SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
Recommended by:
Brumar89
To: Broken_Clock who wrote (1337965)1/13/2022 1:36:14 PM
From: Tenchusatsu1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) of 1574863
 
BC, there are a lot of attacks that this professor makes. Some are probably fair and valid.

But the one thing that I will dispute is the notion that nAtUrAl iMmUnItY is better at fending off COVID-19 than a vaccine.

First, we don't know that for sure. I've seen studies where the immunity from vaccines far outweigh nAtUrAl iMmUnItY. I've also seen studies where nAtUrAl iMmUnItY turns out to be better. They all approach their conclusions using different methods, and it's up to the scientific community of experts to debate that.

But more importantly, that professor ignores the dangers of trying to get to nAtUrAl iMmUnItY in the first place. The entire death toll from COVID-19 already proves that simply achieving nAtUrAl iMmUnItY is a risky endeavor. Plus the side effects of long-term COVID can't be understated:

COVID-19 (coronavirus): Long-term effects - Mayo Clinic

In any case, Sweden already tried the "herd immunity" strategy. Their reasoning was that it would have been too costly to do the lockdown thing like every other country had been doing, especially in Scandinavia.

The general consensus is that Sweden's experiment was a failure:

Sweden’s Herd Immunity: Success or Failure? | (wustl.edu)
The main reason behind Sweden’s approach to COVID-19 was economic cost. FHM Director Johan Carlsson and General Counsel Bitte Bråstad wrote to the government as early as Jan. 31, 2020 about the costs associated with classifying COVID-19 as a “socially dangerous disease,” bringing up fears of loss of production and progress in society should containment measures be implemented [4]. But Sweden’s lack of containment measures did not help the economy; Sweden’s GDP fell more than any of its fellow Nordic countries, which imposed lockdowns more in line with other nations. Sweden reported an 8.6% drop in the second quarter of the year, as compared to a 7.4% drop in Denmark and only a 3.2% drop in Finland [2]. Writing about the COVID-19 response in their country, molecular biologist Andrew Ewing and activist Kelly Bjorkland wrote in their article for Time, “the Swedish way has yielded little but death and misery” [4].
Tenchusatsu
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext