Countering the ideas about herd immunity without a vaccine

Here in Finland, the argument for gaining herd immunity without a vaccine, including the statement that as a strategy it is better for the economy than crushing the epidemic, is often circulated in the public sphere as a factual statement: it is possible, it is doable, it is in the end more ethical, it will prevent a second wave of the epidemic.

Journalists often do not seem to have enough knowledge or the ability to question it. In Sweden, this is of course the case even more. Some stories have been circulated about Sweden as “the new normal” within more international media, as well.

Would it be possible for Yaneer / NECSI to push out a paper directly addressing the economic and public health implications for trying to gain herd immunity without a vaccine as a strategy at some point? Additionally, if there exists some material that could be useful, please point me to that.

The situation in Finland is interesting in that a significant amount of researchers, physicians, ex-public health authorities etc. disagree with the herd immunity strategy, but several people in major positions of our CDC equivalent do seem to believe in it, and they repeatedly push out statements for it without transparency about the epidemiological models and assumptions they use. It would be very important to get journalists to push for transparency and honesty about their conclusions and the subsequent political decisions made.

I wrote an article in French about the epidemic overshoot which happens when there is no mitigation measure. I created also a worksheet to compute the graphs of the simulations.

I wrote a set of tweets. https://twitter.com/yaneerbaryam/status/1258868430247211021?s=20

This topic was automatically closed 29 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

Icons made by surang & Freepik  from www.flaticon.com