It is disturbing how large segments of a society will parrot what others say and if that person is "in authority", will use that information as the bible. Many here were parroting some epidemiologist or other as saying that 70-80% of the populace needed to have COVID before immunity would be reached. In a new article, this is being called into question. I absolutely loathe the NY Times, bit since it is the GOTO source for many left wingers here, what better rag to quote for all of the progressives, liberals and independents here. I searched for this only because a poster here derided Dennis Prager for saying that herd immunity may occur at 50% and instead of checking himself, Luce dismissed the contention out of hand because, after all, Dennis Prager, you know is, well.a CONSERVATIVE!! This is what is done with people who want to hold onto false information provided by their tribe. they deride anyone with contrary information as kooks or right wingers or conspiracy nuts.
I don't want to make this OP too long by quoting the entire article which really should be quoted in its entirety as it just shows how much everyone does NOT know about this virus. Also, it kinda proves what I posted about New York being now immune. It seems I possess this uncanny ability to predict the truth a day or so before it comes out as a news article.
Coronavirus R0 Value Explained - The New York Times
I was right not because I am smart or smarter than anyone else here but because I use common sense, which seems to be absent in today's hysterical environment. All I did was look at the astronomical death rates per million in the four states that had the highest which are New York, Mass, Conn, and New Jersey, and see that they are now among the LOWEST in people dying, whereas some of the states that were previously very low in death rates are now zooming up. I looked at that and thought "This can't be right. IF immunity needed a populace to have 70-80-90% or more people with COVID for immunity, those four states should STILL have people dying. In spite of the continual lies that somehow those states wore masks and others didn't, there is no proof of that and Sweden alone proves that masks don't make a difference since their death rate per million is only slightly higher than the U.S., and less than other countries who most definitely wore masks since Day One.
What has happened in those four states is that they have reached or are near reaching immunity. That is the only explanation when you look at the chart and the facts and think logically. It also means the article is true. We only need 50% or even less of the populace to have had it. Since the other states have not had enough people infected and killed yet, they are having it now.
Questions, Derisive comments? Complaints?
