Personally, I think it is very unlikely that herd immunity will be acquired abroad, but of course, I do not rule it out, except that the price to be paid will be extremely high, and it can be said that no country can afford it!

Let's start with a little bit of "herd immunity".

Herd immunity or community immunity, also known as community immunity, is the process by which a sufficient number of individuals become immune to a disease-causing agent so that other non-immune individuals are protected from infection. The theory of herd immunity suggests that when a large number of individuals in a group are immune to an infectious disease, or when there are few susceptible individuals, the chain of infection for those infectious diseases that are transmitted from one individual to another is interrupted.

The term herd immunity was coined in the UK, where the strategy was 'to control the outbreak by tolerating the slow progression of the epidemic without rigorous defense and expecting the majority of the population to be asymptomatic or only mildly symptomatic after latent infection, thus achieving universal immunity in the population', i.e., to prevent and control novel coronaviruses through herd immunity.

It should be said that there is a certain degree of reasonableness for Britain to do so, in terms of the country as a whole: first, it does not have to adopt strict segregation measures, so as not to unduly harm the economy; second, the new crown is the most dangerous to the elderly group, and Britain is Darwin's hometown. We do not know whether "the survival of the fittest" has seeped into the thinking of the British, but the phenomenon of population ageing in Britain is very serious, which to a certain extent is dragging down the development of the economy. The aging of the British population is a serious phenomenon, which to a certain extent drags down the economic development, so the United Kingdom should have an indeterminate reason for doing so.

It would be too cruel to the individual, who would not want to be a victim of the disease, and it would not be fair to fight against a country that is active in the epidemic, such as ours! Nowadays, international exchanges are becoming more and more frequent, and as long as the new crown has not been eradicated from one corner of the planet, there is always the possibility of a resurgence of the disease. If the British really were to acquire herd immunity, then other countries would either have to close their gates to the British and clamp down on them, or reluctantly accept the fact of secondary transmission.

The main concern in this area now should be the situation in the United Kingdom, the originator of "herd immunity". According to the news of March 24th, the model of the researchers of the University of Oxford shows that the new coronavirus may have infected half of the population of the United Kingdom in the past two months, which is far more than the scientists' previous estimation, that is to say, the country has gained the initial herd immunity to the new coronavirus.

But that's a modeling assumption that's highly questionable, and the biggest problem is that the mortality rate in the U.K. isn't that high, so let's look at the latest U.K. outbreak data: cumulative 11,812 diagnoses (+2,129 compared to yesterday), and 584 deaths (+121 compared to yesterday), which is roughly a 5% mortality rate.

On the surface, this mortality rate is moderate, but , if the British really want to obtain herd immunity, then the number of infected people can never be about 10,000 now, then, according to the number of deaths divided by the real number of infected people, the calculated mortality rate is too low, too counterintuitive! One can refer to Italy, which has a 10% mortality rate now, and both the UK and Italy are more developed countries in Europe, with aging populations, with a certain amount that can't be done.

The probability therefore infers that herd immunity has not been achieved in the UK. In fact, herd immunization is a very dangerous path.Academician Li Lanjuan said that the idea of "mass immunization" put forward by some countries in the face of the epidemic is an irresponsible approach to the general public, and that China's experience and lessons learned in fighting the epidemic are worth studying and learning from other countries.

Well, fear not ten thousand, fear not one thousand, just in case, in case these Buddhist anti-epidemic countries like the United Kingdom have really achieved mass immunization, then we have no alternative but to step up control to prevent the importation of overseas cases. As a matter of fact, the United States has recently stepped up its testing efforts, and the cumulative number of confirmed cases has already surpassed that of China to rank first in the world. This kind of active anti-epidemic practice deserves to be recognized, and it also implies that the denial of the practice of mass immunization is not feasible!

Dr. Zhang Wenhong put it well: the success of the global fight against the epidemic depends not on the countries that are doing the best, but on the countries that are doing the worst.

This is the well-known "barrel theory".

One country handles it poorly, the virus spreads everywhere, eventually more and more people around the globe are at high risk of being infected, more are passed on, more get sick, more antibodies are produced, and mass immunization may be on the way.

People hear the word and basically it's still the British government saying a couple of weeks ago that they might consider collective immunization as a measure to combat the outbreak. A lot of people got nervous after that.

Could the UK be the country doing the worst on the "barrel theory"?

It doesn't look like it at the moment.

This is because a similar policy has not actually been implemented in the United Kingdom because shortly after Prime Minister Johnson's televised speech, dozens of medical experts in the United Kingdom wrote a joint letter to him opposing the implementation of mass immunization in the United Kingdom.

The reason is simple - mass immunization is conditional.

That is, with the availability of vaccines, young people are more resistant and can get through viruses more easily, and together with the various vaccines and potent medicines, a stage will gradually develop where 60% of the whole society develops antibodies, which will provide protection to the elderly, the weak, the sick, the disabled and other people who are sensitive to diseases.

And there's no vaccine at all, so once a young person is hit by the new coronavirus, there's a chance that it could turn into a serious illness.

The new coronavirus outbreak readmission rate is about 20%, which is already considered high among other coronavirus diseases.

Therefore, the so-called collective immunization in this context is tantamount to exposing many innocent lives to serious threats, which may not only fail to protect the elderly, the sick and the handicapped, but also young people may lose a lot of their lives.

So the British government is now kind of actively fighting the epidemic and is not as passive as it used to be.

Therefore, the so-called collective immunization in the United Kingdom is not practiced.

But in fact, in many Western countries, a situation of collective immunization may actually be reached in the end.

Because none of their so-called embargo policies are strict, which means that there is no complete cut-off of the virus' transmission pathway.

So the virus should still be quietly circulating in Western societies. In particular, some asymptomatic infections may be increasing in this context.

This is because, according to scientific statistics, the longer the chain of transmission of this type of coronavirus, the less it spreads and the less contagious it becomes.

Therefore, if the West does not cut off the virus completely, the virus will still be transmitted from person to person through various channels, and the number of asymptomatic infections will naturally increase over time. Young people may become resistant antibody carriers. After a period of time, perhaps a situation of collective immunity will emerge.

In this context, the first is to prevent foreign entrants, the second is to build up one's own resistance, and the third is to hope that the virus will become less contagious and easier to treat as it spreads more.

The outbreaks in Europe and the United States are getting worse, and control is not working well.

If this continues, it is quite possible that all of Europe, and even the Americas, could spiral out of control and, ultimately, be forced into social Darwinism, which, at great cost, could lead to "herd immunity".

At that point, people are not afraid of the New Crown Virus, so what should we do?

To make it clear what we should do, let's start with herd immunization.

Herd immunization, and the costs of herd immunity

To put it mildly, if it were not for this outbreak, many people would not know what "herd immunity" is.

Herd immunity, that is, immunity to the virus is gained for the entire population through vaccine or infection of a large portion of the population.

In terms of access to herd immunity, there are two pathways:One is to gain immunity through vaccination, just as cowpox was given to gain immunity to smallpox.

Second, in the absence of a vaccine, liberalize to allow transmission and eventually herd immunity.

When 60% of the population is infected, one part of the population will die, how many will die depends on the lethality of the virus, the overall lethality of the new coronavirus is now around 4.6%, of course, the mortality rate in Italy, Spain, Iran is too high, pulling up the overall mortality rate; a large portion of the population carries it through and then acquires the ability to self-immunize; there is also a small portion of the population who are naturally immune to the virus, a bit of a hundred poisons; and finally The remaining part of the population, because the path of transmission of the virus is always isolated, the probability of infection is greatly reduced, and it is not easy to be infected. In this way, the so-called "herd immunity" is achieved.

In the absence of a vaccine, herd immunity can be obtained by "social Darwinism", but at a very high cost and with horrific statistics.

If you don't count East and Southeast Asia, you don't count Africa, Europe, the Americas, and the Middle East, plus India, the population totals around 3.5 billion, and 60% are infected, then 2.1 billion are infected, and at the least 1% mortality rate, then there are around 20 million deaths.

Undoubtedly, this is a horrific statistic, comparable to the medieval Black Death, and close to the death toll of the Spanish pandemic.

Can Europe and the United States really take on such group immunization? It is too difficult.

Watching your fellow countrymen suffer one by one, and many die for it, would be an absolutely unbearable trauma. If that had happened, almost 2 million people would have died in the US, almost 10 million in India, and around 400,000 in the UK.

Even if not that many people were infected and not that many people died, let's discount that, that's a very scary number. Even if we don't discount it, and only a fifth of 20 million died, or 4 million, that's still a catastrophe.

Paying such a huge price for herd immunity is purely self-inflicted and a death wish.

With today's medical care being so advanced, not to make more of an effort but to watch the disaster unfold would be a crime, and the executioners would be the countries and leaders who give up so easily.

If the outbreak in a foreign country is completely out of control and they let it go, then this is how we need to respond

If foreign epidemics get out of hand and naturally go into "social Darwinism", what do we do?

(i) A ban on navigation, first with all countries practising "social Darwinism", and then when they have succeeded in "mass immunization".

If the epidemic in Europe and the United States gets out of control, it will be a very big test for us. The most stringent strategy is to ban flights directly, or at worst, to restrict flights, and as long as people from Europe and the United States are coming, they must be quarantined for 14 days, and, of course, if they are already patients with the new coronavirus, they will be sent away directly.

When a year and a half later, after the success of herd immunization in Europe and the United States, then the passages, but the necessary tests, still can not be reduced.

(ii) Accelerating the development of vaccines and effective medicines.

As long as the vaccine is successfully developed, each person in the country will have one, and in this way, no matter what kind of new coronary pneumonia is, there is no fear at all. Let it be.

In addition, if there is a special drug, there is no fear. Just like the flu, if there are some effective medicines, then just come and get sick, take the medicine and basically solve the problem.

(iii) Reduce exposure and take precautions when trading goods in other countries where epidemics are prevalent.

China is a big manufacturing country and the world is very dependent on it, so all kinds of import and export transactions are essential. In order to prevent too much contact and too many infected people, if you can take online transactions, do not take offline transactions. If you can't take online transactions, try to minimize contact and do a good job of self-protection.

After returning to the country, the person concerned must be quarantined for 14 days, and if there is any transaction during this period, the next batch of people will go. In short, the prevention and control in practice, our country must not enter the "social Darwinism", must not let the entrants, will bring the new coronavirus, resulting in secondary outbreaks, that would be difficult, after all, often closed to the city is unrealistic.

In general, if Europe and the United States give up control, then we ban flights, or control flights, but testing and quarantine is essential. When other countries have successfully immunized their populations, open flights and increase exchanges.

In addition, step up the time to develop vaccines and special drugs, once this matter is resolved, all OK, not afraid at all.

Personally, I think it is unlikely that the UK or any other country will be able to fight the new Crown Pneumonia Virus through herd immunization as it is too costly and risky and may not be successful. Let us take the United Kingdom as an example, the total population of the United Kingdom is about 66 million, and mass immunization would mean that 60 to 70% of them would be infected with C.N.C.P., so the number of infected people would be 39 to 46 million, and the number of deaths, in terms of the current mortality rate in our country and internationally, is about 4%, which means that millions of people in the United Kingdom may face death.

The cost of mass immunization in exchange for millions of lives is unimaginable, and will not only directly affect the British economy, but also have a great impact on the government's power, so the measure of mass immunization will basically not be adopted.

As academician Li Lanjuan said, herd immunization is an irresponsible practice to the people's people.

So what will our country do if herd immunization is actually achieved abroad?

There's no need to worry too much, even if the idea of herd immunity abroad does come to fruition.We should do what we should do, anyway, it is impossible to follow suit, until the epidemic is over, the normal preventive and control measures continue, to prevent the impact of imported cases on the prevention and control of the epidemic in the country.

And stepping up the research and development of the vaccine is also a top priority. The success of the vaccine will mean victory in the war against the epidemic, and then there will be even less need to care about whether others are group immunized or not.

At the same time, academician Zhong Nanshan's view on herd immunization is that there is no evidence to prove that once an infection is cured, it will not be re-infected for life, that is to say, the timeliness of herd immunization may be limited, and that this approach does not represent victory over the virus, and that there are the same risks.

In addition, there is the possibility of mutation of the virus, and if the virus mutates, the significance of herd immunity will no longer exist, and are we prepared to sacrifice tens of thousands of people to re-acquire immunity at that time?

Anyway, I guess they won't take such a big risk to engage in herd immunization. Even if they do, whether they can succeed or not is still one thing, and even if they do, it has little to do with us, so let's step up our time to research vaccines and control the epidemic.

Thanks for reading, I hope this helps.

Estimated that people who advocate group immunization have not seen the scene of death caused by large-scale infectious diseases, I do veterinarians, I have seen a lot of infectious diseases occurring in livestock and poultry, poultry inside the infectious bronchitis is a member of the coronavirus, in fact, the transmission of the branch of the infectious disease in poultry is not the most virulent, but if not immunized will also cause 20-30% mortality! When you look at a large number of dead chickens from the chicken coop, and even many dead chickens you can not pick up, because you just pick up once, behind the death of another! I don't know if the human psyche could hold up and not break down if a human turned into a chicken! I also forgot to mention that there are several vaccines to prevent and control the spread of the disease in chickens! But even that often fails in the face of a disease like coronavirus, which is super mutable and has many serotypes! Another thing I forgot to mention is that some of the transmissible branches in chickens don't show many symptoms, or have very mild symptoms, but they can cause irreversible damage to the reproductive system when the chick is infected, and the hen will not be able to lay eggs as an adult, which is commonly referred to as a false hen! I see that the previous reports on the New Crown Virus have already included news of the reproductive system being affected after infection. If the new crown virus kills our reproduction that! There's no future wondering if people will be able to sit still! So herd immunity really isn't as good as it seems, trying to cope with it is hard enough, trying to lie down is almost impossible unless you want to sacrifice a number of human lives to it every day! Or the social model regresses back to the Middle Ages!

The title is a cold joke, a really cold joke!

This epidemic has brought about a complete and collective collapse of the lie that healthcare is advanced and free in the West, with many national benefits.

Compare the size of the country, the size of the population, the rate of infection, the death rate, the cure rate, and you'll be amazed at how amazingly well China is doing! China is now the only country in the world where new crowns are included in health insurance and the state pays for them!

China, with the exception of Hubei and especially Wuhan, is not really in a serious epidemic. But the developed West is in almost total rout!

It is not true that there are no people immune to the virus, just very few! In terms of mortality rates, middle-aged men and the elderly are the most prevalent. If left unchecked the result is likely to be a complete gender imbalance, with women far outnumbering men!

The new crown is horrible and there is no cure. What's even scarier is that the treatment cycle for a patient is usually two or three weeks, even if one in ten people have the disease the healthcare system is in total meltdown.

In fact an example of collective immunization not being viable has already been given in the case of Italy 🇮🇹! The death rate is close to ten percent. The medical system has collapsed with obsolete medical equipment and widespread infection among medical staff.

If the situation continues to be left unchecked, it is not just a matter of saying that mild to moderate illnesses will turn into serious illnesses and then death. At that time, the mortality rate will continue to rise, and the country will not be far from dying.

It's not unheard of for illnesses to heal themselves, that's a very small minority. More often than not, it is in cases of medical intervention. Mild cases are best treated early, but need to be detected and treated early. Local medical conditions are well equipped.

The countries with the best disease numbers and mortality rates right now are Germany and Singapore. The data looks good for the US too, but I don't think its data is real. The number of deaths is suspected to be faked! The mortality rate of new crown patients is lower than the flu? I really don't believe it!

Collective immunization is a joke; a group of dry ducks goes into the water, and anyone who does not drown learns to swim. It is called group immunization. Other families do this, I do not care, their own family will never do this thing. Those who mention this method are basically outsiders!

The Tiredness of Humanity

It is very likely that foreign countries will acquire collective immunity against the virus, what should we do at home then? In my opinion, there is no good way but to speed up the development of vaccines, so that all citizens can be vaccinated as soon as possible, in order to fight fire with fire and make the best efforts to ensure safety as far as possible.

Since the outbreak of the new crown epidemic in 2020, although our country has adhered to the concept of "people first", and with great wisdom, great courage and great determination, and even by adopting extreme measures such as sealing off cities and provinces, we have bought the whole world time to fight the epidemic with great sacrifices, however, due to the differences in the conditions of various countries, especially in Europe and the United States, not only did they waste a very good opportunity, but some countries actually put forward the concept of mass immunization. However, due to the different national conditions of various countries, especially in Europe and the United States, not only did they waste the good time, but some countries actually put forward the concept of mass immunization.

For example, on March 12, 2020, British Prime Minister Boris announced that the United Kingdom had entered the second phase of the fight against the epidemic - the "Delay" phase. Subsequently, the British government's chief scientific adviser issued an article saying that the core concept of the British government's anti-epidemic policy is "herd immunity", that is, to give up the active fight against the epidemic, and is committed to "slowing down rather than stopping the spread of epidemics", and finally, by "making 6 adults infected" to obtain immunity. Finally, immunity was acquired by "making 6 adults sick" to stop the further spread of the virus.

Although herd immunization is never mentioned again in the UK due to unanimous domestic and international opposition, it is not on the lips, but in fact it is done as it is. For example, in the United States, according to the U.S. Federal Census Bureau survey, the total number of people in the United States in 2019 was 328 million, but according to the U.S. Johns Hopkins University Global Epidemic Real-Time Surveillance System, as of 5:23 p.m. EST on October 9, a total of 76,508,525 cases of new coronavirus infections were reported in the U.S., including deaths of 213,430 cases, which is in fact embarking on the the path of herd immunity.

Although the Mid-Autumn Festival and the National Day are unique, and although as of October 11, there have been no new cases in 31 provinces in China for 56 consecutive days, there are new cases imported from overseas every day, and there were 21 new confirmed cases on October 11, all of which were imported from overseas. Comparing the two, the question raised by the questioner comes to us, although we have done our part and achieved significant strategic results in the fight against the epidemic, but after all, there is no immunity, and if we come into contact with people from outside the country, we are at great risk of being infected. Yes, what should we do?

However, in the face of those who advocate the so-called freedom, even wearing a mask has become extremely difficult, extremely political and even extremely selfish, what can we do? For example, Trump, obviously tested positive, obviously have been sent to the hospital, but he less than three days, not only free to run out of the hospital, and free to take off the obstruction of the mask, the words as usual, the meeting as usual, people as usual, the presidential palace has become a viral manufacturing base, and even the White House staff can not do anything about it, what can we do?

The only way is to speed up the development of the vaccine and inoculate the whole country in stages as quickly as possible in order to fight the poisonous people, with poison.

Alas, in the new crown year of 2020, the world showed up and humanity has been tired ever since.

Thank you for reading!

The cumulative number of confirmed cases in the U.S. has exceeded 100,000, so if the U.S. already had collective immunity to the virus, then this additional 18,227 cases, I'm sure, wouldn't have happened, right?

So, mass immunization abroad? I don't think there is any basis at all for that argument. The best country we know of right now for controlling new crowns is us, and we do get better control at a time when new cases are increasing in overseas markets.

We can see that we have cured over 75,122 people, (as of March 28th) which shows how stable our control of the new crowns has become.In fact, it is true that our experience can be shared overseas, which is why you can see that Academician Zhong Nanshan is online at the same time as hundreds of American doctors, sharing their experience.

Academician Zhong Nanshan also mentioned that the number of confirmed cases in the United States has surpassed that of China, and it is possible that the "epicenter" will shift to the United States. Therefore, we need to work together to find the best way to achieve success.

In fact, what the new crowns have to do now is - overseas to be well protected and wear good masks, which is something that ordinary people can do and can do well, and only with this awareness can the new crowns be better controlled. And trials of the vaccine have already taken place in our country, so there should actually be more expectations for the future control of New Crown.

It is highly likely that foreign countries will acquire collective immunity to the virus, and what will happen at home then? In the face of the global spread of the epidemic, as well as certain countries or regions' cavalier or even Buddhist resistance to the epidemic, we can only take more stringent measures to strengthen prevention and control so that we will not be hit by a second epidemic.

Some foreign countries have introduced the so-called "science" of collective immunity, which seems to be a grandiose idea, but I am afraid that deep down, it is just a cover-up for their own political purposes because of their inability to do anything about the epidemic and their indifference to the people's health and lives. Isn't this the natural law of survival in the primitive forest? If this is the case, then there is even less need for any medical system to treat the sick and save them, and they will just be left to fend for themselves, won't they?

From the current state of the epidemic, the spread is getting stronger and stronger, more and more new diagnoses are being made, and the number of deaths is increasing. Relying on collective immunity, that is, infecting 60 to 70 percent of the population with the virus, does the death toll not matter? Are the lives of those living in these highly developed and modernized countries being left to fend for themselves like animals in a primeval forest?

Looking at today's figures, Italy has over 80,000 infections and over 9,000 deaths; Spain has over 70,000 infections and over 5,000 deaths; and the United Kingdom has 14,745 infections and 761 deaths. According to these death figures, let's try to calculate how many people will die in the UK under the cover of "collective immunity". The total population of the UK is around 66.5 million people, if 60% of them are infected, there will be 39,900,000, and according to the above death rate, there will be more than 2 million people dead, and this is just one country. That's just one country, if it were global, wouldn't it be hell on earth?

If this so-called "collective immunity" is to continue, we will indeed have to tighten our controls and, at the same time, be more careful in our protection as individuals. The movement of people around the globe is becoming more and more frequent, and access is being controlled at various ports of entry and exit, with good inspections and increased quarantine. Individuals should bring good masks, reduce gathering and socializing, improve personal and family hygiene, and start from themselves to cherish themselves and take care of themselves, while not involving others.

For more sharing, stay tuned to East Wind High.