The Great Barrington Declaration

[youngmafbog]

Seems a fair few medical professionals agree with what I and a few other ABers have been saying for sometime only to be called covidiots by the worshipers of the great covid.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8810977/Coronavirus-Anti-lockdown-petition-calling-herd-immunity-reaches-30-000-signatures.html

[Old_Geezer]

If herd immunity doesn't prove possible then one is stuck coping with the present situation forever, or until something natural changes the situation. Are we prepared to be in lockdown, wearing masks, monitored by phone, scared of existence forever, or are we going to bite the bullet and get on with it ? Trying for HI is the only rational course IMO.

[ParsleyDumpling]

I have to say rowan, you really have got to the crux of the whole issue, with regards Covid. It does amaze me that governments and some scientists treat this as a battle that we will win, where Mother Nature is concerned we seldom do. Well said.

[Zacs-Master]

'people who die and suffer the worst are medically ill in the first place. The vast majority of people getting it do not suffer major symptoms and some even none at all.'

I agree (there, I bet that surprised you). That doesn't mean that going for herd immunity won't affect a significant proportion of the population, potentially meaning that manufacturing, service industries, utility companies (power stations!), transport services (goods and public transport) and most importantly our health services wont be affected.

You're also making a mistake in dismissing the fact that the elderly are consumers and buyers. The grey pound is a significant contributor to our economy:
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2553921/Baby-boomers-helped-lift-Britain-recession-grey-pound-accounts-50-consumer-spending.html

[Old_Geezer]

Yeah, but they can't take it with them ;-)

[Zacs-Master]

Much of the elderly's spending power. Pension pots would undoubtedly be affected by a large scale downturn in world economy (or should I say 'larger than we're already going to experience'?)

[Zacs-Master]

sorry that first sentence should read 'Much of the elderly's spending power is pension related'.

[TrevorThePug]

"Trying for HI is the only rational course IMO."

Maybe, but one of the main reasons for not doing that initially was that the NHS has been so decimated by consecutive Conservative governments, that it would have never coped. Still, more money to Serco and Friends of Tory plc would have been appealing to Dom&Co.

[ichkeria]

" It is not a u-turn, not by medical people anyway. The u turn is the MSM who have constantly not reported what alternative medical people have said."

Quite right, indeed it is not. It only seems like a "U turn" because this view scarcely gets a look-in compared to others.
I am sure there may be good reasons for this, but it's a fact.

[ichkeria]

"Herd immunity only works if infection results in long term resistance. It is too early to tell if this is the case. "

Herd immunity always works, eventually.
There is no reason to think it will be any different with this.
There is to date, in any case, no reliable evidence that anyone has contracted this virus twice in the relatively short space of time since it "crossed over" to humans.

[Old_Geezer]

True, but we've passed that point Trevor. The capacity has been increased and the demand for it lower than in the first "wave".

[pastafreak]

I was almost going to post this last night. But, coward that I am, didn't as I assumed I'd get shot down.
Many more than 3,or a fair few, are involved in this petition.
This might be considered by some to be a u-turn, and going against the scientific and medical community. But that's only because dissenting views get lost in the media scrum to get our attention. And more sensible media outlets are still cautious as what comes from the government is seen as some sort of truth or gospel.

I found this on a site I go on that focusses on diet and nutrition, often from a research point of view, with a lot of papers linked and discussed. Of course covid is a strong topic with discussions about what the science is. So over the past 6-8months I've already seen much detailed and sensible discussion about what's been done, what's not working...and the reasoning behind what many intelligent minds say should be done. Much is over my head, but it all needs to be made public so that we can be better informed. Up until now, we've not been.

[jim360]

// To be blunt, and no doubt I will be castigated as a horrible person for saying it, people who die and suffer the worst are medically ill in the first place. The vast majority of people getting it do not suffer major symptoms and some even none at all.

So far from wrecking the economy it could actually save money since you wont have long term treatment which is expensive. //

Does this argument only apply to Covid-19? If so, why? If not, why is this not an argument for abandoning healthcare altogether? I'm assuming I've misunderstood your point.

[Atheist]

There isn't herd immunity to the common cold.

[ichkeria]

Only because immunity doesn’t last very long. Immunity to the current coronavirus would seem to be a lot longer

[pixie374]

There are too many different strains of the common cold, atheist. You get immunity, as you can't catch the same one twice. I don't know about covid immunity though.

I thought that this was the original idea, not a u-turn, to not overwhelm the NHS, while we aimed for herd immunity... and a vaccine? Unfortunately, we seem to have taken it so far now, that covid deaths are seen as the only problem, while others are being allowed and ignored.

[ichkeria]

... and there is no vaccine for it.
There may turn out not to be a successful one for this of course. None of the other coronaviruses have one.

[ToraToraTora]

jim; "Does this argument only apply to Covid-19? If so, why? If not, why is this not an argument for abandoning healthcare altogether? I'm assuming I've misunderstood your point. " - because we are not trashing the economy for other areas of health care. Covidiocy has decreed that we all must suffer for a virus that does not effect most people.

[jim360]

I think it's the "it would actually save money" part that prompted my question. All healthcare is expensive, after all. Likewise, the first part of the passage I quoted seemed applicable to any and all illnesses, ie it's a usual rule that those who suffer under illness are often vulnerable for one reason or another.

The problem that Covid-19 poses, or posed, is a lot of people being ill all at once in a way that overwhelms the health service. Given that March/April showed that this disease has the capacity to do so, it's not impossible that it will do so again, which is apparently still enough of a concern to motivate early and large-scale interventions to try and prevent it.

[Peter Pedant]

o god if we reach herd immunity by signing a petition then I'll sign
once good - many times better !

but I fear we wont

[New Judge]

The financial cost of coping with Covid (in the way we're attempting to at present) is not lodged with the cost of healthcare for the sufferers. That is just a drop in the ocean. The true cost lies with the decimation (yes, I know it means literally, but I'm speaking figuratively) of large chunks of the economy. Sectors which contribute hugely to the nation's economy (hospitality, travel to name but two) have seen large scale destruction and that will continue to escalate even with the "relaxations" that have taken place. The trickle down effects of the restrictions mean that virtually no business sectors are immune and the strategy is simply unsustainable.