Coronavirus Epidemic: Plan to end lockdown with herd immunity.

This video blog by S.Pelling PhD, AKC, outlines a plan to quickly end the current epidemic of covid-19.

Quote on 2nd May, from Nobel Prize winning Professor of structural Biology at Stanford Michael Levitt:
" England, France, Italy, Sweden, Belgium, Holland are all reaching levels of saturation that are going to be very close to herd immunity, so basically I think that is a good thing. I think the policy of herd immunity is the right policy. I think Britain was on exactly the right track before they were fed wrong numbers, and they made a huge mistake. I see the stand up winners as Germany and Sweden, they did not practice too much lockdown. They got enough people sick to get some herd immunity. The stand-out losers are countries like Austria, Australia, Israel that actually had very very strict lockdowns, that did not have many cases …" 12'45" to 13'35"
“If we could protect old people perfectly then the death rates would be very very low”

I did not mention whether having previously been infected with covid19 confers immunity, i.e. prevents one becoming seriously ill in a subsequent infection with the same virus. In this video blog I am assuming that it does, sufficiently so that herd immunity is possible. If it does not confer sufficient immunity, then the argument is based on a false premise and so invalid. Suprisingly, this question is still unanswered, but Its close relation SARS does confer immunity for 2-3 years. A video which discusses this is

Immunity conferred by covid-19 illness?

NYC Daily Data Summary for April 14, 2020 in the file found in the website below states that of 6840 total deaths from covid-19, 5151 had underlying conditions, 137 did not (i.e. were 'healthy'), and for 1552 it is unknown if they did or did not. Thus, 137 / ( 5151 + 137 ) = 2.6% is the proportion of fatalities among the healthy.
The infection fatality rate is assumed to be 0.5% for the general population. The true figure may be twice or half this, but the uncertainty does not significantly affect the conclusions in the video blog.
Combining these two percentages, the infection fatality rate amongst the healthy is (very approximately) 0.5% x 2.6% = 0.013%.
UK population is 66.6 million, so 2/3 x 66.6M = 44.4 M.
0.5% x 44M = 220 000.
0.013% x 44M = 5720.

NYC Daily Data Summary for April 14, 2020

It is remarkable that 4 months on since this disease was publicly known, we still do not have such basic and crucial information as: do those who recover have immunity from getting the disease again, and what is the probability of an infected person dying? Surely the enormously well-funded medical research establishment could have done some simple work to determine this?

Professor Ionannidis posted the following on 8th April: "Population-level COVID-19 mortality risk"

Quote from the abstract to the above paper:
CONCLUSIONS:
People less than 65 years old have very small risks of COVID-19 death even in the hotbeds of the pandemic and deaths for people less than 65 years without underlying predisposing conditions are remarkably uncommon. Strategies focusing specifically on protecting high-risk elderly individuals should be considered in managing the pandemic.

More about the 'global dimming effect' problem, see Paul Beckwith at:

The abandonment of nursing homes:

Other interesting perspectives:


Perspectives on the Pandemic | Dr. John Ioannidis Update: 4.17.20 |

Dr. Ioannidis on Why We Don't Have Reliable Data Surrounding COVID-19

Perspectives on the Pandemic | Professor Knut Wittkowski Update Interview | Episode 5

[mysticalpathmysticalpath]

This sounds great if there aren’t any modified virus going around. There are healthy people that have passed away and I know of a very fit healthy individual that is fighting for his life in Madrid.