Generational Dynamics World View

[John J. Xenakis]

** 03-Apr-2020 World View: 'Ride it Out' (Herd Immunity) strategy controversy

There is a lot of controvery today over the economic shutdown, the
harsh lockdown and social distancing rules that are being laid down
today. In America, these mitigation rules have forced the closure of
millions of businesses, many of which will never be able to reopen,
and have forced job losses for tens of millions of Americans, many of
whom will no longer be able to provide for their families.

Many people are saying that the cure is worse than the disease -- more
people are going to suffer and die because of the economic shutdown
that would ever die from from Covid-19. These people say we should
just "ride it out," and just let the virus run its course. Even if
more people die, the whole crisis will end more quickly.

Many people support this policy, which is called the "herd immunity"
strategy. Both the UK and US governments have considered the "herd
immunity" strategy. Advocates say that this strategy will actually
save a lot of lives, because even if more people die from Covid-19,
fewer people will die from the economic destruction that the
mitigation strategies are currently being used.

However, there are also people on the other side. Earlier today I was
watching MSNBC, and people were criticizing Trump for killing people
by issuing guidelines but not enforcing a harsh nationwide lockdown.

I should begin by saying I'm not an advocate of any particular policy
for handling this crisis. I consider myself to be a "weather
forecaster," and using the Generational Dynamics methodology to
provide weather forecasts. As with all issues, I simply provide a
generational analysis of what is happening and what is going to
happen, just as a weather forecaster might predict a rainy day or
sunny day, without taking sides on whether rain is good or bad. The
reason why many people hate and shun me (and why many other people
follow me every day) is because my weather forecasts always turn out
to be right.

At Donald Trump's March 31 press briefing by members of the
Coronavirus Task Force he directly addressed the controvery. One
objective of that press conference was to hear from Anthony Fauci, the
director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases,
who is currently considered to be superstar expert on the coronavirus,
and who appears on numerous tv shows giving expert opinion.

During one of his tv interviews, Fauci had said that even with the
current mitigation efforts, 100,000-200,000 people were going to die,
but without them over 2 million people would die and the health care
system would be overwhelmed. These numbers shocked a lot of people,
and created numerous media headlines, and so Fauci and another expert
Deborah Birx, were at the press briefing to explain them, and to
explain the concept of "flattening the curve."

So during the press briefing, Birx showed a lot of slides and graphs
and explained what was going to happen with and without mitigation.

The full press conference and slide presentations can be viewed here:

Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2TRmlsmMNU

3/31/20: Members of the Coronavirus Task Force Hold a Press Briefing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2TRmlsmMNU

Transcript:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-sta...iefing-15/

I should add that I've seen dozens of experts on tv since then, and
they didn't contradict Fauci's numbers, which had been supported in
detail by Birx. Attitudes are changing very rapidly, and in the last
three days, these numbers are no longer considered "shocking," but are
now "the common wisdom."

In his comments, Trump directly addressed the "ride it out" strategy,
and he explained at length why the US administration has rejected that
strategy. He also mentioned that the UK government considered the
same strategy and rejected it. Here are some excerpts from what Trump
said:

Quote:> "They’re very sobering, yeah. When you see 100,000
> people, that’s a — and that’s at a minimum number. ... [T]hat
> would be, you know, a lot of lives taking place over a relatively
> short period of time.

> But think of what would have happened if we didn’t do anything. I
> mean, I’ve had many friends, business people, people with great,
> actually, common sense — they said, “Why don’t we ride it out?” A
> lot of people have said. A lot of people have thought about it.
> “Ride it out. Don’t do anything, just ride it out and think of it
> as the flu.” But it’s not the flu. It’s vicious.

> When you send a friend to the hospital, and you call up to find
> out how is he doing — it happened to me, where he goes to the
> hospital, he says goodbye. He’s sort of a tough guy. A little
> older, a little heavier than he’d like to be, frankly. And you
> call up the next day: “How’s he doing?” And he’s in a coma? This
> is not the flu.

> So we would have seen things had we done nothing. But for a long
> while, a lot of people were asking that question, I think, right?
> I was asking it also. I mean, a lot of people were saying, “Well,
> let’s just ride it out.” This is not to be ridden out because
> then you would have been looking at potentially 2.2 million people
> or more. 2.2 million people in a relatively short period of time.

> If you remember, they were looking at that concept. It’s a
> concept, I guess. You know, it’s concept if you — if you don’t
> mind death. A lot of death. But they were looking at that in the
> UK. Remember? They were very much looking at it. And all of a
> sudden, they went hard the other way because they started seeing
> things that weren’t good. So they were — you know, they put
> themselves in a little bit of a problem.

> Now, Boris tested positive, and I hear he’s — I hope he’s going to
> be fine. But in the UK, they were looking at that. And they have
> a name for it, but we won’t even call — we won’t even go by the
> name. But it would’ve been — it would have been very catastrophic,
> I think, if that would have happened. [[Note: the name he's
> referencing is "herd immunity."]]

> But that was something that everybody was talking about, Steve,
> like, “just don’t do anything.” “Don’t do anything. Forget about
> everything. Just ride it out.” They used the expression, “Ride it
> out.” We would have had, at a minimum, 1.5, 1.6, but you would
> have had perhaps more than 2.2 million people dying in a very
> short period of time. And that would have been a number that —
> the likes of which we’ve never seen."

I think that one of the major issues is that the public would not
tolerate a "ride it out" strategy. If it were tried, Boris Johnson's
government would quickly fall and Trump would be impeached (again).
Many people in the public would implement mitigation policies in their
own neighborhoods, cities, states and provinces.

In fact, if you look at the 1918 Spanish Flu documentary that I
mentioned in an earlier message, there was a de facto "ride it out"
policy in effect in 1918, but there was still a lot of mitigation
going on, with policies put into effect by individual organizations
and local governments. So basically what I'm saying is that a "ride
it out" or "herd immunity" or "burn through" strategy cannot be
implemented because the public won't tolerate it, as soon as the
deaths start piling up.

There are even stories coming out of densely populated cities like
Mumbai or refugee camps, that people are taking "social distancing"
mitigation steps on their own. People are not willing to just stand
around, ride it out, and die.

Many officials are passionate about this issue, and I don't blame
them. A lot of people are going to be suffering because of the
economic situation, and a lot of people are going to be starving
because they no longer have an income.