Like Tree1045Likes

Has Hong Kong adopted the wrong COVID-19 strategy?

Reply
Page 73 of 80 FirstFirst ... 65 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 ... LastLast
  1. #721

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Pampanga, Philippines
    Posts
    27,130
    Quote Originally Posted by Edwardstorm:
    I doubt these numbers are accurate though... Portugal peaked at almost the same time as PH with omicron (60.000) daily cases on January 31st for a few days.... and while the peak has passed we are still seeing anywhere between 5.000 to 15.000 daily cases for the last weeks. Sure, hospitalisations are almost below 1.000 (and 43 death per million people last two weeks) but if you have the same trend in Hong Kong there would still be way too many people to isolate.

    And in Portugal almost 100% of the entire population is both vaccinated and boosted (boosted only over 18´s) . I am guessing the numbers are still high here because people test (free in pharmacy 4x a month) and report when they test positive. Guessing in PH there is less testing and therefore it seems to have gone back to zero. In Hong Kong sensible people will not report self tests (so the numbers are appearing to go down now) but wait till they introduce mandatory testing in April, the authorities will be in for a major shock as the numbers will surpass the available isolation capacity. (asides from the lunatic idea to do this to begin with)
    Yes testing is not encouraged here, better to stay home and isolate. However that changes the absolute number not the trend. I would add a zero. So peak at 400,000 cases now at 5,000 cases per day.

    I know in our city about half the people had it, officially 500 cases per day. Now a few weeks later I know no one who has it and the official figure is around 2 per week. There are officially 4 active cases in the city (population 300,000). The kids are having parties and playing in the indoor play centres. Crowds of 50,000 for election rallies. So that is under 2 months from peak.

  2. #722

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,647
    It's important to understand that herd immunity was always a bullshit concept for coronavirus's which evolve rapidly.

    It's exasperating that people still talk such bollocks. We never had herd immunity to the common cold and never will, we have out own inherent immunity which is good in some and shit in others. And even that waxes and wanes.

    There is no line to cross that protects 'the herd' and there never was.

    The upside to that is the HK weak will continue to die forever whilst being positive with some form of covid like coronavirus.

    The downside is that the fucking jackboots will always have an impossible target to lock us up for, as long as people keep regurgitating untruths.
    Del Piero likes this.

  3. #723

  4. #724

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    22,173
    Quote Originally Posted by Sage:
    It's important to understand that herd immunity was always a bullshit concept for coronavirus's which evolve rapidly.

    It's exasperating that people still talk such bollocks. We never had herd immunity to the common cold and never will, we have out own inherent immunity which is good in some and shit in others. And even that waxes and wanes.
    I don't think anyone thinks herd immunity for a society is an absolute term when applied to an upper lung virus.

    Herd Immunity for Covid 19 surely means society has sufficient protection from vaccines and prior infections to reduce the risk of health care system collapse due to huge spikes in severe cases. Flattening the curve and herd immunity have been used together for 2+ years. I am not sure why anyone would assume it to be an absolute term as I don't recall it EVER being used in conjunction with eradication goals.

  5. #725

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    23,168

    The only argument @Sage has a hope of winning is against some bullshit strawman he erects himself. As an unemployed and unemployable loser he has plenty of time for these sorts of fallacies


  6. #726

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    22,173

    'Closed loop' scheme for careworkers quickly becomes optional.


    https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/...gtype=homepage


  7. #727

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,647
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    I don't think anyone thinks herd immunity for a society is an absolute term when applied to an upper lung virus.

    Herd Immunity for Covid 19 surely means society has sufficient protection from vaccines and prior infections to reduce the risk of health care system collapse due to huge spikes in severe cases. Flattening the curve and herd immunity have been used together for 2+ years. I am not sure why anyone would assume it to be an absolute term as I don't recall it EVER being used in conjunction with eradication goals.
    No idea what you mean by 'absolute terms'

    But you missed a huge chunk of 21st century history if you didn't grasp that the objective of herd immunity was to prevent transmission to the the vulnerable who couldn't get vaxxed.

    It entered the public lexicon in exactly those terms, protecting the weak in the herd, not protecting the hospital down the road from where the herd is grazing.

    Your health care systems claim is subsequent goal post moving, now that actual herd immunity has proven to be a dud.

    The WHO makes it quite clear in this paragraph from Dec 2020 (which is the top hit on google right now for 'herd immunity definition', let alone 2 years ago.)

    Name:  HI.png
Views: 281
Size:  82.0 KB
    Football16 likes this.

  8. #728

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,647
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    I don't think anyone thinks herd immunity for a society is an absolute term when applied to an upper lung virus.

    Herd Immunity for Covid 19 surely means society has sufficient protection from vaccines and prior infections to reduce the risk of health care system collapse due to huge spikes in severe cases. Flattening the curve and herd immunity have been used together for 2+ years. I am not sure why anyone would assume it to be an absolute term as I don't recall it EVER being used in conjunction with eradication goals.
    And just in case you're still confused.

    Here's a video made 5 years ago by a close freind and colleague of one of my immediate family members. Explaining herd immunity as it was always meant, (and how it's still 100% applicable): Breaking transmission chains in infectious diseases.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEn1PKyBUNc

  9. #729

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    22,173
    Quote Originally Posted by Sage:
    And just in case you're still confused.

    Here's a video made 5 years ago by a close freind and colleague of one of my immediate family members. Explaining herd immunity as it was always meant, (and how it's still 100% applicable): Breaking transmission chains in infectious diseases.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEn1PKyBUNc
    Oh dear.

    Do we still have measles? People talk of herd immunity for measles but not eradication. It is not an absolute term. Perhaps some people want to believe herd immunity means eradication bit it just means risk reduction.

  10. #730

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,647
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    Oh dear.

    Do we still have measles? People talk of herd immunity for measles but not eradication. It is not an absolute term. Perhaps some people want to believe herd immunity means eradication bit it just means risk reduction.
    Oh dear, 'eradication' is your term. Nowhere did I use it nor imply it.

    You clearly understand the difference between eradication and breaking transmission chains, so therefore you're just trying to justify why you thought the herd was a herd of hospitals?
    hike likes this.

Reply
Page 73 of 80 FirstFirst ... 65 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 ... LastLast