The Road Less Traveled, Part IV

As I did in the first part of this series of posts, I would like to begin today with a thought to consider as we discuss our current “Covid situation”: “Two roads diverged in a wood, and I took the one less traveled by. And that has made all the difference.” –Robert Frost

Much of what I will present today is once again taken from Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. As a reminder, Dr. Bhattacharya is a Professor of Medicine at Stanford University. He also holds a Ph.D. in economics. He is also a director of the Stanford Center on the Demography and Economics of Health and Aging. With this background he is well suited to comment on the current situation in which we find ourselves.

MOVING FORWARD

I would like to focus today on “where we go from here?” Here, in Dr Bhattacharya’s own words, is what we should all agree upon relative to what we have done so far. His sentiment should be considered regardless of your political views (we need to take politics out of the equation and focus on the facts and true science and that is all): “The widespread lockdown policy has been a devastating public health mistake!”

Dr. Bhattacharya and a large group of epidemiologists and public health scientists have developed a declaration document called the Great Barrington Declaration, which outlines in detail their justification and scientific reasoning for this conclusion. You can learn more here: https://gbdeclaration.org/

The group developed a more targeted and comprehensively focused approach to the pandemic. Their consensus is that the “current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short- and long-term public health.” However, the group acknowledges that our understanding of the virus is growing. From this understanding and developing knowledge, we recognize that “vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young.” They go on to acknowledge that in children “COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.”

We also need to recognize that “as immunity builds in the population [which it is—in other words as more people contract COVID-19 and get over it as most people are] the risk of infection to all including the vulnerable falls.” As a result, we need to realize that “all populations will eventually reach herd immunity—i.e., the point at which the rate of new infections is stable.”

That is what we are now accomplishing.

The declaration’s authors go on to say, “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 immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at the highest risk.” This is what they call “Focused Protection.”

They continue, “Adopting measures to protect the vulnerable should be the central aim of public health responses to COVID-19. By way of example, nursing homes should use staff with acquired immunity and perform frequent testing of other staff and all visitors. Staff rotation should be minimized. Retired people living at home should have groceries and other essentials delivered to their home.

“Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. Simple hygiene measures, such as hand washing and staying home when sick, should be practiced by everyone to reduce the herd immunity threshold. Schools and universities should be open for in-person teaching. Extracurricular activities, such as sports, should be resumed. Young, low-risk adults should work normally, rather than from home. Restaurants and other businesses should be open. Arts, music, sport and other cultural activities should resume. People who are more at risk may participate if they wish, while society as a whole enjoys the protection conferred upon the vulnerable by those who have built up herd immunity.”

CONCLUSIONS

We must all recognize what Dr. Bhattacharya concludes, again in his own words: “Herd immunity is not a strategy; it is a biological fact that applies to most infectious diseases. Even when we come up with a vaccine, we will be relying on herd immunity as an end-point for the epidemic. The vaccine may help, but herd immunity is what will bring it to an end.” The second thought that he lays out is, “our strategy is not to let people die but to protect the vulnerable. We know the people who are vulnerable, and we know the people who are not vulnerable.”

I would like to point out that this is not a “fringe view” of our current situation. To date the Great Barrington Declaration has been signed by more than 43,000 medical and public health scientists and medical practitioners, myself included, as well as well as nearly 730,000 concerned citizens.

I feel that Dr. Bhattacharya’s parting thoughts should be our common goal. He stated that; “We shouldn’t be afraid. We should respond to the COVID virus rationally: protect the vulnerable, treat the people who get the infection compassionately, develop a vaccine. And while doing these things we should bring back the civilization that we had so that the cure does not end up being worse than the disease.”

I trust that this series of articles has been received with an open/non-political mind by all. You see the facts don’t lie, and as we learn more about the facts and the science behind this pandemic, we can make more educated decisions and plans.

Think about what I have presented, consider the long-term public health disgrace that we may someday look back upon and wonder why we had done some of what we had.

I have presented this information for your consideration and contemplation and not to flame the ire of the politically slanted reader. It is time to take politics out of the equation and focus on the scientific facts.

Questions? Answers can be found on the Great Barrington Declaration's FAQ page.