Herd Immunization
The health experts who provided us with the dire predictions offered a radical alternative solution that most of us did not want to hear. They suggested that we alternate a NPI policy with an “open up” policy that would allow us to go out in public without protection. We get infected. Most of us survive the infection and build the necessary anti-bodies. This is what is called herd immunization. When we all are self-immunized, then the virus will cease to be a major threat. It will go away (with the assistance of immunizing injections for young people). Many people will die—but many people will live and rebuild our societies. It is a horrible option that was received with little support by those of us who were living with the basic set of assumptions about doing “the right thing” (NPI). Based on this set of assumptions, only uncaring people who live by numbers (statistical projections) would ever propose herd immunity. We must throw out this option –and perhaps fire the scientists who are making this inhumane proposal.
The problem was that they might in some way be right. They might ultimately be more caring than the rest of us. At the very least, they are quite brave in their articulation of the “inconvenient truth.” Perhaps, careful consideration should be given to the truths that might be embedded in the herd immunization policy. Such a consideration never did take place in the United States nor in most other countries during 2020. Herd immunity became politized (as did many other complex societal issues of the 2020s in the United States). Americans were either for or against herd immunity and those advocating the other side of the issue were assigned labels that led to frozen, polarized positions. Civic discourse was rarely found regarding herd immunity in most corners of our world.
The Outcomes
What does it mean that no serious attention was devoted at any level to the matter of herd immunity? A serious proposal should have been offered and deliberated. It would include realistic appraisals regarding the virus’s staying power which is at the core of a herd immunity policy. Embedded in this appraisal is an assumption that the virus will continue to linger, and outbreaks will occur at least sporadically—even with an effective vaccine and continuation of social distancing. While this assumption might be too pessimistic, it is important to keep the “worst case” scenario in mind—what the behavioral economics call “premortum” planning (Kahneman, 2013).
