三位流行病學專家10月4日提出大巴林頓宣言,倡議立即改變防疫政策

哈佛、牛津和斯坦福三位頂級流行病專家10月4日提出大伯林頓宣言,倡議立即改變防疫政策,實施重點保護高危人群的策略,低危人群全麵放開,實現群體免疫。宣言書這幾天已獲得近七千醫學專家,近一萬五千醫務工作者和二十萬公眾人士聯署。

宣言指出,由於封閉式防疫所造成的其它不可挽回的損失,如錯過流感疫苗,心血管疾病延誤治療,癌症早期診斷等,已經大於疫情本身的危害。日前世衛組織估算,全球已有10%的人口感染。洪水已經形成,靠堵是堵不住的。世衛組織同時也宣布,目前病毒主要是通過無症狀感染者傳播。無症狀感染者傳播的病毒,自然傾向於無症狀感染。病毒隨著傳播而毒性降低傳播性增強,既符合科學規律,又已被數據證明。比如高校開學以來,學生已出現7萬多例陽性,但需住院的隻有四人,死亡一人。正如宣言中寫的,對低危人群,新冠病毒的危險性已經低於流感。整個宣言隻字未提經濟社會方麵的利害,僅僅考慮醫學上的取舍。

https://gbdeclaration.org/

The Great Barrington Declaration

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.

 

所有跟帖: 

中危咋辦? -lucky_rain- 給 lucky_rain 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 13:12:26

打疫苗,得病了有雙抗,還有那“希望“ -fuz- 給 fuz 發送悄悄話 fuz 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 14:29:39

這不就是網友solo1提出的“反向隔離”麽? -fuz- 給 fuz 發送悄悄話 fuz 的博客首頁 (139 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 13:13:30

就是。我給Science的文章比這個更詳細。遲早會有更多的人想通了。就怕病毒到時候變異了,就晚了。 -solo1- 給 solo1 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 14:11:50

可惜文章被編輯直接拒了。 -solo1- 給 solo1 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 14:16:26

名望啊,還是特別重要的。看看那三位在哪公幹的,哈牛屎啊 -fuz- 給 fuz 發送悄悄話 fuz 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 14:32:05

哈牛屎, 哈哈 -數與形- 給 數與形 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 17:31:59

就是英國最先提出的群體免疫法。英國基本是這樣做的,瑞典也是。結果如何不是都可以看到嗎。 -阿明.- 給 阿明. 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 18:42:41

任何計劃和策略實施都存在“時機”問題,就跟治病用藥一樣,即便同樣藥,用藥時機也決定結果和利弊。 -pickshell- 給 pickshell 發送悄悄話 (464 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 03:53:28

以色列早就實行這個策略。覺得 “重點隔離” ,或 “特定群體隔離” 的說法比 “反向隔離” 更貼切。 -欲千北- 給 欲千北 發送悄悄話 欲千北 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 16:02:16

以色列正在封城啊:“遇第二波疫情 以色列將封城三周 ” -阿明.- 給 阿明. 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 19:01:59

到現在這時候了,事情其實比較容易做了。 -吃與活- 給 吃與活 發送悄悄話 吃與活 的博客首頁 (197 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 17:15:51

世界早該如此,疫苗也快出來了,還是很有希望的,帶風向的抄作業的讓他們自己內循環去 -小落- 給 小落 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 18:01:00

在疫苗快出來的時候來這個倡議, 哎, 我真替這些"專家"臉紅. -POCOCAT- 給 POCOCAT 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 18:44:25

俄國疫苗出來幾個月了,現在第二波比第一波還厲害。看不出疫苗的作用。 -阿明.- 給 阿明. 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 18:57:26

病毒濃度那麽高,高危怎麽保護,就是犧牲人命換經濟。不止中國,我們這(澳新)病毒也基本沒了 -niersi- 給 niersi 發送悄悄話 niersi 的博客首頁 (58 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 18:56:29

澳新防疫怎麽做到病毒基本沒了的?也是戴口罩+嚴格隔離?民眾能聽從政府步調一致嗎? -香草仙子- 給 香草仙子 發送悄悄話 香草仙子 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 07:34:15

是,還沒中國嚴格,思路一樣。兩周就少一大半,四周就基本沒了。違反的罰款. -niersi- 給 niersi 發送悄悄話 niersi 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 14:58:52

今天美國的新添感染人數已經是53120,說是已經超迷了4月份的峰值,隻希望死亡率下降。 -長青311- 給 長青311 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 20:12:00

小題大作,將檢測陽性的人隔離就可以啦 -難得糊塗一次- 給 難得糊塗一次 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/10/2020 postreply 21:53:10

美國感染人數是八百萬,老年人是數千萬,保護老年人容易呢還是隔離感染人容易? -難得糊塗一次- 給 難得糊塗一次 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 09:26:08

隔離感染人最長造成14天失業而已 -難得糊塗一次- 給 難得糊塗一次 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 09:27:50

保護老年人可是沒有盡頭的事 -難得糊塗一次- 給 難得糊塗一次 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 09:28:22

在美國很難做到 -TBz- 給 TBz 發送悄悄話 TBz 的博客首頁 (251 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 09:46:35

早期加州剛開始有病例的時候,我們這裏的市政府發來一個郵件,因為不少居民在問,我們這個城市有無病例? -虎嗅薔薇- 給 虎嗅薔薇 發送悄悄話 (496 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 10:31:11

哈哈,還真是。當初提議封城隔離,不少人出來示威抗議“限製自由,侵犯人權”:) -pickshell- 給 pickshell 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 11:09:46

武漢封城與我的計劃不一樣 -難得糊塗一次- 給 難得糊塗一次 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 11:15:04

隻是十四天有什麽難的 -難得糊塗一次- 給 難得糊塗一次 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 11:13:57

保護高危人群是一件很難的事。 -hydrop- 給 hydrop 發送悄悄話 (395 bytes) () 10/11/2020 postreply 20:27:11

請您先登陸,再發跟帖!