This is not a far-fetched or click-bait question, though it is a theoretical one. With immunity passports being floated as a necessary condition to travel, what would you do if faced with the choice of being grounded in perpetuity?
I’m not about to inject myself with bleach, but if I had to risk a 1-2% chance of dying in exchange for traveling around the world, I’d take the risk. My wife is onboard with it too. Life is full of inherent risks. Every choice in life is a cost-benefit analysis. The key, of course, is to make informed choices. Thoughtful choices. Discerning choices.
I do not downplay the severity of COVID-19, nor do I take flippantly my responsibility to protect not only myself, but those around me. I’ve carefully guarded myself and family by curtailing social interactions, keeping employees at home, and wearing masks in public (in compliance with local law). Not only do I want this era to pass, but I want to be an agent who helped to contain it.
And yet multiple governments are floating the concept of an immunity passport, something I discussed in greater detail here. There are all sorts of problems inherent in such a passport. Most importantly, there is real question as to whether people are actually “immune” even when they develop certain antibodies after contracting COVID-19. We have seen relapse cases all over the world.
But for purposes of our discussion, let’s assume there is a document or a stamp that clears you to fly. It clears you to enter nations. And without it, you cannot fly and cannot visit Europe or Asia or Australia.
Where can I get in line? Seriously.
I’d retreat to a hotel, inject myself with the virus (not that it can be injected, again, we are just having a theoretical discussion), and let it take its effect. For three weeks I’d remain quarantined…longer if necessary. I’m not talking about a vaccine, I’m talking about the full-on virus. And I know the result would not necessarily be binary: I could end up with lasting lung damage or other permanent handicaps.
What does it profit to gain the world and lose your life? I dismiss that ultimatum in the context of this discussion. For better or for worse, my livelihood is conditioned upon travel. Travel is the instrument which I have been given to provide for my family.
This post is a musing. Don’t take it the wrong way. I want to be a good citizen and a good neighbor. I don’t want to hurt others. But if it came to this choice (and maybe this won’t even be feasible), I’d take the risk…
How about you?
This is all so, “Hunger Games (ish).”
Imagining two societies: One, “The Immune” that can roam free and rule the world. And another, “The Non-immune” forced to shelter at home as their businesses die or they are unable to work and lose their mental health and well being. It’s insane to even imagine it coming to this. Or the repercussions on society.
I can see these passports being effective only for medical workers and first responders. It would enable them to take most of the high risk situations to their care and spare the more at risk non-immune workers.
But to imagine that all of society would be separated like this is the stuff of Science Fiction and I doubt ever happening.
What I do it? It depends. If it was appearing to be longer than expected to live like this and my mental health and existence depended on it, I would lick the walls of a New York Subway in a second. If there was hope that in a few months the whole thing is over with treatment or vaccine…never.
Agreed that it is all about timing.
that is absolutely insane. granted traveling is necessary for certain professions, however, I would NEVER put myself or others ( that includes the hotel workers who would provide room service, towel changing, cleaning etc.) consequently your self quarantining is short-sighted.
You are making a decision not only for yourself but for others without their consent or knowledge. If your need to travel is such a necessity self-quarantine at home,
do not expose other people who are forced to be at work and do not have the luxury of taking themselves out of the workforce.
To be clear, if I locked myself in a hotel, I would not emerge for three weeks from my room. No maids, no room service unless left outside my door, no using the spa or gym…
Seriously, is there something wrong with you? Just wait a year for the vaccine.
Arnold, It’s a theoretical discussion. One that IF the immune are given the ability to work, travel, live life, make money what would the non-immune do? If a vaccine was a year or two away and the non-immune are left behind would desperation take over? I think it would. Two societies would bring about HUGE repercussions. Are you going to leave behind the students are non-immune? The small businesses that don’t have immunity cards? It will become chaos and anarchy. Hunger Games.
With statements made as Delta did, in the previous post of Matthew’s, this is not something completely far-fetched either and worthy of discussion.
Yes of course, no question.
Not only will many infect themselves to travel, more importantly almost every poor migrant laborer will infect themselves to be able to work in crowded factories or abroad, religious people will infect themselves to be able to go on pilgrimage, everyone will get infected so they can finally meet their families split across boundaries and so on.
Why not send you wife and kids to the hotel and you stay home?
That would be fine. Or I just use the guest house.
Guest house?!?! Nobody else observed this, but I’m jealous.
We have a guest room/floor. But can’t rent it out (too noisy from upstairs.)
It’s quite small…
Getting any disease voluntarily is not a smart idea – this is about as dumb as parents infecting their children with chickenpox on purpose.
But according to the recent antibody tests in New York, California as well as sample testing in populations in Northern Italy and Iceland, the risk of dying is estimated at less than 0.5%, which should make healthy, fit people even less worried.
Reports of reinfection are anecdotal, and few cases, and in no case was reinfection actually proven, as far as I’ve read. We can safely assume that one would have immunity for at least a year – and if you do get it again it would be much milder than the first time since you’d have partial immunity – this is comparable to getting infected with flu strains that are mutated versions of previous flus you’ve had.
Clearly the thing to do is to protect and isolate all those people who are vulnerable – people with chronic conditions, particularly of the lungs and heart, and older people; so that everybody else can again go out and work.
This is why immunity passports for anything outside of health care is a bad idea. The notion makes having had the disease economically beneficial, and therefore encourages the spread. Also, while immunity for those who have contracted COVID-19 is still unproven, so is the direct correlation between amount of initial exposure and severity of disease. But just as we’re pretty sure you can have some immunity after catching it, we’re also convinced that taking a larger viral dose will lead to a worse outcome. So “making sure” you get the disease will likely mean massive exposure, and that means an order of magnitude higher risk.
At this point in time, I wouldn’t inject myself the virus. There are still so many unknowns. Just this morning, I read an article on the Washington Post where it’s finding young (those under age 50) asymptomatic covid-19 positive folks may be dying of strokes! “So they survive the lung side, and in time develop other issues.” Just crazy!
Ask me that same question in the fall though and with more information out there I’ll probably say yes since I love to travel and risk is an inherent part of travel.
You are crazy.. just for the sake of travelling for no sensible reason, staying in hotels and quarantining yourself..for what..just to earn miles and points and get status cards!
You know what there some lunatics out there, who are believing your insane idea and will do everything just to travel again..
Well it is your own decision, it is your life your risking not mine. It is the same anyway, if I am reading your tripreport or your orbituary!!
We don’t have to reduce this to “hunger games”.
In places like Stockholm, their approach will lead to herd immunity without having overwhelmed their health care system and most residents there will have gained their “immunity passports.”
But yes for isolated young healthy individuals it’s a theoretical no-brainer.
Several problems with this. First, this is called a vaccine, which we might develop. Second, there is some evidence that this virus, like the Flu, mutates, so, you might be exposed to March 2020 COVID, which might not help with September 2020 COVID. Third… Could you become a “silent carrier?”
No simple solutions, but, I truly believe this was blown into an unnecessary paralyzing panic.
Of course you are right about a vaccine, but I’m very leery of a fast vaccine without proper testing. For this discussion, however, I’m talking about the full strain.
This is not really a peer reviewed, scientific source, but this would entail part of the problem. Would you have to reinfect yourself repeatedly?
Thank you for a very interesting theoretical discussion.
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/what-to-know-about-mutation-and-covid-19
If the vaccine doesn’t work too well, it’s very possible that getting Covid-19 may not protect you very well. The common cold is a different coronavirus and getting the common cold once doesn’t protect you.
The danger about your discussion is that some people will become lazy, thinking getting Covid19 is nothing 98-99% of the time. That resulted in the big spikes after Spring Break and the Louisana spike after Mardi Gras.
No, getting Covid 19 is risky for all ages. Young people have a higher risk of stroke. Does anyone want a stroke?
The WHO just came out with a warning that there is no proof that having antibodies imparts immunity and that there may be some evidence of re-infection, so you may want to hold off on this idea. Oh, and for this 72 yr old diabetic with hypertension not so much.
And then later in the day backtracked and said it does…
This is worldwide fascism and is as unconscionable as Jonathan Swift a modest proposal.
That so much of the populace goes along with this is alarming including some letters proposing mandatory imprisonment that I am seeing. I would prefer hearing about revolts.
It’s crazy that people are going along with the shutdown.
It’s time to reopen. This can’t go on much longer.
I look forward to word of your early demise. Also a final picture of you clutching a small wad of cash in one hand and a bottle of Lysol in the other.
Life is precious, we should stay home to protect everyone…unless they disagree and then it’s OK if they die?
I know you think you’re just being provocative and cheeky. And you need clicks to put money in your pocket. But posts like this are irresponsible.
In a time when spring breakers are holding (or even joking about) “chicken pox parties”, and the president suggests people inject or ingest disinfectants…to the point that the head of Lysol and Clorox immediately warn consumers not to drink their products – a reasonable reaction, since we know that some people drank fish tank cleaners and died because Trump told them there was a magical COVID cure in it…
There are enough idiots out there already who will do things to harm themselves and all of us. Please don’t be another one of them by suggesting things like this.
And judging from the comments above, your blog has attracted all the right-wing Trumpist morons.
I appreciate your concern and do not want to contribute to paranoia or harmful choices. But my contention is a serious one and ad revenue is down so much it is not about extra clicks. This is not something I am recommending now or prepared to do myself today. But it is something I am open to and we can only wait so long before life and travel must resume again.
While I realize that the discussion is theoretical, and contend that, despite your protestations to the contrary, it is, in fact, clickbait. I don’t think you will do any harm by inspiring others to adopt this strategy, but there’s a slim chance that this might come to pass, and you’ll bear that burden. Your choice, Sir. I believe you are modestly well read on the effects of the virus, but perhaps it has escaped your notice that infection is not a binary proposition, with death or immunity as the two only outcomes. There is amble evidence that lasting disability, especially as regards lung damage, is an additional consideration. Further, the supposition that an otherwise healthy person can just ride it out in isolation and emerge with the Golden Ticket ignores the fact that you could end up on a ventilator, and the prelude to that care is terrifying in its clinical course. This was a stupid, irresponsible post, another in a series put forth by this blog during the pandemic. Shame on you.
Paul, you took the time to write this and I appreciate it. You have showed me respect by being so stern and direct in your criticism of late and based upon our years of work together and my resulting great respect for you, I take what you say seriously. Although I did not mention it, I am indeed aware of the risks of lung damage as well. Deliberate contraction of this virus is not something I ever WANT to do. But Paul, if I cannot travel, cannot go to church, cannot enjoy celebrations with my family or mourn the loss of loved ones at a funeral; if I cannot stride through airports or brave overland journeys through the wonderful enclaves of this world, then a huge part of who I am as a person dies. Life becomes a shadow of what it was meant to be. I’m not making a “give me liberty or give me death” argument, as my life in quarantine is far too comfortable and has been a blessing in other ways. I will abide by government regulations, not defy them. I will seek new ways to flourish and help others. But this cannot continue indefinitely and I trust you can appreciate, even if you still scorn my decision, that a genuine desire to provide for my family and not just survive, but thrive, is a basis for this theoretical discussion.
The respect is mutual, Matthew. However, my critique, typos and all, stands. Perhaps the topic could have been framed in a less inflammatory manner, something like your thoughtful and rational response to my comment.
Matthew, I have had these same thoughts. Especially the part about being denied the opportunity to travel causes a huge part of who I am to already die. I would do it in a heartbeat. At home having already stocked up on supplies to last 3 weeks. I have never been a fan of longevity for it’s own sake. I am worried there won’t ever be a vaccine based on the fact that other viruses don’t have vaccines like HIV and I know a ton of research has gone into that.
Most of the people who are important in my life are overseas. As long as this continues, I can’t be with them. And accepting risk as part of adventure has always been normal for me. Countries will reopen the restrictions on normal life probably within 2 months domestically, then gradually open to international travel.
I am otherwise healthy and I am confident I would be in the 99% who gets the mild case. I am hoping I may have already been exposed when I was in some Middle Eastern bazaars early March before everything shut down. I wish I could just walk up and get an antibody test on demand. People should be free to make their own risk assessments and join the Immunes or Non-immunes. I don’t want to “survive”. I want to LIVE!
Don’t get impatient. Find alternatives. Things will be learned by the experts in a few months versus today. We can benefit from what we will know in the near future.
Great post Paul.
A little nutty, yes. But it’s not clickbait. This is how he writes. Also, he says a thousand times, don’t do it and that it’s a thought exercise.
“This was a stupid, irresponsible post, another in a series put forth by this blog during the pandemic.”
If I may weigh in on this in as cogent and calm manner as possible.
Matt is not only concerned about his way of life (which matters a great deal to him) but like many others in our society, this situation has exacerbated and brought to the forefront other conflicts of interest in a diverse, open, and democratic society:
1) Attempting to reduce (but not eliminate!) risk of cross infection to senior citizens and other high-risk individuals at the expense of the economic chaos harming the livelihoods and well being of far more people?
This is similar to the high-regulation folks (let’s lower the speed limit down to 25 nearly everywhere because low speed saves lives!) versus the need for people to commute to work quickly and effectively.
2) McD’s and other restaurants are open (to go) for people to get some snacks, but churches are ordered shut even if they attempt to engage in social distancing measures similar to that for Costco.
3) (kind of part of 2) Home gardening stores and even sections of of Walmart are closed off as these are classified by some states as “leisure” activities but yet, for a long term crisis, home food generation may mean the difference between life and death for some. These measures may make the problem worse or appear irrational to many. People being arrested in wilderness areas because they’re “outside.”
4) And last (here) but not least: freedom of discussion and thought where we discuss in a rational manner these tradeoffs and pitch ideas (such as Trump’s recent questions about “injecting” “disinfectants” and UV light which set off a media firestorm and cascading claims of “poison calls”
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/nyc-poison-control-calls-for-bleach-lysol-double-after-trump-disinfectant-comment/2389593/
Indeed, is the “quarantine” going to extend to thought and discussion as well? “BAD IDEA! Stay home!”
Are we going to move forward into a “bubble wrap” society?
This all reminds me of September 11th. I wonder… what if we had just rebuilt the twin towers, gone to kill Bin Laden, tightened up cockpit access doors and… that’s it? Did we really need all the hyper surveillance and multiple wars to follow due to 2977 victims?
Some typos. Sorry. Passionate typing, and no salvation from autocorret.
I’m a bit stunned to read this post. Of course, it is all too common. People cannot envision life without their usual livelihood. This is a time – like it or not- where our souls are tested and strengthened. It’s a time to savor, give and receive what we really need. We are made for connection and love- not travel.
What if you did gain the whole world and lose your soul? We were made for more. What I realize is that this crisis just brings out the best and worse in folks – depending how they have lived up until now. Very few are willing to let this crisis change them into the kind of people we really need to be. Life is defined not by Global Status but
by the qualities by which we live courageously and compassionately. Yeah, I miss my frequent trips to Europe in Polaris Business but I’m learning the gift of so much more
Wayne, I chose the phrase above very deliberately. We are not talking about Matthew 16:26. I’m not talking about trading my soul for money. This isn’t a soteriological discussion, but a pragmatic discussion.
I would give up every penny I ever had and would make and never travel again if it meant saving my son or wife. Life is indeed not defined by status or wealth, but how we love. For me, that boils down to loving God and loving others, the Golden Rule of Matthew 22:36-40. I believe that love is a gift of God borne out in faith. There are so many people I know who are spectacularly wealthy, spectacularly powerful, and simultaneously spectacularly miserable. My *goal* is not to attain status money in life, but that of Romans 8:29.
Here, however, we are talking about a tradeoff; a pragmatic choice. Travel is a gift. And the point of this discussion is simple: I’d risk getting the virus if it meant that travel could continue. It’s a theoretical discussion assuming that others would not be hurt as a result. My wife supports me. You’re free to disagree. But don’t turn this into a discussion over forfeiting our soul for money. It’s not about that. Rather, it is about a deliberate cost-benefit analysis on a far less weightier matter.
Thank you for your comment.
Wayne, I think the question Matthew poses is far more about “life’ and less about miles and “frivolous” travel. That is, how would you feel and what would you do IF you were told the vaccine is not working, scientists need another year or so, but the Immune are allowed to continue their lives normally while you are told to quarantine during that time.
While I agree with you that right now that we must be responsible for the good of society, under a different scenario I would imagine it completely impossible. The Non-Immune would revolt and anarchy would ensue.
Either all of society comes together in this or human beings will break under the pressure and stress. We succeed now only as a collective.
Context for the 1-2% mortality thought exercise: Cholera, anyone? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_disease_case_fatality_rates
Who says there will be a vaccine? The media…. the research companies? If there is one, the vaccine could end up killing millions as well. Herd immunity will work. People are going to die, you can delay it but not avoid it.
The economy is already in shock…. let the world economy go another 2 years waiting for a vaccine and see what happens. How many hungry? How many dead children (not elderly ..children) How many banks and governments will collapse world wide? Hiding in our homes…it is not the solution. Moderation and cautiousness to manage the spread while going on about our daily lives is what we should be doing. Infecting yourself.. on purpose?? Not sure that is a good idea! Moderation is always the key.
Good point but be careful about moderation, which can be misunderstood. Example, moderate iv drug abuse is ok, just not daily, right? (No). Moderate racism is ok just as long as you don’t lynch a Black man, right (No). Moderation in child discipline by smacking your kid in the face but never breaking the kids arm is ok, right? (No).
Moderation is often ok but have to be cautious that it doesn’t become lackadaisical behavior or is really not good moderation.
It’s an interesting theoretical question. To answer it you’d have to consider risk versus reward and draw ethical and legal boundaries around the scenario. Essentially there’s a risk of death or lasting disability by injecting live virus. From what we’ve heard, that risk is 1-2%. The reward is a grace period of say 2 years unhindered travel assuming a vaccine would eventually be released after 2 years nullifying the need for a special passport. Legally you’d have to assume sufficient countries sign on to the scheme. Ethically, doctors would have to void their credo of “do no harm” when injecting live pathogens into their patients.
Ed the risk is not 1-2% for a healthy person. The risk is FAR lower. The death rate is probably more like 1% total considering how many people out there had the virus and never knew. Let’s say it is 2% though. 85% of the deaths are those over 60…..what is the odds of a healthy 35 year old dying… yes there is a chance, it has happened but the odds are WAY less than 1%. Maybe less than .1% of a healthy person under 40 dying. Stats differ based on age and previous health conditions. It is not 1-2% across the board.
When you see it kill a healthy person, not that rarely, you will think twice. While it may be usually the sick and old, 20% of the time, that’s not the case. It’s nothing remotely close to the flu.
Short answer: No.
It’s called ‘novel’ (new) coronavirus. Globally, medical researchers are literally finding out new aspects of how this virus functions and attending health impacts upon the infected. As poster ‘Joe’ made mention of the Washington Post article on younger adults being hit with clotting and induced strokes and heart attacks, caution is the watchword.
Also, for the uninitiated, unread consider that SARS hit the world in 2003 – 17 years ago – and there is no vaccine. Ditto MERS, 2012. And all the talk about 12 to 18 months for a vaccine for which this virus/disease is still greatly unknown is just unbelievable. The virus has only been out in the public for about 6 months (longer as per some researchers have concluded).
So, no to voluntarily being infected with COVID-19. But I’m sure Bill and Melinda Gates will thank you for your sacrifice to their dystopia world vision.
Oh, and the U.N.’s WHO (though not a fan of that Chinese Communist organ) today debunked the immunity passport business by stating that there is no evidence that a person already infected with COVID-19 cannot become infected again. So much for Big Brother Bill’s fantasy island of Dr. Moreau global control.
SARS and MERS are much less infectious diseases. Saying that because they don’t have a vaccine this virus wont get it comparing apples with oranges. As very few people get them there is a much lower incentive to devote large amount of resources to make a vaccine, Both of those viruses combined had less then 10000 cases so this is a completely different ball game
Of course there is no vaccine for SARS1 as the disease disappeared with the virus mutating. There have been some rather hopeful candidates for a vaccine, but who would put money into tests and more importantly who would risk human life for a vaccine that is not needed anymore.
As SARS-CoV-2 is rather unlikely to disappear that will be a different story.
Matthew,
Time and again your posts resonate a lot with my thinking. I’m blessed with good circumstances so travel is right now a wish but not a necessity.
So under the present circumstances I will certainly wait and see how things play out: will there be a vaccine? Will there indeed be such a passport (perhaps only for some countries)? Will this pandemic retreat sufficiently that the risk of catching it will be significantly lower while traveling? Of course if there is a vaccine I’ll jump on it.
But if it came to the dystopian future that only cured people (no vaccine) could travel (something I believe to be very unlikely – and it could well be the other way around, i.e. only people untouched by the virus could travel), then I would definitely consider taking the risk. The world is too wonderful to renounce it for perpetual containment.
> The world is too wonderful to renounce it for perpetual containment.
So true.
Here are 6 reasons an immunity passport is not going to work
https://viewfromthewing.com/6-reasons-an-immunity-passport-isnt-going-to-work-for-travel/
You saw my earlier post on Bastian today? I also see many problems with these so-called immunity passports. But problems did not stop things like TSA or airline bailouts so don’t expect rationality from our leaders…
You are crazy.. just for the sake of travelling for no sensible reason, staying in hotels and quarantining yourself..for what..just to earn miles and points and get status cards!
You know what there some lunatics out there, who are believing your insane idea and will do everything just to travel again..
Well it is your own decision, it is your life your risking not mine. It is the same anyway, if I am reading your tripreport or your orbituary!!
He isn’t doing it just for miles. He has a business that relays in part of him being able to go and take meeting in different parts of the world. Video conferencing can’t replace everything and this isn’t just for vanity.
Thanks you Klavs. Exactly right. I am not talking about traveling for fun.
I don’t get it… in times of corona who has the nerve and money to “retreat to a hotel” for 3 weeks, longer if necessary in order to get the virus and be able to travel again? As you are a Hyatt lover and wouldn’t leave the room (so you could only eat room service) we are talking around $8,000 (assuming 25 days, room rate incl. service and tax $250/night and $60 room service/night). Not to forget being unable to see your family for all that time and most likely getting a severe case of cabin fever from staying in a room that long.
My business is struggling right now, investments have underperformed and I van’t imagine you’re in a very different situation. Why would you be willing to be alone in a hotel room for three weeks, pay $8,000 in the process, only to be “probably immune” and cleared to fly?
You quote a 1-2% death rate. Fine for a theoretical discussion, but in America it’s closer to 5% these days, higher in parts of Europe (and lower in others).
If I was single I might consider it, with kids -and a wife, no way.
I hate the hoaxers as much as anyone, but it’s not 5% in the US.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
If you do the simple math of deaths/cases, it’s about 2%. There are probably deaths not accounted for, as well as cases (recovered) not accounted for. So maybe more in the 1-2% range.
Still – to all the “it’s just a flu!” trolls – piss off. This is likely order of magnitude more deadly than the flu (0.1% death rate) and ~2x as transmissible.
Thanks for the link. If you follow it you will find the following figures* for the US:
970,757 total cases
54,941 deaths
Simple math says that’s a 5.6% death rate, not the 2% you quote. You need a new abacus.
Crucially, scroll down and have a look at the figures for closed cases, in which the patient either recovered or died. Currently there’s a 32% death rate. That’s two orders of magnitude worse than flu.
*All numbers will change by the time anyone clicks this link, as it is updated frequently.
Your point is well taken that there may be some deaths not accounted for, and are almost certainly a good number of people who have recovered but not been counted. But we can only count and compare known cases, whether of flu or coronavirus.
Personally, I don’t like those odds.
Best guess so far from virologists here in Germany would be a case fatality rate of 0.5% to 1% if all asymptomatic and mild infections are included. But who would want to sit with 200 people in a cinema, if he knows one random person is executed in the next hour. And that doesn’t even take into account the overload of the medical infrastructure that will lead in itself to additional deaths (that won’t even be attributed to COVID-19)
It also seems that the long term consequences for people surviving can be pretty severe (permanent lung damage, heart damage etc)
YULtide
If it were that easy… Obviously the number of people with COVID is much higher than the official number. Because only those who are symptomatic get tested. At the same time those who develop symptoms are more likely to die. If you correct the figure to the extent that around 2-3x more people are infected than there are official “cases”, the 1-2% becomes rather accurate.
The number of deaths does not factor in that 2.8 million people die in the US every year from all kinds of causes. So you have to benchmark the so-called “COVID deaths” and “non-COVID deaths” against that number.
Absolutely not, for reasons already mentioned above.
The whole question of immunity is far from resolved, not only in respect of possible duration but also the matter of the various strains of virus in circulation. It’s far from clear that the very low level of antibodies in some ‘recovered’ patients will prevent reinfection at all, let alone for a year. Even the Swedes acknowledge that their strategy is fraught.
Setting aside ethical considerations for a moment, assuming that you could manage to get yourself injected with the virus, having done so deliberately would your medical insurance cover any expenses incurred if things went sideways? E.g., if you had to be admitted to intensive care for, say, 3 weeks, would your insurance kick in, or would they wash their hands of you because you deliberately caused your infection? And how much would that cost?
Putting ethical considerations back on the table, I’m with Paul, above. This is irresponsible.
So I’m tired of this bulls*** as much as anyone, but you (or anyone else contemplating this) really should think about a few things.
One, there’s no guarantee you’d even have real immunity, even if you caught the virus. The reality is, as we’d say back in East Texas, “nobody don’t know nothing” about CV. You might maintain immunity for a year, or a few months, or not at all. So you are potentially putting yourself at risk for nothing. (This is a prime reason I don’t think “Immunity Passports” are workable, but that’s a discussion for another day.)
Two, while at your age, there is a (very) slim possibility that something could go wrong, you should always be prepared for Murphy’s Law. You could end up on a ventilator, completely alone in an ICU ward, with your family prohibited from visiting you. It’s morbid, but you really should think about whether you’re prepared for that possibility. And that if that happens, you’re likely personally on the hook for a six figure hospital bill. I doubt your health insurance is going to cover you if you intentionally sicken yourself.
Three, depending on which study you like, the percentage of people with immunity ranges from 4% (Santa Clara County) to 21% (New York City). The reality is, if that’s the percentage of people worldwide that will be allowed to transact business, your business is screwed no matter what. Hate to be blunt, but that’s the truth. So just like in #1, you’re likely taking a risk that accomplishes nothing.
That’s a long-winded way of saying, no, I wouldn’t do it, and neither should you.
WTF would anyone retreat to a hotel? Be a hero, go volunteer at an NYC or NOLA hospital Corona ward and declare that you don’t need to consume no stinking N95 mask.
That would directly endanger others…no thanks.
Um, the corona _ward_ where infected people are cohorted? jeez
I think that this post is a very logical response to how this pandemic is being addressed across the world. And it reflects one of my greater fears about it.
I am quite concerned that government policies will — inadvertently or no — reward those who have contracted and recovered from the virus, thereby providing incentive for people to actually contract it. And that’s just crazy, I think. But, at this point, I’m not sure that such incentives are something that can even be avoided.
So, while I do on occasion find myself envious of those who have antibodies for the novel coronavirus in their bloodstreams (imagine not having to worry about contracting it!), even as I don’t envy their having had to deal with the disease, no, I would not intentionally have myself infected. No CovID parties for me, please! 🙂
And, yes, I know that there is currently no proof that having antibodies constitutes an immunity. That’s me being optimistic!
I know two people who are 40, in very good physical health, no previous health issues, who got it. One survived but had two weeks of hell, one has been on a ventilator for 4 weeks and MIGHT be recovering, though the doctors all say that he will have lung issues and other health issues for years if he survives. Again, both of these guys were running marathons, not obese, going to the gym, no diabetes, eating well, etc.
I love travel and it’s my favorite thing too but there are still way too many unknowns about this to willingly expose myself to this virus.
The reason public health directives, laws and regulations can override individual freedoms is because this isn’t just about the individual but the potential impact to other people. If you self-infected yourself and you became ill enough to need to go to the hospital (not a rare scenario even at a younger age) you are now putting numerous health care workers at risk of contracting Covid and each with their small chance of permanent disability or dying. This isn’t my body my choice. This is my choice others death. This isn’t I choose to eat unhealthy food, I may kill myself earlier, this is I drive drunk I can kill someone else.