What do you think of the herd immunity strategy proposed by the British Prime Minister to fight the coronavirus?

What do you think of the herd immunity strategy proposed by the British Prime Minister to fight the coronavirus?

What do you think of the herd immunity strategy proposed by the British Prime Minister to fight the coronavirus?

That’s dramatic!

According to

As of 15 March, the United Kingdom had 1,143 cases, including 21 deaths.

In other words, they were about the same as France on 8 March:

Source:

I deduce that

the UK is roughly 7 days behind France,

like

France is roughly seven days behind Italy.

As the UK health minister himself stated (same source): “…France is about seven days behind Italy.

“.

This immunity will come into play in all countries, because it is just

.

Just having understood this natural phenomenon

cannot constitute a policy

. But the politicians there must be excited to have understood a scientific concept, so they say to themselves that they are saved. But doing science requires understanding many, many scientific concepts, and then articulating all of that…

According to the same source: “For the time being, the government,

who hopes to delay the peak of the epidemic until the summer…

【!】

to cushion the shock for health services
has instructed

that people with symptoms remain confined for a week…

.”

So the government of the United Kingdom is in the process of committing…

the same mistakes

than the Italian and French governments, with one and two weeks delay.

Like all the , these rulers didn’t understand…

the exponential nature of the spread of the epidemic

. Some idiot at home probably made a linear projection of a small piece of curve at one point, resulting in “a peak in the summer” – that’s dramatically stupid!

Their peak, as in all countries, will come in a few weeks, when their hospitals have been submerged for far too long!

By the way,

Confining only people with symptoms is not helpful.

now that the scientific community knows that

the majority of infected show no symptoms for a week, and are still contagious!

Differentiated containment (mild herd immunity):

An interesting thing to try (in this country or another), knowing the age distribution of mortality rates:

(source:

),

would be to attempt a

differentiated confinement
:

since the majority of the population under the age of 39 has a low mortality rate,

we could let them work, let them “infect” this population under 39 years of age, who will mostly have only mild symptoms (runny or stuffy nose, sore throat, often no fever), treating the

serious cases (there are some, but statistics show that there are few) of this population in hospitals, applying a concept of “hospitalization”.

mild herd immunity

(it would be necessary to calculate whether, statistically, this burden would be bearable for the number of beds in the country testing it, with up-to-date data; from the graph above it seems that it would be);

but on the other hand, containment

for people the age of 40,

with

strict precautionary measures related to their food supply

(no physical contact with the deliverymen, taking into account the survival time of the virus on the packaging (no handling of the packaging by residents until 4 days after receipt), etc.).

In order to intra- contaminations, it would be necessary to reason by house :

As soon as a house has a person aged 40 or over, it is absolutely confined;

In other words, a house would only be deconfined if all its occupants are 39 years or younger, and on a voluntary basis, moreover, so as not to stress anyone!

Once this first phase has been stabilized, with the hospitals decongested, the age criterion for deconfinement could be raised very gradually, and still on a voluntary basis, so that people at risk would only take the risk in sanitary conditions of hospitals in nominal operation.

(Source for the survival duration of the virus :

)