Covid-19: Are You Scared Yet?

"Canada Warns Against the Folly of Herd Immunity," blares the top story at Bourque.org, with a link to an article on, where else, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's website.

The CBC article, titled more informatively: "Canada's top doctor warns against relying on herd immunity to reopen economy," suggests that the powers that be in Canada want the population to remain cowed and fearful over the novel Corona virus for a while yet.

The CBC article quotes, Dr. Theresa Tam, Canada's Chief Public Health Officer saying: "The idea of ... generating natural immunity is actually not something that should be undertaken," which leaves little room for confidence in the scientific competence of Canada's top public health official. 

The CBC article does helpfully -- sort of, explain the concept of "herd immunity," saying:

Herd immunity is conferred when enough people in a given population have been infected with a virus, marking them immune to reinfection and slowing down the rate at which the virus spreads on its own.

which is almost right, but not quite, making it quite wrong. Herd immunity is achieved when enough people have immunity that the average number of people each infected person infects is less than one. It's at that point that the number of new infections begins to fall, and to fall at an accelerating rate until it reaches zero, at which point the epidemic is over. 

Europe's Covid-19 death toll as of April 26, 2020.
Image source: Zero Hedge

In most jurisdictions in Europe and North America, infection rates are declining, indicating that herd immunity has been achieved. However, the proportion of the population with immunity that is required to achieve herd immunity depends on social dynamics. That is, it depends on the number of people each infected person comes into contact with and may, therefore, infect. Furthermore, social dynamics in most countries have been radically modified by quarantines, lock-downs, school and business shut-downs and other social distancing measures. 

What that means is that a return to normality will increase the number of people without immunity that each infected person contacts. In turn, that means that a return to normality will reverse the achievement of herd immunity that obtained under the conditions of controlled social interaction. As a consequence, the rate of new infections will increase until the number of people with immunity rises to the point at which herd immunity is regained.

 So, yes, attainment of herd immunity under near universal house arrest does not mean everything can return to normal without a cost in terms of an increased rate of new infections. But herd immunity must be reached or the disease will rage on until everyone has been infected. 

And, yes, there are different ways of getting to herd immunity, not all of which have the same outcome. If you "take it on the chin," to use Boris Johnson's term for the idea of going for herd immunity without modifying social arrangements, hospitals will be overloaded with severe cases, mortuaries will be unable to deal with the piles of bodies that accumulate, and there will be general panic and despair. 

But if you delay the achievement of herd immunity by shutting the economy for too long, there will be many bad consequences too, including the loss of economic output, the loss of schooling, and for some people, probably, the loss of their sanity.

The best course, therefore, now that declining new infection rates indicate that herd immunity has been achieved, is a progressive return to normality. Schools opening first, perhaps, then a staged return to work by other sectors, with massive Covid-19 testing being conducted to ensure that the return to work does not drive the rate of new infections to the point of creating chaos.

Meantime, creating panic and fear seems to be the mandate of the global medical establishment. Thus, on Friday, the World health Organization (WHO) announced that there is "currently no evidence" that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.

Well anything is possible and perhaps we are all doomed to get Covid19 over and over again until civilization collapses and Greta Thunberg is fulfilled, as the smog abates and carbon dioxide concentrations subside to pre-human levels. But what the WHOOO-HOOOO said is bunk as confirmed when it later issued a clarification to the effect that most people infected would end up with "some level of protection."

So, yes, Covid19 is a nasty disease that, in New York City, one of the worst hit places, is killing around 0.35% of those infected, but it won't kill us all. What's more, if you are under 65, your risk of death from Covid19 is probably less than that of being killed driving to the office, or so it has been calculated by the distinguished epidemiologist, John Ioannides of Standford University's Medical Faculty.

Related: 
Off Guardian: Why are so many healthcare workers dying from Covid-19? Answer: They're not.
Zero Hedge: WHO Deletes Tweet About Reinfection As 'Immunity Passports' Being Debated
The Hill: Chinese scientists predict coronavirus won't be eradicated
TechStartUps: UV technology developed by Columbia University to fight the spread of coronavirus
WSJ: The Bats Behind the Pandemic
Great Game India: Dutch Virologist Ron Fouchier – Another Key To COVID-19 Investigation
Great Game India: How China Stole Coronavirus From Canada And Weaponized It
Great Game India: Dr Fauci Funded Wuhan Virus Experiments – Former NY Mayor
Great Game India: Secret US Cable That Saw Coronavirus Crisis Coming

How the Covid-19 Epidemic Spreads and How It Will Die

Epidemics result when each person infected by a disease infects more than one other person. Then the number of persons infected grows day by day. But if those who are infected survive to become immune to the disease, then, as disease spreads through the population, the number of persons that each infected person infects must fall, ultimately falling below one. At that point the population is said to have achieved herd immunity. From there on, the number of persons infected daily declines until the spread of disease is entirely extinguished.

Because infectious diseases have an incubation period during which an infected person remains in apparent good health, observable or reported infections follow actual infections by the duration of the incubation period. In the case of Covid-19, the incubation period is usually between one and two weeks. Thus the occurrence of Covid-19 herd immunity precedes the peak of observable infections by one or two weeks and the peak in reported deaths by as much as a month.

Many communities in North America and elsewhere, are reporting declining daily totals of new  Covid-19 infections. That means that herd immunity has been achieved and the epidemic is dying. In New York City, herd immunity is reported to have been achieved with just 21% of the population having been infected.

The spread of the disease depends, however, on social dynamics and other measures to control disease spread. Currently, social dynamics in most communities have been radically altered by so-called social distancing in public places, lock-downs, and quarantines. The use of face masks and the use of disinfectant both indoors and out have also affected disease spread. Once such measures are relaxed or eliminated, disease spread among those still susceptible will occur more readily and the number of persons infected by each newly infected person will rise.

Relaxing or ending measures to control social dynamics thus raises the number of persons that each newly infected person infects to a number greater than one. As a result herd immunity is temporarily lost and the rate at which new infections occur will increase. However, the continued rise in the number of those infected will increase the proportion of the population with immunity, so that herd immunity will be regained, but with a higher proportion of the population infected.

The rise in the proportion of the population infected that occurs during transition from a period of controlled social interaction to a new period of normality is unavoidable. Adverse consequences of the transition to normality from the current period of controlled social interaction can be limited in two important ways.

First, by a progressive transition that prevents a spike in new infections that overloads hospital capacity to treat those who suffer serious adverse reaction to the disease.

Second, measures to to protect those most likely to suffer severe illness or death as a result of infection. Mostly, that means protecting the elderly, who account for the vast majority of those killed by Covid-19.

Also in need of special protection are those with conditions such as a respiratory disease, obesity or diabetes who may suffer particularly adverse reactions to the disease and should, therefore, be held in quarantine for their own protection until the epidemic ends.

Currently, the death rate due to Covid-19 in North America is probably close to 0.3% of those infected. Of those who have died, almost half in the United States, Canada, Italy and probably most other countries are elderly people suffering multiple other diseases and resident in a care home.

The future death toll due to Covid-19 could therefore be greatly reduced by better protecting the elderly, particularly those in care homes, from infection. The most important measure to achieve this would be repeated testing of care home workers and residents for Covid-19 infection to insure infected individuals are promptly quarantined.

Related:
David Stockman: "The Ripple-Effects Of The Government Lockdown Are Only Starting To Take Shape..."

Has New York City Achieved Covid19 Herd Immunity?

New York State Governor, Andrew Cuomo announced today that random surveys indicatd that 14% of New York State residents now have antibodies to Covid19, and in New York City, the number is 21%.

Assuming that being antibody positive means Covid19 immunity, that is immunity from re-infection, has New York achieved so-called herd immunity, which is to say immunity to the Covid19 virus that is sufficiently widespread to prevent each newly infected individual from, on average, passing the virus to more than one other person?

If herd immunity has been achieved, then the decline in reported deaths should continue even if the present measures of quarantine and lock-down are abandoned.

Unfortunately, there is no clear guide as to the infection frequency required for herd immunity. Assuming a reproduction number of more than three, which is to say the average number of people each infected person infects before the development of any population immunity, then an infection rate of over 60% of thereabouts would be needed to end the epidemic, assuming that people interact and spread the disease in a random fashion. However, people do not interact in a random fashion. Some are much more effective as disease spreaders than others. Children, for example, are excellent spreaders, both among themselves and among family members and family friends. Old folks, however, tend to live relatively isolated lives and are therefore extremely poor spreaders. It is not implausible, therefore, to suppose that an immunity rate of 21, as in New York City, or even as low as 14% for New York State as a whole, is sufficient to cause the epidemic to die.

As the various jurisdictions dealing with the epidemic make decision on ending lock-downs and other quarantine measures, and as more surveys of population immunity are reported, we will soon know.

Related:
YDN: R nought in New York City is less than one: Herd immunity achieved
The Hill: The results are in — stop the panic and end the total isolation
The Irish Savant: Heads I win, tails you lose
DC Whispers: Sweden Kept Economy Open, Yet Has A Mortality Rate Similar To America’s
Pepe Escobar: What Did U.S. Intel Really Know About the ‘Chinese’ Virus?
Post News: 94% of All NYC Coronavirus Patients Have Underlying Health Problems

the Corona Virus Response: A Media Induced Panic For What Reason?

Here's a comment from an actual expert on viral respiratory diseases:

Dr. John Oxford, virologist, Professor at Queen Mary College, University of London, and a leading expert on influenza, including bird flu and the 1918 Spanish Influenza, and HIV/AIDS.

What he says:

Personally, I would say the best advice is to spend less time watching TV news which is sensational and not very good. Personally, I view this Covid outbreak as akin to a bad winter influenza epidemic. In this case we have had 8000 deaths this last year in the ‘at risk’ groups viz over 65% people with heart disease etc. I do not feel this current Covid will exceed this number. We are suffering from a media epidemic! Source

So why the continued lock-down?

Many unofficial reports are now emerging that reveal Covid19 infection rates in the general population that are huge multiples of officially reported rates.

 That means that infection rates in many communities are pretty certainly past the point necessary to achieve herd immunity, which is to say the point at which the disease spreads with ever increasing difficulty before dying out entirely.

Yet no government has reported a survey of the general public to determine whether herd immunity has been achieved.

Why not?

Presumably, because governments do not want the public to know.

And that presumably, is because governments want the lock-downs to continue for reasons quite other than those stated.

What are those ulterior and unstated motives?

Interesting question that:

To drive up unemployment while destroying small businesses that are the chief employers of low-wage labor?

Why would governments want this?

Many reasons come to mind. Here are a couple:

1. By creating a much larger pool of the unemployed, a desperate and docile pool of cheap labor is made available to the corporate giants that own the government.

2. While thousands upon thousands of small business that have been forcibly closed -- shops, restaurants, a multiplicity of service enterprises -- the big boys, Amazon, Star Bucks, Tim Hortons, Crispy Kreme will have been planning how to take over the space newly created for their own expansion.

3. Or is the objective simply to create widespread poverty on a permanent basis?

Is it the idea that living standards for the majority having been crushed, they are to remain crushed?

What, after all, is the point of so many people stuffing their faces with junk food, pissing away energy and other resources on  hedonistic cruise vacations, trips to Vegas and stuffing themselves with toxic, obesity- and diabetes-inducing  grease- and sugar- loaded junk food.

Welcome to the new peonage.

Other possibilities? Suggestions welcome!

And here's one obvious alternative: a Deep State plot to get rid of Trump.

Related:
LA Times: Hundreds of thousands in L.A. County may have been infected with coronavirus
Perspective on the Pandemic: Interview with Prof. John Ioannides

Thierry Meyssan: Covid-19: Neil Ferguson, the Liberal Lyssenko
Ron Paul: What If The Lockdown Was A Giant Mistake?
Jim Fedako: Exactly How Many Deaths To Justify Giving Government's Control Of Everything?
ZH: Why The Shutdown Must End

Understanding the Reproduction Number, Lock-downs and Herd Immunity

During a disease epidemic, lock-downs cut the reproduction number -- that is the number of people infected by each infected person -- by reducing opportunities for viral spread. This can be seen in the Canadian data, which show that the number of newly reported cases turned down within two week of the onset of a national lock-down (see figure 2). As the incubation period for the disease is approximately two weeks, that indicates that the lock-down had a more or less immediate effect in reducing the spread of the virus.

Figure 2. New reported COVID-19 cases (n=5,590

Footnote1) in Canada by episode dateFootnote2 as of April 1, 2020, 11 am EDT

When R0 is less than one, the epidemic dies down and is ultimately extinguished. Problem is, if R0 is driven down by means of a lock-down, any remaining cases or new cases from whatever source are likely to re-ignite the epidemic when the lock-down ends. That is the danger China now faces. China is dealing with this risk by testing people entering the country so that imported cases can be quarantined, and so that contacts of new cases of any source, can be tracked down and quarantined.

In time, if the proportion of the population that has been infected rises high enough, R0 will fall below 1 without a lock-down because most people are immune and cannot therefore be (re-)infected. That is why, in Britain, epidemiologists are now conducting surveys to determine how many people have already acquired immunity. If the proportion is high enough, probably over 60%, herd immunity will have been achieved. That means that even without control over human interactions, R0 will be less than 1 and the virus will be unable to spread. At that point, any new outbreak will die out spontaneously and the national lock-down can be ended.

A further consequence of making a reliable estimate of the population-wide infection rate is that it will provide a basis for an accurate estimate of the mortality rate for the disease. At present, mortality rate estimates are hopelessly skewed because the infection rate includes only those with disease symptoms who are known to medical authorities. Those who suffer the illness without reporting to a doctor, or who are infected without experiencing disease symptoms, are currently excluded from mortality rate estimates, thus elevating the apparent death rate, probably many times in excess of the actual rate.

Related:
James Corbett: The Things You CANNOT Say About Coronavirus
Spectator USA: No lockdown, please, we’re Swedish
Guido Fawkes: China Faking Corona Virus Stats?

How Herd Immunity Is Supposed to Work: Pretty Cool — If It Works

This three-minute video explains how vaccination works to protect a population, even when many, perhaps most, are not vaccinated.



The same logic applies in the case of naturally acquired immunity within a population.

Here's the explanation of the UK Government's policy in response to the bat flu, as provided by Guido Fawkes:

The government’s internationally unique strategy is premised on the idea that the majority of us will inevitably get the coronavirus and for most of us it will be merely an unpleasant experience from which we will recover. Letting the healthy get it, with the more vulnerable kept physically separated from the majority, in the expectation Britons will develop herd immunity and because immune people cannot infect others. [Thus], in the long run, [there will be fewer] fatalities.

The British Government policy reponse to COVID19 benefits from the Chinese experience. What that experience shows is that the virus-caused demand for hospital care and mortality rises sharply with age, doing so strongly over the age of 60. The UK response reflects this fact.

Thus, the authorities are allowing the infection to spread throughout the population to the point it impacts a substantial number of the elderly. At that point, the elderly will be required to go into quarantine for four months for their own protection.

Quarantining the elderly will have two effects:

(1) it will prevent mass infection of those most liable to life-threatening disease symptoms, thereby limiting both mortality and demand for hospital care;

(2) it will reduce the average number of people each infected person will infect, i.e., the reproduction rate or R_nought. The latter effect, combined with the rise in the proportion of the under-65 population who by then will have acquired immunity, will drive the reproduction rate down, hopefully below 1.0, at which point the epidemic will die out.

Perhaps Britain's current crop of bureaucrats and government advisers are smarter than the old guard:



But: Did they get the timing wrong?

Related:
Buzzfeed: The UK Only Realised "In The Last Few Days" That Its Coronavirus Strategy Would "Likely Result In Hundreds of Thousands of Deaths"
Business Insider: People over 70 in the UK will be quarantined at home for 4 months in a 'wartime' effort to tackle coronavirus