Perhaps you missed the part of my post in which I mentioned the “magic 70% mark” which will smash transmission rates down wherever that rate applies. India is no where near that mark, with an alarming exponential rise in cases as noted above.
So far the only country that has hit that magic 70% rate is, AFAIK, Israel. If there are others, please let me know.
It will take time to stabilize the situation globally.
Guy
That would be the 70%+ herd immunity mark.
Yes and for a variety of reasons we are not there yet. The US and the UK will be there soon.
Guy
And then it will be OK, yeah?
It depends what you mean by “it” and “OK”! 
Guy
“Life” and “normalcy”.
You’re welcome. Have you considered trying to find a job in medical research or government so you can help to improve how such things are handled?
Nice attempt at irony. But anyone thinking of such a career or job would be met with more close mindedness with the woke cancer arriving sometime soon. Then there is the corruption.
A lockdown in India will kill hundreds of thousands and send another few hundred thousand into destitution, prostitution, or worse. Guaranteed.
If only life were so simple that you get two clear choices.
That drop started several weeks before the vaccine rollout began. Caseload was about 90% down from its peak when vaccinations had barely reached 20% of the population. But as usual facts are irrelevant here.
You are suggesting there is no correlation between mass vaccination in the UK and the smashing of the transmission curve? 
Guy
Of course there bloody isn’t. Go and look at the charts. How can something that happens today change something that happened a month ago? Are the scientists claiming to have invented time travel now?
It might well have some effect on future cases. But the idea that vaccination was the cause of the precipitous drop during Jan/Feb is delusional.
You will have noticed that we are now in April right?
Guy
Yes, I had noticed. Does that somehow alter history?
How’s the UK transmission curve looking now?
Guy
In case some folks are interested, here’s what I’m referring to:
Guy
10% of the population vaccinated at end of Jan, caseload down by well over 50% from the peak.
30% vaccinated end of Feb, cases 90% down.
Bear in mind that vaccination doesn’t have an instantaneous effect - IIRC the claim is that ~10 days delay gives you some useful level of immunity. It’s impossible that vaccination had any more than a modest role in that dramatic downwards trend … unless, of course, we’re now claiming that 30% coverage is enough to achieve herd immunity. But since 20-30% of the British population are estimated to have acquired immunity, there’s a bit of logical conundrum there.
Obviously at this point it is having some effect in keeping caseloads low. How much effect? Nobody knows. It’s impossible to know.
I don’t think this is a reasonable excuse. Ivermectin is not a new drug - all that’s being suggested is that we use it off-label. This is very common and AFAIK is not illegal as long as it’s done under medical supervision.
If someone is dying I don’t see any obvious reason not to try any possible option, however slim the chance of success, as long as it is done with informed consent. Again, this is pretty common. So why is it being actively forbidden here?
Meanwhile, millions of perfectly healthy people are being pressured into enrolling in a mass-vaccination programme, using technology which has never used commercially, with unknown and unknowable effects, on the basis of very limited testing … because, y’know, COVID is a threat to humanity and it’s OK to bend and break the rules.
Tomorrow I’m going to buy an the Ivermectin I can and resell it to people in the US. 
The clinical trials are running over the world with millions of people. And they have extensive preclinical testing.
People would rather get the new mRNA vaccines the data is so good.
FIFY 
This has never been done before, using this kind of technology, on this kind of scale. It is not possible to know how this is going to pan out. It might all work out fine. But we can’t know that.
That’s as maybe. It doesn’t alter the fact that standard testing protocols have been subverted “because it’s an emergency”, yet people are being denied Ivermectin despite promising case histories. Frankly, I suspect Ivermectin is useless or nearly so, but I don’t see why people shouldn’t be allowed to give it a shot if they want to. Put yourself in their shoes. Wouldn’t you try anything if it was your relative in the ICU?
Bear in mind also that the vast majority of drugs on the market have no therapeutic value - the NNT can be anywhere from 5 up to the hundreds. If the NNT for Ivermectin turns out to be 100, that still makes it more objectively useful than (say) statins.
