Stanford study examines possible California herd immunity

[ergophobe]

Apparently there are interesting tidbits in CA
- early flu season in 2019
- 8,000 Chinese nationals arriving daily this fall
- direct flights from Wuhan
- lower than expected case numbers

So they think the disease has been circulating in CA since the fall and lots of people have already had the mild version.
https://www.ksbw.com/article/central-coast-coronavirus-latest-numbers-and-timeline/32057115

Results expected in a few weeks

[rcjordan]

Trump considered allowing the coronavirus to 'wash over' the US - Business Insider
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-considered-allowing-the-coronavirus-to-wash-over-the-us-2020-4

[DrCool]

>wash over

I remember chicken pox parties as a kid where when one kid would get it parents would have other kids over so everyone could just get infected and be done with it. Itch for a few days, take an oatmeal bath, and then have immunity. But with COVID-19 since death is a common outcome for some that wouldn't really work.

[littleman]

His probable thinking on the 'wash over' approach:
If one takes out the human equation and just looks at the nation as a machine (like a sociopath would) CV-19 could look like a beneficial tuneup.  The old and weak die, leaving a younger, more capable labor force to carry on with less drain on the economy.

[buckworks]

>> 'wash over'

It sounds awful, but it's a scenario that had to be evaluated.

"What would happen if" is an important question for just about any kind of planning or policy-making.

[DrCool]

>a scenario that had to be evaluated

Agree. And giving him the benefit of the doubt he probably had no clue the severity of the disease and what it would mean. Once it was explained he realized it wasn't a good option. Maybe he was just trying to get a sense of what the worst-case scenario would be?

[ergophobe]

To be fair, the "wash over" approach is what they took in the UK at first and there are still well-respected public health thinkers who say that we could have done a very aggressive protection of high-risk people and let the virus wash over the low-risk population, hastening the arrival of herd immunity.

Fauci did say, back before he started being forced to lie to protect his job, that when shown the modelling for that approach, Trump immediately changed his mind.

Imagine, though, that the modelling had shown such an approach would actually result in fewer deaths, but nevertheless many deaths. It would actually be political disaster. Nobody would believe the modelling and would say more should have been done. Even if it had made public health sense, it would be politically disastrous.

The famous Stalin* quote comes to mind: "One death is a tragedy. A million deaths are a statistic."

*which was likely never said by Stalin and was certainly said earlier by others
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/21/death-statistic/