Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Is there a 20% infection effect?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Sousuke
    Veteran Member
    • Mar 2012
    • 4024

    Is there a 20% infection effect?

    There is speculation about whether a population can achieve some sort of immunity to the virus with as little as 20% infected.


    I've seen this mentioned over the last week and it made me compare California to New York.

    California locked down ahead of NY, so in April it never saw New Yorks numbers. Yet the state maintained a stubborn plateau through May and early June before rising again.

    NY on the other hand had their numbers crash back to the ground and as they are reopening no resurgence is being seen.

    I cannot image that NY vs CA lockdowns were all that different, so what is the difference? Could it be that once an area gets hit with 10 to 20 percent infections, there is an element of resistance? Could it be that the most mobile groups end up getting it at such a rate that herd immunity begins to take place in their sub group?

    Secondary to this - what if 60% of the population is already immune to some degree (looking at asymptomatic carriers) and therefore once a certain extra percentage acquires immunity, we start to get to an overall 70% much quicker that previously thought.
    Last edited by Sousuke; 07-02-2020, 11:00 AM.
    Everyone on Calguns keeps talking about TDS. I never knew we had so many fish keepers!

    The TDS on my 10gallon tanks 110ppm
    The TDS on my 29 gallon tank is 150ppm (due to substrate)
  • #2
    SAN compnerd
    CGN/CGSSA Contributor
    CGN Contributor
    • May 2009
    • 4725

    Originally posted by Sousuke
    https://theconversation.com/coronavi...nfected-141584

    I've seen this mentioned over the last week and it made me compare California to New York.

    California locked down ahead of NY, so in April it never saw New Yorks numbers. Yet the state maintained a stubborn plateau through May and early June before rising again.

    NY on the other hand had their numbers crash back to the ground and as they are reopening no resurgence is being seen.

    I cannot image that NY vs CA lockdowns were all that different, so what is the difference? Could it be that once an area gets hit with 10 to 20 percent infections, there is an element of resistance? Could it be that the most mobile groups end up getting it at such a rate that herd immunity begins to take place in their sub group?
    This is exactly what happened on the cruise ship in Japan, after a month of being on the ship only 20% of the people got the wuflu.

    Makes sense.
    "I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious." - Thomas Jefferson, 1824

    Originally posted by SAN compnerd
    When the middle east descends into complete chaos in 2-3 years due in part to the actions of this administration I'll necro post about how clueless I was.

    Comment

    • #3
      sd_shooter
      I need a LIFE!!
      • Dec 2008
      • 14269

      New York effectively became like Italy and Sweden. NY was too late and virus became a brush fire. It burned through the available fuel (old and weak.)

      Western states slowed down the virus a little and now we'll have a longer curve.

      Regardless, no more lockdowns, let's tear off the bandaid.

      Comment

      Working...
      UA-8071174-1