Orange Room Supporter
Not at all. Using vaccine can simulate the effect of herd immunity.This is what herd immunity means, the term doesn't exist outside of a vaccine
Herd immunity is when enough people have become immune as to not permit an outbreak spread.And you can become immune through vaccine, or through contracting the virus and developing immunity against it. Meaning natural vaccination, in the absence of a clinical vaccine.
Sure, and most probably, many people need to contract the virus probably twice before being totally immune. Just like with vaccines, you need to make a second, sometimes a third vaccination, (rappel) to achieve immunity.UK strategy is based on people not gettint reinfected if they get the virus once, but there were cases where people got tested positive again_ now what we are not sure of was it a problem of testing or did he get it again_ so we do not even know that getting it is getting immunized, that is why the strategy can be risky. Add to it, is that how do you control who gets it, if you let people get it, it can be the vulnerable...
The idea is that in the absence of a vaccine, and since most people recover from it, then if we isolate vulnerable ones and let the biggest number of those who recover from it, get it, then within a small period, most of the population would be immune, and then next year, chances of an outbreak and of passing it to the most vulnerable ones would become extremely small.
Sure it's a bold decision, but far from being a bad one, by all means.