This concept, which he defended in 2020, postulates an epidemic that can develop in a strictly linear way: once a person is infected with the virus, he is protected; Once the vast majority of the population is infected with the virus, the epidemic ends.
However, the virus has proven to be more elusive. Not only has it been shown that an infected person can be re-infected, but in addition, vaccines are relatively effective: they protect against dangerous forms of the disease, but do not prevent the virus from continuing to spread; Furthermore, Long-term protection is still unknown; Finally, there is the problem of virus mutations.
However, it was not as if the development of the situation had taken everyone by surprise. As early as spring 2020, the term “alternative” began appearing in news reports.
But the fact remains that during the pandemic’s first year, the concept of herd immunity had many adherents, particularly within governments. British And Swedish. In addition to those who signed, in October 2020, an open letter called the ‘Great Barrington Declaration’: it recommended that governments allow the virus to spread freely while working to protect ‘the most vulnerable’ – but the letter did not provide There is no clear business plan To achieve these two goals, If not these which all governments of the planet have used in their attempt, with varying degrees of success, to protect the most vulnerable.
Près de deux ans et demi après le début de la pandémie, alors qu’on continue d’en apprendre sur le comportement et les particularités de ce virus, il est de toutes façons devenu clair que ces comparaisons qu’tétévec a fair tenéc Measles don’t keeprecently commented on three authors, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, in an analysis of his publication Journal of Infectious Diseases. In the case of measles, a certain group immunity is already achieved when the majority of the population has been vaccinated. But achieving herd immunity with this virus is “impossible”, Director of the Global Public Health Chair added From the University of Edinburgh, Devi Sridhar, although 100% of people have contracted this virus. We’re rather having a contest of odds – where the fact of their existence reduces the chances of getting them again, where the fact of vaccination reduces the chances of hospitalization, and where, from mutation to mutation, we hope to run into versions of the virus that won’t be more dangerous than the flu – but not sure More than getting rid of it.
She continued, “We are certainly no longer at the same point as at the beginning of 2020. Our challenge has shifted from mass deaths to ways to keep workplaces and essential services running. COVID-19 is not mild enough to be treated as a cold, because it makes People are sick enough to not be able to work.But we can at least see some avenues emerging, including three that Devi Sridhar is particularly adamant about: Don’t underestimate the importance of case screening and tracing, particularly to protect the most vulnerable.Pay more attention For the long coronavirus: because we will have to develop treatments against this still not well understood outcome of the virus, especially if it is considered that the virus will continue to spread.
“Subtly charming problem solver. Extreme tv enthusiast. Web scholar. Evil beer expert. Music nerd. Food junkie.”