Stanford doctors among leaders of global anti-lockdown movement

“As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists, we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies,” the declaration states. “The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk.”

Though the arguments are not new, with more than 18,000 medical, science and public health practitioners among its more than 191,000 worldwide online signatories, it represents the largest public break among health experts from their peers’ prevailing support for lockdowns since the pandemic began early this year.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/10/12/coronavirus-stanford-doctors-among-leaders-of-global-anti-lockdown-movement/

18,000 is a fairly large group of people.

It is said that Stanford and Yale Universities are among the most conservative universities in the world. The conservative ethos is: property over lives.

What else is new?

Fair enough if the vast majority only have a fairly mild case but how damaging will it be when enough people are ill enough not to be able to work for some time and transport and vital services break down, then there's the medical services becoming overwhelmed with people needing hospital care just for covid.

Vintage wrote: Fair enough if the vast majority only have a fairly mild case but how damaging will it be when enough people are ill enough not to be able to work for some time and transport and vital services break down, then there's the medical services becoming overwhelmed with people needing hospital care just for covid.

There are two elements to this virus: (1) symptoms; and (2) spread. Many people escape severe symptoms, while many die. But all of them spread, so if the left one don't gettcha, the right one will.

Seems to me its a rock and a hard place situation. It must be better to try to control it as far as possible, we don't even know how long immunity could last. Some 25 year old in the US have contracted it a second time but worse the second time or did it lie dormant and make a comeback? Now I'm hearing more men are likely to get it worse and that people with Group A blood and to a lesser degree AB Group are more susceptible.

Original Quill wrote:It is said that Stanford and Yale Universities are among the most conservative universities in the world.  The conservative ethos is: property over lives.

What else is new?

That 18,000 medical, science and public health practitioners represent more than two US universities.

Vintage wrote:Seems to me its a rock and a hard place situation. It must be better to try to control it as far as possible, we don't even know how long immunity could last. Some 25 year old in the US have contracted it a second time but worse the second time or did it lie dormant and make a comeback? Now I'm hearing more men are likely to get it worse and that people with Group A blood and to a lesser degree AB Group are more susceptible.

Right now, there is no promise of immunity. Cases are arising of people who have had it, and come back with it again later.

Vintage wrote: Fair enough if the vast majority only have a fairly mild case but how damaging will it be when enough people are ill enough not to be able to work for some time and transport and vital services break down, then there's the medical services becoming overwhelmed with people needing hospital care just for covid.

You forget that only about 1 in 100 are ill enough to warrant hospital treatment... With vast majority of those surviving...


Everyone else is either no symptoms or just mild to moderate symptoms like having a cold or flu for a few days...


Most don't even feel bad enough to have any time off work...


And not everyone is going to get it at the same time either...


So your doom and gloom society breakdown scenario is completely impossible.


Plus... The more who do get it and recover, the less people there are for the virus to jump around in and between... therefore the safer everyone is from this growing herd immunity...

Its not my doom and gloom scenario. This is what scientists thought would happen, this was why we had Nightingale hospitals and lockdowns, now its becoming an economic nightmare anyway the advice seems to be changing. China is still busy locking down infected areas.

Maddog wrote:“As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists, we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies,” the declaration states. “The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk.”

Though the arguments are not new, with more than 18,000 medical, science and public health practitioners among its more than 191,000 worldwide online signatories, it represents the largest public break among health experts from their peers’ prevailing support for lockdowns since the pandemic began early this year.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/10/12/coronavirus-stanford-doctors-among-leaders-of-global-anti-lockdown-movement/

18,000 is a fairly large group of people.

more and more "experts" are saying the lockdown reaction is disproportionate to the severity of the virus, it still baffles me how the UK downgraded the severity of the virus the day before the lockdown!!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Vintage wrote: Fair enough if the vast majority only have a fairly mild case but how damaging will it be when enough people are ill enough not to be able to work for some time and transport and vital services break down, then there's the medical services becoming overwhelmed with people needing hospital care just for covid.

You forget that only about 1 in 100 are ill enough to warrant hospital treatment... With vast majority of those surviving...


Everyone else is either no symptoms or just mild to moderate symptoms like having a cold or flu for a few days...


Most don't even feel bad enough to have any time off work...


And not everyone is going to get it at the same time either...


So your doom and gloom society breakdown scenario is completely impossible.


Plus... The more who do get it and recover, the less people there are for the virus to jump around in and between... therefore the safer everyone is from this growing herd immunity...

No wonder the infection rate is so high.

Syl wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:

You forget that only about 1 in 100 are ill enough to warrant hospital treatment... With vast majority of those surviving...

Everyone else is either no symptoms or just mild to moderate symptoms like having a cold or flu for a few days...

Most don't even feel bad enough to have any time off work...

And not everyone is going to get it at the same time either...

So your doom and gloom society breakdown scenario is completely impossible.

Plus... The more who do get it and recover, the less people there are for the virus to jump around in and between... therefore the safer everyone is from this growing herd immunity...

No wonder the infection rate is so high.

Took the words right outta my mouth. Look how one-sided this perspective is. ^

It pays no mind whatsoever to the real problem: spread. The most benign asymptomatic positive, goes home and infects grandpa, grandma, the kids, uncles and aunts, brothers, sisters, and they all die. What a happy moment!!

Republicans/Tories don't even realize this is a duel-pronged danger. They think, like Trump, well, that's done...what's next?