https://www.webmd.com/lung/coronavirus-immunity-reinfection#1

"Could Herd Immunity Protect Us?
Herd immunity happens when a large part of the population -- the herd -- is immune to a virus. This can happen either because these people got vaccinated or had already been infected. Herd immunity makes it harder for a virus to spread. So even those who haven't been sick or vaccinated have some protection.

The more contagious a virus is, the more people need to be immune for herd immunity to kick in. The SARS-CoV-2 virus is so contagious that experts estimate about 70% of people in a community will need to be immune to have herd protection. That number might be hard to get to without a vaccine or a whole lot of people getting sick." (and dying)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
In order to get to 70% (Herd Immunity) in a country of 333 million people (like the US) 233 million people would have to get Coronavirus.
With an average IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) of 1.4%, that'd be 3,262,000 deaths in America in order to achieve herd immunity.
If there is a large percentage of Americans who refuse to give up their right to assemble and refuse to get vaccinated even if we develop a vaccine, so, we're not going to prevent the spread of the virus.
Eventually, without this thing going away on its own, the only way to end the pandemic is to achieve herd immunity.
If that's the case, then Sweden is way ahead of us in the race for herd immunity. Shouldn't we just bite the bullet and get it over with and prepare ourselves for millions of Americans dying off in the 2nd wave, in order to achieve herd immunity as fast as we can?

Your math is bad. The death toll for herd immunity should be 1.4% of 70% of the US population. You apparently did 1.4% of the entire population. Edit: your math is ok, my bad. It's ok assuming the assumptions are correct on herd immunity levels and death rates. You also ignore people with long term complications that don't die, but are disabled.

The ethics are bad too. "Let's have a death rate comparable to WWII" doesn't sound like an acceptable solution. "Let's try to minimize deaths until we can develop a treatment or vaccine" sounds a lot more civilized.

Lastly, we really don't know what the fatality rate or the disability rate are yet. We're not even sure yet which or how many organs can be affected. It would be nice to know that before deciding to dispense with swaths of the population, rather than after. :-/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2020 03:51PM by Brother Of Jerry.

I like the way you bring up the long-term consequences even for those who have recovered. The other complication is that we don't know how feasible herd immunity would be. There is enough evidence that infection may not confer long-term immunity to give scientists pause.

https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/04/27/1000569/how-long-are-people-immune-to-covid-19/

To be sure, there is a lot that we don’t know.

But for discussion’s sake, the other side of the ledger, the health and economic effects of the lockdown, must also be tallied.

The rates of domestic abuse, child abuse, suicide have all increased. What’s an acceptable increase?

The negative effects on health and community due to employment disruption Is well studied and surprisingly detrimental. How much is acceptable?


As for a vaccine, obviously easier said than done. Some took 10 To 15 years to create. Even with all the regulations and proper testing protocols set aside so as to potentially speed up the process, a vaccine in a year would be nearly unprecedented, revolutionary.

And let’s say this is accomplished and a vaccine is announced this time next year, one that has skipped all the usual regulatory processes, will you volunteer yourself to line-up first? Who will? And as you say, we don’t know “yet which or how many organs can be affected,” which means we wouldn’t know the same about a new vaccine, especially since we skipped the usual testing protocols. And of course, the less we know about the virus, the harder it is to create a vaccine.

There’s a lot to consider, no doubt.


Of course trying to achieve herd immunity “as fast as we can” would be folly. A gradual, step by step re-opening seems wisest and is what most jurisdictions in N.Anerica are proposing or doing already.

>"...trying to achieve herd immunity “as fast as we can” would be folly. A gradual, step by step re-opening seems wisest and is what most jurisdictions in N.Anerica are proposing or doing already."

Yes, that was one of the main points of the shutdown, as far as I understand. Letting CV just run rampant would have swamped the health care system. The way it's been done has acted to "slow the spread", as they termed this approach, so that gradually the herd immunity does start to develop but meanwhile you don't overload the health care system, as far as that's preventable. Of course, another major consideration was just the plain ethics of trying to save as many lives as possible.

One major factor of the entire nightmare we should remember is that the medical and science and epidemiological experts were grappling with a "novel" virus, so named because it was new - they had not encountered it before and were not 100% aware of all its various aspects and behaviours at first. It's like if there's a pot on the stove that catches fire you may elect to throw a lid on it first to smother the flames and then take further steps to address the situation, such as turning off the stove and removing the pot. Only when the immediate danger is over would you then even start to think about scouring the pot or determining that it's fit only for the dust heap.

It will be interesting to see how the herd immunity thing goes. I hope they'll find that people do have at least limited immunity once they've had the virus and recovered. However, with seasonal flu, say, as the virus mutates every year experts recommend receiving a flu vaccine each flu season. I wouldn't be surprised if that's the case with a vaccine for CV. Too bad, but that's the way viruses try to keep out ahead of us - their old mutation game.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2020 05:31PM by Nightingale.

Right. The ‘novel’ part of the virus is a massive hinderance. It was hard enough to make vaccines for things we knew fairly well. In fact, I would be very suspicious of any remedy presented in a year, especially since all normal protocols have been waived.

Alberta’s preparatory response was massive overkill, in terms of preparing hospitals for an overwhelming and sudden demand, especially for ICU units. With many surgeries postponed and all elective surgeries, we had entire wings empty. I don’t begrudge this initial response in the least, and I think the fact that we didn’t even come close to overwhelming our health care system is due precisely to the success of the lockdown.

But weirdly, some have taken the success as evidence that the virus’s danger was overblown. Weirder still, they think this as they look squarely at one of the worst localized breakouts in N. America. The Cargill meat processing plant had about a thousand cases, that’s half the staff. That should cement in everyone’s mind how easily the virus can spread.

The good news, if it still holds up (I haven’t re-checked), came out early in Iceland, a country that tested more per capital than anywhere else. Half the test population was asymptomatic. At first this news was worrisome, since it means a lot of infected people are walking around not knowing they were spreading the virus everywhere they go. But the good news is, to use schrodingerscat’s number, of the 70% of pop. needed for herd immunity, half that number potentially wouldn’t even know they were sick.

Overall, I’ve been very happy with Alberta’s response and Canada’s overall. We’ll see how the gradual reopening goes. I’m optimistic. The last step, recovering the economy, might prove to be the most difficult part.

Human Wrote:
-------------------------------------------
>
> Alberta’s preparatory response was massive
> overkill, in terms of preparing hospitals for an
> overwhelming and sudden demand, especially for ICU
> units. With many surgeries postponed and all
> elective surgeries, we had entire wings empty. I
> don’t begrudge this initial response in the
> least, and I think the fact that we didn’t even
> come close to overwhelming our health care system
> is due precisely to the success of the lockdown.

With no regard to the lives put into danger by delaying certain surgeries or health care workers put out of work, some hospitals are close to shutting down as a result of the cancellations.

Just wondering. . .Toward the end of February, my DH had been coughing his lungs up, more or less. He was getting ready to go to bed when he suddenly collapsed and could not get up. He outweighs me by at least 100 pounds, so I could not lift him up. Our adult daughter lives with us. She couldn't budge him, nor could our 28-year-old neighbor, who looks like a young Viking.

In the end, we had to call 911. It took a crew of three to wrangle him onto a gurney. He spent three days in the hospital. They never did assign a particular etiology to the pneumonia. He remained weak for several days after that.

My shoulder surgery was done a few days after he got home, and after nearly three months, it is still a long ways from rehabilitation, and it probably won't ever be back quite to normal. I don't drive, and our daughter refused to let me go to the hospital to visit DH on the grounds that my own surgery was coming up.

Could this possibly have been an early manifestation of COVID-19?? And the fact that I didn't get it maybe mean that I am kind of resistant to it?? I have neither a clue nor a medical background.

It surely could have been. The virus had gained a strong foothold by February and healthcare professionals are now retesting samples from back then to see which influenza cases were actually COVID-19.

When testing becomes possible, it might be good (both as entertainment and to get a sense of possible immunity) to have his case reviewed.

This might be an appropriate place to squeeze in some encouraging epidemiology news.

There were concerns that some Wuhan Virus survivors in Korea had become reinfected. A few hundred of those were retested, and found to have antibodies--but not the virus. There were a lot of false positives, it seems, because the test picked up residual viral proteins (or something).

So it seems that, at this short date, people who have had it remain safe. So if your husband had it, Catnip, then there's a good chance he's safe, and you to, considering husbands' and wives' microbes tend to be well acquainted.

https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2020/05/19/south-korea-retested-covid-19-positives-actually-great-news/

Live long and prosper.

Catnip, this may be of interest.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/poll-one-third-americans-might-124500468.html

Catnip, I know that my state is now testing anyone who wants to get tested for Covid. If your state has opened up testing, I think it would be a good idea for you both. I think that the late February timeline for your husband's illness could definitely line up.

You have a good point. We should consider both sides of the policy ledger.

I would add, however, that you are underestimating the costs of NOT imposing constraints. Plausible studies indicate that the number of lives lost in the absence of the various quarantine measures might have been 35X the 90,000 we have already experienced. That would mean over three million dead. Now when I read such exercises, I apply a big fudge factor to see what it would mean if the estimates are wrong in either direction. So assume the 35X is off by a factor of 3.

What happens? We arrive at a bit over one million dead, which is roughly the total of all dead in all US wars combined. Do you have any idea how much of an economic and societal shock that would be? A depression would be inevitable, and the number of impoverished families and cases of domestic violence and child abuse would skyrocket.

I'm all for a frank evaluation of the costs and benefits of the various possible approaches. But if we go that way, it's important to count the economic and human costs of the herd-immunity strategy too. And in that case the losses are not 90,000 but rather a minimum of a million deaths and all that entails.

Right. Both sides of the ledger have to be assessed fairly.

But we did lockdown and avoided the worst case scenario. That’s no longer relevant. Now we must measure both sides of the ledger as we ease up the lockdown.

As for an economic depression, that’s already a foregone conclusion. As I watch these mind bogglingly massive stimulus bills get passed in the U.S., bi-partisanly, with all the benefits going to the top; and as I watch images of the day long food bank line-ups across America, I have zero confidence that America will respond appropriately. You will be Brasil, politically and economically, quicker than you can say FDR.

> But we did lockdown and avoided the worst case
> scenario. That’s no longer relevant. Now we must
> measure both sides of the ledger as we ease up the
> lockdown.

Agreed. The ledger that matters is the present one, not the past one. I'm in favor of cautious, strategic reopening with a backup plan in place. I do not have confidence that the United States has a Plan B to implement if the pandemic resurges.


------------
> As for an economic depression, that’s already a
> foregone conclusion.

Yes. A depression was in the cards from the moment the disease gained a foothold in North America. Those delays in January and February were criminal.


-------------
> As I watch these mind
> bogglingly massive stimulus bills get passed in
> the U.S., bi-partisanly, with all the benefits
> going to the top; and as I watch images of the day
> long food bank line-ups across America, I have
> zero confidence that America will respond
> appropriately.

Did I already use the word "criminal?" Because I would like to use it again.


------------------
> You will be Brasil, politically and
> economically, quicker than you can say FDR.

Well the US already has its Argentinian Peronistas, so why not a Brazilian outcome? Or, more germanely in several ways, a Russian outcome?

Funny, I can’t hear, “Let them eat ice cream” in a Russian accent. Doesn’t sound right.

A Portugese accent would definitely be more appropriate.

Just giving away "free" money upsets me. There needs to be "means-testing," but in a time of economic crisis, there simply are neither the time nor the resources to do it.

I don't need any kind of money give-away. My retirement is just fine, thank you. I gave my $1200 to an unemployed family member last time.

America can't be bothered to rethink its healthcare system so there is universal healthcare, but is ready to give away gazillions - without verifying who needs it and who doesn't - and this strikes me as massively irresponsible.

if you really are upset about people getting free money, please focus more on the TRILLIONS that have been handed out for free to a few thousand people who already have hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars and less about the family down the street trying to buy groceries for their kids.

The job loss had been catastrophic. And because America insists upon coupling Health care with employment (what an insidious notion), 27 million of your fellow citizens no longer have health care. That means the family down the street can’t buy groceries and also can’t get their asthma medicine or diabetes medicine Or much much worse.

And if the University of Chicago study is correct, roughly 40% of those wage earning jobs ain’t coming back after the lockdown, and may never come back.

So I suggest focusing on the billionaires that your Congress actually serves, and the trillions that have been handed to them, bi-partisanly, for free. And you better start insisting upon getTing cash down to the people, where it should have been put in the first place, lest your cities are burned to the ground this summer and fall.

Forgive my tone, catnip, but I get why young people are quickly coming to the belief that working people under 40 are going to starve to death because boomers didn’t want to get the flu. And it really doesn’t matter if starving people believe incorrectly, they’re starving.

And by the way, means-testing is FAR more expensive than the fraud you fear.

Again, please forgive my tone. Take this as more my general feeling than anything directed at you personally.

Human

I don't have a problem with anything you said. I tend to focus on means-testing because that was a huge part of my job for 30 years: proving that people were or were not eligible for government benefits based on evidence ("means.")

Like you, I have HUGE issues with lots of cash going willy-nilly to people who don't need it. But when there are people who are losing everything because of the massive economic shutdown, there isn't time to sort things out in a more thoughtfully planned way.

Why doesn't anyone ever state the stats re the increase inesuicides and abuse.

Lulu not logged in Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why doesn't anyone ever state the stats re the
> increase inesuicides and abuse.

Feel free.
I have not heard them so I have no idea what they are.
But just a quick google search, the jury is still out and there are no stats of suicides since 2018.

They are not being reported (much).

But there is awareness.

The burden is on those speculating that the rates are or will be going up.

Where are the suicide rates for those who loss a family member?

This is tough. There are no easy answers. The best answer to a healthy economy are healthy people. No matter how hard the president tried to force meat processors to go back to work, they could not return until they had a healthy work environment.

Can't play on the beach until Jaws is gone.

> Where are the suicide rates for those who loss a
> family member?

Exactly, and the suicide rates that would have ensued from a much higher death rate. People act like there would have been no deep recession, damaged families, and suicides if the quarantine measures had not been imposed.

Brother Of Jerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The ethics are bad too. "Let's have a death rate
> comparable to WWII" doesn't sound like an
> acceptable solution. "Let's try to minimize deaths
> until we can develop a treatment or vaccine"
> sounds a lot more civilized.
>

Or, let's look at what it takes to get 'herd immunity' and aim for that since:

A: We don't have a vaccine
B: The only realistic, hope we have, naturally, is for 70% of the population developing or acquiring antibodies which are either,
1. Produced naturally in response to most diseases, including Covid 19 Virus or
2. Acquired through injection or digestion of antibodies harvested from a human (or humanized cow or similar mammal) survivor

So, why not give a Covid Antibody injection to the 70% of Americans who are least at risk so that we can achieve herd immunity quickly and prevent 3 million deaths?
And even if we do lose 3 million out of 333 million, because we don't inject people with antibodies, we'll be back down to 330 million and we can take test samples of everybody so we can just clone them and bring them back to life again, with Covid antibodies. Problem solved.
Or just use their DNA to cross breed with a humanized Bonobo and use it for lab tests to prevent future outbreaks.

You're going to ride this "humanized" hobby horse until it drops from exhaustion and dies, aren't you? Try not to get any slivers.

And who would those millions of Americans be? Most Wuhan-related deaths are the elderly, and people with pre-existing locations. For most everybody else: minor, or no symptoms at all. Nothing a bit of C18H28ClN3O5S at .88/dose can't fix.

Just think of what this would do to thin out the herd! (Pun intended.) How it would reduce the strain on Social Security, Medicare, the VA! Trillion$ in e$tate money would flow into the hands of Gen-X, Millennials, and government coffers. Funeral homes would prosper, and the ranks of grief counselors and probate attorneys would grow and prosper. Best of all: these people are over-represented among the "Deplorable" demographic. Once they go, they'd be easily persuaded to vote "woke," and we can then worry about other crises, like global warming.

(Hmmm...what if a world-wide culling of a few billion souls solved the world climate global warming change crisis? Would the "green" energy industry still be viable? Watch for "Planet of the Humans, Part II!)

Gov. Andrew Cuomo (regarded as a possible dark knight on a white horse in Milwaukee this year) boldly ordered elderly with the Wuhan Virus to return to their nursing homes for hospice, I mean, recuperation. Way to go, Guv!

There would be downsides. Altruistic agencies with our best interests in mind (like WHO and NIH) and deserving outfits like Gilead Sciences and the Wuhan Institute of Virology would lose out on the billions that could be made with a vaccine. Our enlightened betters like Tedros Adhanom, Anthony Fauci, and Bill Gates would have to find other ways to establish their bona fides as Philosopher Kings. But such costs would be more than offset as we get back to our more comfortable "normal" of cheap circuit boards, dog food, breaded tilapia and pharmaceuticals from our good friends in China. That's what we really want, right? Cheap goods and peace in our time.

Let's let the Swedes run the show! Blonde women look fantastic in red caps and capes.

I would love to meet these people with pre-existing locations.

Yes, this is all a plot to sell vaccine shots. Darn, you're onto us!

You're so cute when you write like Jordan. Hugs.

It will be a "public global commodity," available to all peoples and nations. Undisappeared virologists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a long-time partner with the W.H.O. and the US National Institute of Health, are hard at work at this very moment.

"Once they go, they'd be easily persuaded to vote "woke," and we can then worry about other crises, like global warming."

That's an eye catching statement of incomprehensiveness. Who put 'woke' ambiance and global warming in the same movement? This is what I don't get about the Green people why does a war on carbon (which is everywhere in everything) have to include social justice?

In any event people are a good thing, fossil fuels are great because gas cars pollutes less than electric cars that run on power from coal mills.

Give a hoot - don’t pollute!?

Maybe the shutdown means that pensions and SS are plenty solvent. Otherwise the government would have let nature sort things out.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/19/2020 07:28PM by bradley.

Pensions maybe solvent in certain states that have surplus funds but in other states it's not looking good such as in Illinois. They've cut federal retirement perks in recent years. Older boomers got a sweet deal and younger ones won't have it so nice. But I would say a bigger reason that the government has done lots of bail outs is that the white house isn't really concerned about fiscal responsibility. It's not making the top 10 list. Think who's running the country right now :)

https://twitter.com/GregAbbott_TX/status/1262257093031202816/photo/1

No public employees have been laid off in my state, which faces a $5B deficit. We're very compassionate, and take good care of our sycophants. Sure, lots of businesses are "inessential," but never a public employee!

"Plausible studies indicate that the number of lives lost in the absence of the various quarantine measures might have been 35X the 90,000 we have already experienced. "

How do we know how effective the shutdown is?

Is the death rate in Sweden 35X ours?

Is the death rate the same across the U.S.? In WA state, we have hospitals laying off workers and some smaller ones threatened with closing, though I'm sure money will be printed to save them.


Cuomo said over 60% of those hospitalized in new york for the virus never left their house.


Some epidemiologists claim the shutdowns were too late - the virus had already spread, and so the peak was about to happen. Shutdowns therefore done just in time for politicians to take the credit for saving us.

Kind of like the church, which held a fast about the same time - yeah, the fast is what saved us, based on science, of course. Think of how many more would have died without fasting.

And BTW, there hasn't been a real shutdown. For some reason, while telling us to stay home, most businesses still operate, and many stores are open. To test the effectiveness of shutdowns, we need to shoot anybody leaving their home for one year minimum. No need to keep the power on, or store shelves stocked. But we don't really care - those going to the store want people to die we're told.


Then you have the latest gospel of wearing masks. I just risked my life going to the grocery store, where I watched the young bagger using her hands to repeatedly adjust her mask, spreading corona virus from mask to fingers to customer bags.

Of course, like most things coming from government and religion, they are made to make us feel good and safe. Feelings, feelings. Just like church.

And after trashing the economy, government will again save us, by throwing money at us. Those who produce the most dough will get elected. We are now hogs at the trough. Government action will create a crisis, from which they will save us by printing money.

I just read this review paper on the properties and behavior of virus particles, and infective doses, etc, and why masks are ineffective.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340570735_Masks_Don't_Work_A_review_of_science_relevant_to_COVID-19_social_policy

Speaking of the ledger, we need to consider deaths that will occur worldwide due to hunger from shutdowns - about 300 million. Plus the news was showing many people dying from heart attacks, etc, because the news has scared them away from hospitals. Potentially more unnecessary deaths than from the virus.

But again, do not question, or you will be told you just want to kill people, and you are an idiot or anti-intellectual, or whatever...

Pretty much like church.

That's the usual tripe: "disagree with me and you are 'pretty much like church.'"

But let's cut to the chase. The paper you cite is not peer reviewed; it comes from a man now affiliated with a right-wing lobbying group that among other things asserts climate change is a hoax; and he has no expertise in epidemiology.

His bio says: "Former tenured and Full Professor of physics at the University of Ottawa, Canada. Known for applications of physics education research. Published over 100 scientific articles in the areas of metal physics, materials science, measurement methods, and earth and environmental science, and many social commentary essays. Author of the book Hierarchy and Free Expression in the Fight Against Racism."

That's not how it works, Free Man. Writing a book on Hierarchy and Free Expression does not render a person a credible source on face masks and viral contagion. Once again you are cherry picking sources who match your agenda without regard to their expertise.

You say
"Plus the news was showing many people dying from heart attacks, etc, because the news has scared them away from hospitals. Potentially more unnecessary deaths than from the virus."

So your position is that because people with other health problems are afraid to go to the hospital because of Covid-19, that if we had done nothing and thus there were more people in the hospital with Covid-19, that those same people would have been *more* likely to go to the hospital?

That seems like some twisted logic.

Free advice: Free Man's posts are less about providing a logical argument and more "him jacking off to his perceived superiority."

I am quite familiar with his posts.
Honestly, I don't expect pointing out his logical flaws to have any effect on him, but hope springs eternal.

Some folks don't change no matter how many times their flaws are pointed out.

I respect you for trying, though.

Sometimes herds are right.

Every state is relaxing restrictions to at least some degree, so we will soon see how it goes. I quite frankly am shocked at how some people are behaving. I saw a clip of a high school graduation in Oklahoma. The kids were standing shoulder to shoulder, and most did not have masks on. So we will soon see how that turns out.

I personally will not be relaxing my sense of caution anytime soon. Apart from groceries and a few needed items at the hardware store, I feel no urgent need to shop, or to dine out, or to go to the movie theater, or to travel. As much as I miss all of those things, for me, it is simply too big of a risk to take at present. I can wait, and stand back, and watch, and see how it goes. I am learning to take pleasure in other things.

summer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Every state is relaxing restrictions to at least
> some degree, so we will soon see how it goes.

Yet only 3 states have met the CDC guidelines for reopening.
Yes, we'll see how that goes.
I predict, based upon past pandemics, that there will be a 2nd and a 3rd wave and that they will both kill more people than the first wave. A lot more. But yes, it will disproportionately affect older people with underlying pre-existing conditions, especially overweight, diabetic people with heart disease and minorities, since it tends to target those who are already at a higher risk of dying.

In order to achieve herd immunity scientists tell us 70% of the population needs to gain antibodies, either through surviving infection or injection of antibodies obtained from survivors. The more people who survive, the better.

My state, Maryland, either met the guidelines, or came close -- two weeks of flat and/or declining numbers. We also have open testing now. Anyone who wants to can get a test. We are opening with a great sense of caution, which suits me just fine.

Agreed.

Here in B.C. the total number of confirmed cases to date is 2467 with 149 deaths. In Canada the totals are 81,277 confirmed cases and 6145 deaths.

In B.C. as of yesterday we entered Phase 2 of the four or five-phase reopening plan. It seemed fast - from one day to the next, previously shuttered businesses could open, including shops, hair salons and some types of restaurants, but all with extreme caution and operating guidelines (restaurant patios OK, buffets not allowed). Even schools are reopening, just for the month of June, but it's not mandatory for students to attend and it's only a couple of days each week for each student.

The daily briefings really help, to receive updates on the health front and ongoing updated information and guidance as well as support and encouragement. Our public health officer is front and centre and she's calm and quiet and a good speaker and full of useful information and advice.

There is increased testing now too. The primary reason they are partially reopening is that the numbers of new cases went down (to just 3 in the entire province this past Tuesday). Yesterday, though, there were 21 confirmed new cases. They are characterizing that as a significant rise compared to the day before. It could be due to the fact that testing is now more widespread. They have to weigh all factors and come up with the most accurate interpretation of what's going on. It would be too soon to conclude that the rise was due to reopening this week. It will likely take a couple of weeks to determine the effects of reopening, as far as I understand it.

I noted today that the COVID-19 symptom list has expanded from previously to include more symptoms than before. Now there are testing centres set up and if you even just have a cold they are asking you to go in for a test. I guess I'll be in that number. I have a cold that won't quit. I don't think it's COVID but I could always be (unpleasantly) surprised. I have been trying to avoid others and wearing a mask when indicated. It's tempting to go visiting (guidelines state that now one family can visit one other family) but I wouldn't do that even with "just" a cold so that will have to wait a while. It's hard to be patient as it doesn't seem to make sense that you can go shopping but still can't go and see your loved ones. But as the government officials and medical authorities have been so visible and rational they have built up a lot of public trust and most people are understanding and compliant with the need to reopen cautiously.

I'm nervous about kids going back to school. I know the teachers are apprehensive. The only sure thing about CV-19 is that they're not yet 100% sure how it operates. But there is general acknowledgement that there needs to be a balance between reopening and maintaining public health. It's daunting to try and meet everybody's needs all of the time. I'm happy for the shopkeepers, especially small businesses, and it's great to see people out and about in the parks and parents with their kids on bikes in the streets again. So far, I see a lot of effort still with the social distancing, with small family groups sitting on the grass in the park, well away from other families, but with room for all to enjoy the sunshine and stay safe.

It does feel like a big release and relief, as if we've been holding our collective breath for a very long time. The reopening seemed to come abruptly and took us by surprise. But it's a happy surprise. I think partly it's due to the belief that much of the population is well informed and willing to observe the guidelines.

Even with the good shape we seem to be in, our public health officer has warned that a 2nd (and even 3rd) wave is inevitable and is likely to be more severe than what we've been through. Tough news but I guess we can take some comfort in the thought that we know more now than we did when this thing started and also that officials have ensured, as far as possible, that the health care system can handle whatever comes. As always, we're beyond grateful for our universal health care program. I can call an MD, see one, and get a test if I want, all free of charge. Definitely cannot complain about the free access we have to all medical resources should we need them.

As above, I was surprised to see this morning that they've added common cold to the list of symptoms for which they suggest you get a test. I have already signed up to get the antibody test. I'd rather do the blood test than get the nose jab. I'm a chicken that way. I can't unhear the description DJT gave of his test where they apparently stuck a big swab right up into his sinuses. Ewwwww. I don't wanna do that...

Anyway, take extra care out there everybody. Let's get through this.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/21/2020 03:16PM by Nightingale.

All the people who advocate for herd immunity forget one thing: there is no such thing as immunity for Covfefe-19 (as I call it), except temporarily. People who catch it and survive, may be immune for a few months but not years. People who were hospitalized in February and survived can become sick again today. Some already have.

Last but not least, you don't recover from Covfefe-19. You either die or survive. But you don't make a full recovery. 30-year-olds who caught it and survived after 3 weeks of force-breathing, were released from hospital with the body of a 70-year-old. So much for herd immunity.

Most people who catch it have little or no symptoms.