XFool wrote:onthemove wrote:Re. herd immunity, I believe scientists already accept that vaccination doesn't prevent initial infection and transmission, particularly for the new variants, so I don't think most scientists now expect herd immunity to be reached, even if we got 100% vaccination.
But going back to my point in my OP ... if the ONS numbers are right, and even with your more cautious 1 in 100 per week estimate, surely irrespective of the vaccination status, most people have now had covid anyway now.
And if so ... surely it means the pandemic is all but over.
Shurley shome mishtake?
Care to elaborate?
Why do you think there's been some mistake?
I'm just trying to interpret the official / scientific numbers that are being reported.
If you think you can add some clarity to the discussion, please feel free.
Just to clarify - by 'all but over', I meant, covid now endemic and circulating like the common cold, with people now tolerant (biologically speaking) of it - if most people have now had it, the chances of future serious complications are significantly reduced, as the majority of people would already have now encountered the worst effects.
Obviously, there is then the question of how is it endemic if reinfection isn't common? The answer is, I don't know. Perhaps this is what I'm missing. But I'm just going by the reported information from the main stream media, government, etc. For example .. "
PHE's ongoing study on immunity in healthcare workers found 44 potential re-infections in a group of 6,614 people who had previously had the virus. Researchers conclude reinfection is uncommon"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52446965If you think the reinfection rate is higher, could you provide a link to more recent evidence? (Genuine request, I'd be interested to know the latest scientific research on this).
Or do you interpret the 1 in 60 people infected in the past 7 days differently? Details here if you want to check ...
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulation ... ctober2021Or do you think people previously infected might have lower tolerance next infection? Though this would disagree with the message we're being given ("
Experts have been clear we should expect to be infected repeatedly over our lifetimes. But each reinfection should be milder than the previous one."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58334835)
But then we need to take into account that the R rate of the delta variant is very high ... this is largely the reason why scientists no longer feel herd immunity will be reached.
If so, that could explain the discrepancy ... reinfection rates might be low... but if the opportunity for reinfection from a high R rate is there, then that is probably what will still enable it to remain endemic, even when reinfection rates are 'low'.
In other words, (made up numbers for illustration) if you only have a 1 in 10 chance of reinfection, that might feel low, but if you encounter 10 opportunities for getting infected, the overall opportunity becomes significant. (e.g. see Bayes Theorem ..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes%27_theorem )
But then, like I say, if that's the case, this is it, covid is over, it's now endemic, we live with it going around like the common cold and get on with business as previously usual.