The White House-backed 'Great Barrington Declaration' calling for herd immunity wouldn't just fail — it could lead to 640,000 deaths
The audience is nearly unmasked and preparing for the BOK Center on 20 June 2020 for a Trump rally.
Thomas / Getty Photos Michael B.
This week, the White House endorsed "The Great Barrington Statement" from a libertarian think-tank.
The statement proposes to avoid the COVID-19 prohibitions that enable "those at reduced risk of mortality" to "live naturally" and become contaminated with the expectation that the United States and Great Britain can establish a herd immunity from the coronavirus.
Yet this claim produces a false dichotomy regarding lockdowns and the propagation of the virus.
One prediction indicates that attempting herd immunity may lead by February 2023 to 640,000 more deaths.
There were also thousands of other experts against the assertion, and they published their own counter memo on Wednesday.
For more stories, visit Industry Insider 's website.
The White house supports the latest paper prepared by a centrist think tank in Massachusetts earlier this month, which is in complete alignment with the coronavirus of the Trump administration 's strategy to restart, restart and reopen.
It was written by three Oxford, Stanford, & Harvard university scientists who complain of the impact of the pandemic — and methods to reduce it — on culture, following the Great Barrington Declaration (named after the 7000-member city where it was written in Massachusetts).
The bottom line of the declaration: Most citizens can go ahead and behave as though they did not, and "better defend those who are most at risk" of death and illness.
(The report does not specifically mention how they are supposed to prevent individuals at high risk from the virus.
This principle is named by the Barrington Community "centered security," which has long been advocated by the White House.
Many of the issues posed by the COVID 19 lock-down declaration are true, including 'lower infancy vaccines, deteriorating cardiovascular results, less cancer screening, and mental health degradation.'
However, most specialists in public health globally believe that the scientists' strategy is both short-sighted and lethal.
The Infectious Diseases Society of America has published a statement Wednesday labeling the Barrington Proposal "inappropriate, reckless and misinformed," a Group of over 12,000 disease scientists and physicians around the world.
There's no healthy way to reopen all schools or enterprises entirely while shielding citizens from death and illness properly, unless you bring the amount of cases down to really low numbers within the community, as SouthKorea has achieved through checking, tracing them and distancing them from each other.
The subsequent "death rate is massive and completely inacceptable," reported the actor Matthew McConaughey in August, Anthony Fauci, head of the National Center for Allergies and Infectious Diseases.
In view of this on the table, almost half a million names have been signed, which has been converted into 22 languages, into the statement.
The declaration should not suggest it is protection to the herd
Johnson & Johnson's research requires a cooperative clinical trial to assess Janssen for a coronavirus candidate
In one term, it is not practicable to pursue herd immunity to coronavirus by natural infections.
Around 0.5% of the world population were susceptible to the virus to date. Even the lowest posed herd immunity standards have a long way to go, causing 50% (or more) of the population to be susceptible.
Instead, the Barrington statement notes that "the most compassionate solution which compensates for the danger and benefits of herd immunity is to permit those at minimum risk of death to naturally live their lives through natural infections to gain immunity to the virus, and better protect those at highest risk."
Experts of public health accept that it is not herd protection.
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, head of the World Health Organisation (WHO), said Monday: "Herd immunity is accomplished by shielding citizens from an infection rather than introducing them to it.
"Herd immunity has never been seen in the history of public health as a method to adapt to an epidemic, let alone a pandemic.
Gregg Gonsalves, an epidemiologist at the Yale School of public health on Wednesday tweeted, "Achieving herd immunity free of the vaccine is a prescription for carnage.
Health practitioners have emphasized it as fatal and unethical: humans are not livestock herds to be slaughtered to improve our communal immunity.
Instead, herd immunity is accomplished more commonly by population vaccination.
"I think even when we use words like that in order to cope with human natural diseases, we also need to be cautious because they will contribute to an exceedingly cruel math that does not place individuals, lives and misery at the core of the equation," Mike Ryan from the WHO said in May.
More and more cases of reinfection also suggest that the immunity to coronavirus is not iron-clad.
If we encourage the pandemic to spread like a wild fire in unvaccinated communities, we may have been looking another five to six years like 2020 full of highs, falls and floods of lethal diseases.
"In the first few weeks most people who are infected with the COVID-19 virus produce an immune answer, but we don't know how good or permanent the immune response is or how different the response is for different people," said Tedros.
Thursday, 2 July 2020, health staff are relocating a patient to Covid-19 Unit at the United Memorial Medical Center in Houston , Texas.
FELIX / AFP Label by Getty Pictures
The Great Barrington Declaration plan could contribute to 155 million new COVID-19 infections in the US
So far, COVID-19 has caused more than 216,000 Americans to suffer, and fewer than three percent of the populace of the world has been affected by 7,8 million individuals.
The US could take or send 155 million other cases in order to achieve any semblance of herd immunity via natural pathogens.
One prediction indicates that the effort at herd immunity in the world will lead by February 2023 to 640,000 deaths.
"This is why we don't want to suggest 'Let it go. We'll all be ok. Let everyone get poisoned.' This is a terrible idea," said Fauci in August.
Furthermore, as the declaration writers say "screening the vulnerables is not feasible because of the very existence of the coronavirus – which sometimes passes over silent asymptomatic carriers to be incubated between two and 14 days, although individuals will unequivocally expose others to their infection.
Young people who have returned to their pre-pandemics can not guarantee that they will not return their parents with the virus, especially when certain quick COVID tests can only take around 70 % to 80% of the infection and can lead to false adverse effects.
If the virus carries on wildly, even in young populations, the threats for our health care infrastructure are usually smaller and smaller.
Many young Americans are now at increased risk of experiencing extreme cases of obesity and diabetes.
The virologist Julian Tang of Leicester University said in a review of the Barrington plan: "We don't even have a COVID-19 vaccine or a more common application of antiviral medication.
'Without these 'weapons' against COVID-19, I do not see how these vulnerable groups would efficiently, consistently or safely achieve the 'based security."
The one analysis in June indicated that controls on coronavirus avoided around 60 million infections alone between March 3 and April 6.
We have already proof that the virus does little harsh immunity if it is permitted to run amok in a community.
Kenji Senator Rand Paul has stated at a recent session in the Senate that New York City, which has been hit by the first wave in the United States, has contained its outbreak with this method.
But in his hearing, Dr. Fauci immediately corrected Paul: "If you think that 22% is herd immunity, I think that you're alone."
About 23,900 people have been injured by COVID-19 in New York City.
A Seoul research station for coronavirus on 26 August 2020.
Young Yeon-Je / AFP via Getty Images
The planet will get back to normal by non-harm immune strategies
In the USA, research was sluggish and right now the fast checks in nursing homes around America are so full of mistakes that several countries are pushing to avoid them entirely.
In reality, the country has not yet followed the tried-and - tested and genuine methods of combating the virus which several other countries have used successfully.
The writers of Barrington have adopted a false dichotomy which is causing our public health infrastructure to get out of control.
It is not necessary to monitor the pandemic between "lockdowns" and the epidemic to rage to gain herd immunity.
None of these strategies have been adopted in countries that crushed the virus, such as South Korea and New Zealand.
They checked, contacted and exchanged knowledge with their people to mitigate the epidemic.
"We need a monitoring programme and a contact tracing system, we need to provide the EPP because it has been commonly accessible because we have done none – and that is the issue," said Ezekiel Emanuel of public health experts Insider following the publicity of a study letter in JAMA earlier this week which shows how inferior the answer to the virus is for public health in the United States compared with other journalists.
"Can schools open, because when the transmitting rate is very, very limited, several other stuff can happen," he said.