About 19 million people in the U.S. have had confirmed cases of COVID-19. But confirmed cases may be the tip of the iceberg. Although estimates vary, the Centers for Disease Control believes that about eight people have been infected for each one person with a documented case. If we multiply the 19 million known cases by 8, it is possible that about 152 million people are already immune. Yet the proportion of people who have been infected and the rate of new cases varies significantly by state.
Using publicly available data sources, it is possible to estimate the number of people who might have immunity in each state. The simple calculation multiplies the number of known cases in each state by 8. Then, divide the number of expected immune people by the state population. The numbers vary dramatically across the country, with North Dakota topping the list at 92 percent in contrast to the least affected state, Vermont, at a mere 7 percent.
A very crude estimate suggests that new cases should begin trending downward when about 60 percent of the population has been infected.
By this calculation, five states are likely to have more than 60 percent of their populations previously infected (North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Nebraska) with three others (Utah, Rhode Island, and Wyoming) approaching 60 percent.
Since people can be infected multiple times, it is not clear why prior infection seems to be the definition of immunity here.
ReplyDeletequote source of data please
DeleteI don't believe anything about any of it at all.
ReplyDeleteFacts- CDC has consistently lied since the start of this epidemic about the nature and extent of the disease, bungled the testing along with FDA, along with the FDA have lied about the effectiveness of two old, cheap and proven safe drugs, Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, apparently to promote an inferior new drug. Now CDC is pushing known dangerous experimental vaccines with 3% severe side effects. WHO, largely controlled by the Communist Chinese, is more trustworthy than the CDC and FDA, and I trust the WHO not a whit.
ReplyDeleteAll corona viruses, which include the common cold, are known to be mutable, and this one is known to now have well over a thousand different variants.
As Anon noted above, you can catch this bug multiple times. Neither personal nor group immunity for any length of time have been proven. This is a theory promoted by the same people that made a relatively mild pandemic into economic disaster by a series of colossal blunders. Given the source of much of the 'science' behind these experimental vaccines, (Communist China) I have no intention of being a guinea pig for these experiments, because 1) there is nothing to show it will work, and 2) there is plenty of evidence that it isn't safe.
It's just another virus. Usually once you get any viral infection, you will be mostly immune, but never completely immune from getting it again. But, if you do, your body will mount a quicker defense and it won't be as bad. Time also is a factor. For example, with chicken pox, if you are inoculated as a child, and get exposed when you are 65, you may get it again, but hopefully not as severe. There's never 100% immunity, especially after a long time from first exposure, but you may not get it at all and if you do, it will be a mild case. It's not a superbug, it's just a virus.
DeleteMy point exactly. The virus is a virus, and we are starting to have a good idea of the risk of infection. For most people under the age of 70, the risks are very low, well under 1%. Somewhere between 50% and 90% of the time, you show no symptoms at all, even absent any prophylaxis. There are proven prophylactic treatments that can largely prevent infection that have virtually no risk. So why take a unproven, untested vaccine which does not prevent this disease and shows at least a 3% chance of serious short term side effects? In this case, the cure is as bad or worse than the disease. We have no idea of the long term effects of mRNA 'vaccines' because we've never tried them before. Unz review had a very good article that talks about this issue specifically.
DeleteBear in mind, I am *not* an anti vaxxer; my parents were biochemists and immunologists; I've taken the pneumovax and I take the flu shot every year, because it makes sense, as do a lot of other actual tested and proven vaccines. *These* so-called 'vaccines' do not make sense, and given the track record of those promoting them, I am sceptical not only of their claims, but about their motivation.
Given the reporting on false positives and negatives, I'm not sure what number to multiply by eight. These are supposed to be confirmed cases, so I have to believe there is more to the confirmation than a single test, but what do we know about that? I ask that not to sharpshoot the possibility of achieving herd immunity but in the context of all the deaths attributed to COVID that were clearly cases where the deceased had COVID - again, false positives possible - but died of something else.
DeleteLet's face it, we've all heard of the instances where an accident or heart attack victim's death is counted as a COVID death even though it is unlikely that the disease had any impact on their demise.
Here's an example: The medical examiner found that George Floyd had fentanyl, methamphetamines, cannabinoids and corona virus in his system. Yet Floyd's death has been ruled a homicide. https://www.npr.org/sections/live-updates-protests-for-racial-justice/2020/06/04/869278494/medical-examiners-autopsy-reveals-george-floyd-had-positive-test-for-coronavirus
Agendas often influence the findings that are presented to the public.
Is it a coincidence that the states with the closest thing to herd immunity are also the same ones with the least restrictions?
ReplyDeleteI think not.
And the highest number of cases 3 states have the most draconian mask and lockdowns yet they are the worst
Delete