With so much conflicting information, it’s no wonder people feel so worried about the Covid-19 pandemic. However, two recent reports suggest that there may be light at the end of the coronavirus tunnel, and that the virus is perhaps less deadly than originally thought.
Herd immunity could be at a lower level than we thought
One article in the Independent borrowed from the New York Times suggests that herd immunity may be closer than originally thought. More than a dozen researchers who were interviewed suggest that the level of infection needed to create herd immunity could be much lower than the 70% initially quoted, and more around 50%.
These results have come from different statistical models, which have resulted in widely variable estimates of herd immunity. This is partly due to the fact that there are a number of different variables to take into account. For instance, estimates often assume that everyone has the same potential susceptibility to the virus, and they mix equally with each other. In reality however, this is not the case, as younger people are more likely to suffer less from the symptoms but pass the virus to more people than the older generation would. The estimates for herd immunity fall when this is taken into consideration.
Estimates for herd immunity vary greatly. Tom Britton, a mathematician at Stockholm University, has suggested that herd immunity could be at about 43%. Another group, led by mathematician Gabriela Gomes of the University of Strathclyde in Britain, has found that estimates for herd immunity range from 10 to 20 per cent, in Belgium, England, Portugal and Spain. They accounted for variations in society, which is important, as the variations in immunity within the community make the patterns look more like a patchwork quilt.
The variations were shown up in the differences between rates in New York, as reported by Virginia Pitzer, a mathematical epidemiologist at the Yale School of Public Health. At a clinic in the Corona neighbourhood of Queens antibodies were found to be at 68 per cent, but in the Cobble Hill section of Brooklyn they were at 13 per cent. During a second wave, therefore, it is possible that some areas will be spared future outbreaks, although the researchers warn that it is too early to come to that conclusion for sure.
Virus is becoming less deadly
Another factor to consider is the discovery of a Covid-19 mutation, which is apparently sweeping Europe, North America, and parts of Asia, as reported in the Evening Standard.
According to President-elect of the International Society of Infectious Diseases, Paul Tambyah, the D614G mutation in some parts of the world has coincided with a drop in death rates. This makes sense in the context of the fact that when viruses mutate they tend to become less deadly, as they need their host to survive, for them to survive. Further good news is that Tambyah also thinks that there is no reason for any vaccine to be less effective against the mutation, than the original virus.
Dr Ron Daniels, intensive care consultant at the Good Hope Hospital in Sutton Coldfied, UK, agrees that the virus is ‘getting less angry’. He said that the number of patients becoming critically ill was ‘negligible’, and that in addition to the virus adapting, the medics were better able to manage patients presenting with Covid-19. In his view, the perceived increase in the number of cases was due to an increase in testing, Reports also suggest that the virus is becoming less deadly, as the fatality rates as a percentage of cases have declined, from statistics of the spread across certain European countries.
These factors represent good news generally. However, it is also important that this new information is translated into sensible suggestions for public health policy. Taking these factors together, that the levels needed for herd immunity are perhaps lower than previously thought, fatality rates are decreasing, and the mutation which is sweeping North America is less deadly, this surely suggests that there is less to fear.
If we are able to harness this information and move things forward, it will be important to consider making sure that information given therefore relates to the danger the virus poses. In this regard, death rates reflect the risk more directly than the number of cases, especially if there are more cases of less serious illness. If people are not becoming seriously ill, and the intensive care units are not overflowing, then we need to be encouraging people back into their daily lives, rather than shutting things down at the first sign of a rise in cases.
Developing public health policy to aid recovery
It is therefore unfortunate to hear reports for instance from the USA by Dr Fauci, White House Advisor, suggesting that people should wear goggles or face shields in addition to masks for full protection. If this illness is now more under control, and less deadly than was thought, then it is important for people to have the confidence to go about their daily lives, without living in a state of near permanent fear.
Suggestions such as these just heighten anxiety, with little evidence that they will make any difference to the spread of the virus.
A more sensible and level headed guidance, will reduce the disruption the virus is having to people, and allow the economy to start to recover, saving the agony of people losing jobs and businesses, and will allow children to return fully to education. As Trump has said previously, it is important not to make the cure worse than the virus, and comments such as Dr Fauci’s are sadly helping to do that.
Picture: Microscopic view of Coronavirus, a pathogen that attacks the respiratory tract. Analysis and test, experimentation. Sars. 3d render
Written by :
