It is irrelevant now, since the WHO is reporting, quite probably correctly, that those with the antibodies can still get re-infected and spread it again. It's a super-virus that mutates every couple of weeks, there is no solution to this problem, and we're all going to die from it. Should go short on life-energy futures. <---- (Not a real thing, but you get the idea.)
I read the short WHO paper earlier today. The WHO did not say that at all. Doomers have misrepresented what the WHO wrote. They wrote they were concerned immunity passports might not be accurate because there have been no studies saying that those with antibodies have immunity. My take is that its an open question but that if we were not building some immunity, places like NY and surrounding areas would be overwhelmed and devastated. 14 percent of millions of people already had it. Imagine if they were spreading it over and over and over to each other. Its a pretty good bet that at least some people have immunity or the antibody tests in NY were very wrong.
You missed my sarcastic context... "It's a super-virus that mutates every couple of weeks, there is no solution to this problem, and we're all going to die from it..." That is going to be the takeaway in the news cycle next week, and the panic will continue to spread, longer lockdowns, and more TP hoarding.
Several people have put forward the idea of only locking down the vulnerable people while allowing others to have no restrictions. This proposal will greatly increase the number of deaths. Coronavirus: Over 100,000 could die in the U.K. if only vulnerable groups told to isolate, says professor His team is working on a model for easing the lockdown and is due to release details in the coming days. https://news.sky.com/story/coronavi...roups-told-to-isolate-says-professor-11979126 More than 100,000 people could die this year if the coronavirus lockdown is lifted so only elderly and vulnerable people are shielded, an expert advising the government has said. Professor Neil Ferguson said he was "very sceptical" that a scenario where the younger population resumed a normal life would be a "viable strategy". He said it would require "a very high level" of effective protection for the vulnerable and elderly population, who are also the "least able to really be truly isolated". Speaking to news outlet UnHerd, he said: "The most vulnerable people are also the people who most need care and have most interaction with the health system and are least able to really be truly isolated. "And if you achieve just 80% shielding, 80% reduction in infection risk in those groups, we'd still project you get well over 100,000 deaths later this year through that sort of strategy." Professor Ferguson, from Imperial College London, was the lead author of a report that said the pandemic could kill 250,000 people if the government did not enforce social distancing. He said his team was now working on a model for easing the lockdown and would release details in the coming days. He warned that life "cannot go completely back to normal" and that social distancing would need to remain until a vaccine is developed - something Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab has said will not happen until at least next year. "There will be a trade-off between the extent to which you relax measures and tolerate a level of transmission, and, therefore, mortality and health system demand, versus keeping case numbers as low as you can, which will probably require social distancing longer term," said Professor Ferguson. He pointed towards the South Korean model of mass testing and contact tracing as "remarkably effective" for monitoring the virus infection rate. South Korea has reported just 242 deaths to the disease, which is one of lowest rates in the world. (More at above url)
Wow, you're really reaching here. So desperate to admit you might have misspoken that you are actually trying to make the argument that the government isn't preventing anyone from finding a new job just because they closed all businesses everywhere. If someone is a waiter, and you shutter all restaurants with decree, its the same freaking thing as taking away his ability to get a new waiting job!! And there's the Foxnews angle, and its Trump's agenda. That's the liberal go-to when you can't win an argument based on facts.
Reaching for what? Desperate for what? Where have i misspoken? You are the desperate one. You believe the economy should re-open, but can’t admit to say “many will die” so you couch it in “rights” and then when I show you many examples of those “rights being violated” you counter with “that’s the law so it’s okay.” But this time isn’t okay because the Republican president wants the economy reopen. I understand your MO now and this is a waste of time.