...If we assume that we are achieving herd immunity via natural exposure, achieving it becomes a function of R0 combined with some rate of social interaction. Social distancing obviously reduces the transmission rates and delays herd immunity. For example, antibody tests from the NYC show it to be at 25% exposed population, while herd immunity requires somewhere around 60%. If the NYC did not impose a lockdown, we probably be at the herd immunity threshold already.
Roughly the same number of people will get infected with or without it (albeit slower) before the herd immunity is achieved. What lockdown and other social distancing measures do/did is slow the transmission enough to prevent the medical system from being overwhelmed. If you somehow can be sure of your medical resources, the approach taken by Sweden is pretty reasonable as it will bring them to herd immunity much faster.
I forgot to mention here (maybe I did) that Sweden has a problem with their healthcare policy
before Covid-19. I heard about the problems many years ago when Sweden was not on the list of best countries to retire. Denmark was on the list.
There's medical articles about healthcare system problems and I think I posted a link to one of such articles out of several.
Essentially, the policy was to give greater protection for their elderly population and ethnic minority communities. That didn't happen
prior to Covid-19 and it became worst
after Covid-19 and the statistics reveals the cracks in the healthcare approach to those that are vulnerable.
Its the same issue why many (including Sweden's Prime Minister) are trying to fix considering its
not working as planned....one of the consequences is the high death rate count and then there's the economic toll even though they did not do a complete lockdown.
Seems to me that they're surprise by the shrinking economy, high death rate or didn't expect things were going to get this bad.
Simply, regardless if the approach was reasonable upon initiation of the policy...the high death rate count was
not expected
nor reasonable...at least to Sweden's health officials and Prime Minister.
- I strongly disagree with the notion that if NYC did not impose a lockdown, we probably be at the herd immunity threshold already. NYC does not have a healthcare policy nor the equipment at the time to attempt such.
In fact, many countries do not or did not have a healthcare policy to protect those most vulnerable if a
"no lockdown policy" was implemented. The current problems with the social responsibilities and social disparities of the citizens shows how problematic such a policy would be and the impact such a policy would have on the vulnerable communities...
- U.S.A (its cities / communities) were not ready. That's a fact.
A No lockdown policy with
natural exposure is something that sounds great on paper with good intentions but can
not be achieved
without a vaccine unless you're willing to kill off hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of your population while trying to achieve
herd immunity via
natural exposure.
Very few countries were willing to roll the dice on that
experiment with their citizens. In fact, most governments primary obligation is to protect its citizens. The economy is secondary.
President Trump in the U.S. couldn't experiment like that in the year of an election especially with his economic advisors telling him that the country is strong enough to quickly bounce back from a lockdown that causes a meltdown in the economy.
Thus, protect the people first and then try to protect the economy...not the other way around. Yeah, politics in the equation...it messed up everything.
P.S. I do not know what was the specific problems but the other Scandinavian countries (Denmark / Norway / Finland) have navigated
very well without the same problems...continue to do so after Covid-19.
I think its the reason why those that understood the specific problems within Sweden before Covid-10...they were a little shocked that Sweden used this "Lockdown Lite" type of a policy when many of their communities weren't ready
or couldn't be protected (elderly, ethnic minorities).
In contrast, other Scandinavian countries weren't ready to but they knew they couldn't use a similar like policy and needed to do a full lockdown. They just couldn't roll the dice sort'uv speak about the lives of their citizens.
wrbtrader