The Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.
Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.
Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.
Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.
As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.
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 up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.
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 PCR 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. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.
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 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.
On October 4, 2020, this declaration was authored and signed in Great Barrington, United States, by:
Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring of infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.
Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.
哈佛、牛津和斯坦福三位顶级流行病专家10月4日提出大伯林顿宣言，倡议立即改变防疫政策，实施重点保护高危人群的策略，低危人群全面放开，实现群体免疫。宣言书这几天已获得近七千医学专家，近一万五千医务工作者和二十万公众人士联署。
宣言指出，由于封闭式防疫所造成的其它不可挽回的损失，如错过流感疫苗，心血管疾病延误治疗，癌症早期诊断等，已经大于疫情本身的危害。日前世卫组织估算，全球已有10%的人口感染。洪水已经形成，靠堵是堵不住的。世卫组织同时也宣布，目前病毒主要是通过无症状感染者传播。无症状感染者传播的病毒，自然倾向于无症状感染。病毒随着传播而毒性降低传播性增强，既符合科学规律，又已被数据证明。比如高校开学以来，学生已出现7万多例阳性，但需住院的只有四人，死亡一人。正如宣言中写的，对低危人群，新冠病毒的危险性已经低于流感。整个宣言只字未提经济社会方面的利害，仅仅考虑医学上的取舍。
https://gbdeclaration.org/
The Great Barrington DeclarationThe Great Barrington Declaration – As infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists we have grave concerns about the damaging physical and mental health impacts of the prevailing COVID-19 policies, and recommend an approach we call Focused Protection.
Coming from both the left and right, and around the world, we have devoted our careers to protecting people. Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings and deteriorating mental health – leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden. Keeping students out of school is a grave injustice.
Keeping these measures in place until a vaccine is available will cause irreparable damage, with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.
Fortunately, our understanding of the virus is growing. We know that vulnerability to death from COVID-19 is more than a thousand-fold higher in the old and infirm than the young. Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza.
As immunity builds in the population, the risk of infection to all – including the vulnerable – falls. We know that all populations will eventually reach herd immunity – i.e. the point at which the rate of new infections is stable – and that this can be assisted by (but is not dependent upon) a vaccine. Our goal should therefore be to minimize mortality and social harm until we reach herd immunity.
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 up immunity to the virus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this Focused Protection.
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 PCR 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. When possible, they should meet family members outside rather than inside. A comprehensive and detailed list of measures, including approaches to multi-generational households, can be implemented, and is well within the scope and capability of public health professionals.
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 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.
On October 4, 2020, this declaration was authored and signed in Great Barrington, United States, by:
Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring of infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations.
Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases.
Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations.
https://bbs.wenxuecity.com/health/925739.html
到中国和俄国搞些疫苗来，先给养老院的老人和护理人员接种。老人按自愿原则，但医务人员只有接种后才能上岗。随后根据情况扩大范围。
就是人类最基本的compassion and humanity
用药时机不对，对身体弊大于利；时机对了，利大于弊。
现在比3-5月份时容易多了。新冠病毒的毒性，致病力，病死率与当初明显不同，检测能力效率，对病人的救治方面也积累了不少经验，疫苗也快出来了，普通民众的防疫意识 和知识也与当初不同。就美国而言，现在阶段适度放开应可行，但病毒变异就不好说了。
你把人关起来试试？你能把别人家门钉死吗？你连在人家门口大街对面装个摄像头都不行。
这一点，美国总统的权力恐怕还没有中国居委会主任的权力大。
市政府回答说，由于OSHA条例，要保护病人隐私，这个信息不能透露。那时我就知道这个病毒在这里封不住。还记得2009年H1N1流感疾控的结果。那次还是在CDC反应迅速没掉链子的情形下。那次08和拜顿运气好，病毒大扩散，没什么政治后果。
同时在浙江，一个人去药房买一盒退烧药或者咳嗽药水，人还没到家，三四个电话就紧跟过来了，进行非常细致的盘问
比如长期护理院的住客是高危人群，而护理他们的人员不是。护理人员感染了没有症状或还没有出症状而老年人就被感染了。最开始检测能力不足时，我们这里定期检测医，护人员以保护弱势群体。即便是这样，还是常常在长期护理院出现爆发感染。最初的死亡主要是这些护理院的老年人。