What if ‘Herd Immunity’ Is Closer Than Scientists Thought?

Igor, you are a liar and a fraud.  A caricature.  Not worthy of being taken seriously.

Where you from again?

The government could have provided guidance, messaging, and targeted resources to at risk groups.  The modeling is irrelevant, a fact driven response was all that was required.

For example:

WARNING:  A new disease is spreading across China and is predicted to spread across the globe.  Unfortunately data from China is inconclusive and the government of China is untrustworthy.

Early data suggests that the elderly and those with underlying health issues and weakened immune systems are most at risk of major complications that can lead to hospitalization or even death.

A lot is unknown right now but here are some basic guidelines to the general population that can help protect you and reduce the risk of transmission for not only this disease but many others as well:


    - Practice proper hygiene.  Wipe your ass.  Wash your hands.  Try not to touch your face, mouth, and nose with your hands. Bathe.
    - Those in the most at risk groups should practice social distancing.
    - Stay home and isolate yourself if sick.  If complications arise contact your doctor or hospital from home if possible.
    - Mouth and nose coverings can help reduce the spread of germs and may provide some level of protection for the wearer of the face covering.  If those who are in a high risk group can't social distance from others then masks are suggested.
    - Stay away from nursing homes and other places where there are high concentrations of the most at risk population.  Limit your interactions with the elderly and sick as much as possible.  

Guidelines for nursing homes and other long term/ extended care facilities:

    - Ensure employees are using proper PPE and practicing proper hygiene.
    - If possible provide patients with individual rooms.  If not then try to provide some sort of separation among patients.
    - Limit, reduce, or completely eliminate outside visitation.  One size does not fit all, proper risk analysis should be used to set policy.
    - Isolate and quarantine patients that have symptoms of the virus or have tested positive.  Any patients that have been returned from the hospital should be quarantined and monitored.
    - Contact your local medical agency to request additional resources to ensure the safety of your patients.

Guidelines for hospitals / emergency rooms / clinics:

    - Ensure employees are using proper PPE and practicing proper hygiene.

    - If possible provide patients with individual rooms. If not then try to provide some sort of separation among patients.

    - Limit, reduce, or completely eliminate outside visitation. One size does not fit all, proper risk analysis should be used to set policy.

    - Isolate and quarantine patients that have symptoms of the virus or have tested positive.
    - UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE SHOULD YOU RETURN AN INFECTED PATIENT TO A NURSING HOME.
    - UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE ARE YOU TO BYPASS PROCEDURES THAT ARE INTENDED TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF THE PATIENT IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE RISK EXPOSURE TO YOURSELF ( ie don't put everyone on ventilators!) 
    - Contact your local medical agency to request additional resources to ensure the safety of your patients.

It kind of makes sense if the government is run by a selfish elitist class that is only looking after it's own interests.  They don't care about the vulnerable.  They need people providing services for them that they consider essential to maintain their power and control.

And we trust all individuals to do the right thing?

Here's a comparison (you can decide whether or not it is apt). In World War 2, people on the west coast were required to turn off their lights, because the models suggested that a mainland attack from the Japanese was imminent. It was not, because the model was...premature.

You try to trust every individual to "do the right thing" based on "the information available" (because that's working so well in the present?), but one person leaving the lights on undermines the whole project.

Of course, given all the individuals who are choosing to do what they decide is the "right thing" based on their own interpretations of "the information available" (read: their individually informed premature models), there is no consistency in response.

Actually I responded with an example of how they could have responded, an example that would be a very mild response but not a non response. You've been suggesting that there is an all or nothing approach. Either full blown panic or nobody doing anything at all. I provided an example to counter -your- false dichotomy.