Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Snit wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Commander Kinsey wrote
Doesn't giving a coronavirus vaccine to everyone increase the
chances of the virus mutating to avoid the vaccine?
Nope, it's the reverse of that, the virus can only mutate in
infected people and so the fewer that get infected, the less the
chance of it mutating.
Exactly!
So we should be using it sparingly.
Nope, we should be vaccinating as many as possible with the best
vaccines to reduce the number who get infected.
Yup. And they are nearing what they think is herd immunity in New
York. Amazing.
Dunno, nothing useful on that with
https://www.google.com/search?q=herd...ty+in+New+York
Gotta link ?
Did more looking into this.
Need 70% to get to herd immunity:
Its nothing like that simple now with the new more virulent strains.
That is what I thought,
Thats what is known.
but I have found multiple sources saying 70% is what they think would do
it.
None that base that on any rigorous science.
In the past I had seen 80-90%.
Its even higher than that now with the new more virulent
strains but not known with any certainty yet.
https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/artic...h-covid19.html
That doesnt say that it only needs to get to 70%.
"What we know about coronavirus so far suggests that,
Suggests isnt your original absolute.
if we were really to go back to a pre-pandemic lifestyle, we would need at
least 70% of the population
At least isnt the same as your original.
to be immune to keep the rate of infection down (€śachieve herd immunity€ť)
without restrictions on activities."
New York close to 70%
Even that isnt clear.
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-sta...a-vaccine-dose
That isnt saying that its close to 70%.
Just one politician has made that claim without
citing any scientific basis for making that claim.
That does clarify that it is just one shot, not both -- so they will
still not be quite at the 70% *fully* vaccinated.
And there is no evidence that the 70% is the required level.