaign that seeks to protect everyone", immunity following a wave of infection is distributed more efficiently than with a vaccination campaign that seeks to protect everyone,
Back to the NYT's article:
"His model puts the threshold for herd immunity at 43 percent — that is, the virus cannot hang on in a community after that percentage of residents has been infected and recovered.Most researchers are wary of concluding that the hardest-hit neighborhoods of Brooklyn, or even those in blighted areas of Mumbai, have reached herd immunity or will be spared future outbreaks.But models like Dr. Britton’s hint that it’s not impossible. Other researchers have suggested, controversially, that herd immunity can be achieved at rates of immunity as low as 10 or 20 percent — and that entire countries may already have achieved that goal.
The new models offer food for thought, he and other experts said, but should not be used to set policy.
“Mathematically, it’s certainly possible to have herd immunity at these very, very low levels,” said Carl Bergstrom, an infectious disease expert at the University of Washington in Seattle. “Those are just our best guesses for what the numbers should look like.”
It’s interesting to notice the differences regarding presentation of models and their accuracy when setting "policy." Neil Ferguson's spurious models got us all locked down, but, the very idea that herd immunity has been achieved is just a "best guess"In other words when one is pushing the idea of death counts based on models, well, you can justify medical martial law with those models!
But when models are used that demonstrate the real possibility that herd immunity may well have been reached in many areas (no vaccine required) ... It’s just a best guess.