Thread by @JeromeAdamsMD

I hate to be the party pooper on the “until we get to herd immunity” goal post, but if defined as 85%+ (Fauci and others) and most hospitals/ nursing homes can’t even get that level of compliance, we’re not likely to get there as a society. We need to discuss this differently...

“Herd immunity” isn’t a on/ off switch- it’s a risk spectrum. And it differs based on the setting/ person/ other mitigation measures taken. For example, nursing homes seeing much lower spread and death, despite lower than 90% total vaccination rates in most...

And I’d LOVE to see 90% plus vax rates, but telling people / leading them to believe we can’t reopen or stop wearing masks until then, risks losing many people/ being seen as (for good reason) dishonest, or unrealistic. We need to lay out honest and achievable goals...

Here’s my take- herd immunity thresholds are likely 80-90% IF we do nothing else. But IF we combine with other risk lowering measures (less exposure for some, masks for most when in public, vax for as many as possible- but at least 50-60% in a group), we can likely safely reopen.

Again it’s about ⬇️ risk, and it’s a spectrum with many variables. Vaccinations are the most important variable because they are our strongest/ most effective tool, but it’s going to be very hard / unlikely to ever get to 90% as a Nation- which is why masks remain important.

So let’s reset the conversation on “herd immunity,” and talk about how we can all do our part to reopen by making the most use of all the tools we have. We can slow spread, save lives, and reopen even if we don’t get 90% of the public vaxxed, but it’s going to take herd effort!

Also- this was not an anti- Fauci post- in the purest sense – a virological sense- I absolutely agree with him on 80-90%
threshold. But from a communication standpoint when people then use that to say it’s the goal post for reopening, that’s where we risk losing the public.