- Joined
- Jan 27, 2016
- Messages
- 648
- Points
- 28
Anthony Costello
Anthony Costello is professor of global health and sustainable development at University College London and a former director of maternal and child health at the WHO
Sun 15 Mar 2020 20.12 GMTLast modified on Sun 15 Mar 2020 22.02 GMT
......
They appear to have concluded that it is inevitable most people would get the disease, so we should let the epidemic proceed to allow 60% of the population to become infected and build herd immunity through the wild virus.
......
I have questions:
......
Won’t this strategy ensure that the spread of the virus is intense and will cause more infections and more deaths in the near term?
......
Why are we emphasising herd immunity now? Does coronavirus induce strong herd immunity or is it like flu, where immunity remains weak and new strains emerge each year?
......
Doesn’t this contradict WHO policy? Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO director-general, said after declaring a pandemic: “The idea that countries should shift from containment to mitigation is wrong and dangerous.”
Shouldn’t we wait to see the China situation? They have contained the epidemic after seven weeks of intensive national effort. Will epidemics break out again in new states? Maybe. Will their strengthened systems not contain them quickly and effectively? What is their herd immunity to date? We don’t have the data available but new tests are coming online. It might be substantial, without a massive epidemic.
The WHO policy – practised by China, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong – is to keep things damped down until drugs and a vaccine are available. Vaccines are a safer way to develop herd immunity, without the risks associated with the disease itself. Is it wise or ethical to adopt a policy that threatens immediate casualties on the basis of uncertain future benefit?
......
Finally, on the precautionary principle, shouldn’t we go all out to damp this epidemic down, with all possible measures, whether evidence is strong, uncertain or weak, and worry about herd immunity when we have more evidence?
A lot more in the article at The Guardian : https://www.theguardian.com/comment...egy-questions-unanswered-coronavirus-outbreak
Anthony Costello is professor of global health and sustainable development at University College London and a former director of maternal and child health at the WHO
Sun 15 Mar 2020 20.12 GMTLast modified on Sun 15 Mar 2020 22.02 GMT
......
They appear to have concluded that it is inevitable most people would get the disease, so we should let the epidemic proceed to allow 60% of the population to become infected and build herd immunity through the wild virus.
......
I have questions:
......
Won’t this strategy ensure that the spread of the virus is intense and will cause more infections and more deaths in the near term?
......
Why are we emphasising herd immunity now? Does coronavirus induce strong herd immunity or is it like flu, where immunity remains weak and new strains emerge each year?
......
Doesn’t this contradict WHO policy? Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO director-general, said after declaring a pandemic: “The idea that countries should shift from containment to mitigation is wrong and dangerous.”
Shouldn’t we wait to see the China situation? They have contained the epidemic after seven weeks of intensive national effort. Will epidemics break out again in new states? Maybe. Will their strengthened systems not contain them quickly and effectively? What is their herd immunity to date? We don’t have the data available but new tests are coming online. It might be substantial, without a massive epidemic.
The WHO policy – practised by China, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and Hong Kong – is to keep things damped down until drugs and a vaccine are available. Vaccines are a safer way to develop herd immunity, without the risks associated with the disease itself. Is it wise or ethical to adopt a policy that threatens immediate casualties on the basis of uncertain future benefit?
......
Finally, on the precautionary principle, shouldn’t we go all out to damp this epidemic down, with all possible measures, whether evidence is strong, uncertain or weak, and worry about herd immunity when we have more evidence?
A lot more in the article at The Guardian : https://www.theguardian.com/comment...egy-questions-unanswered-coronavirus-outbreak
