Replies

Gee:

Interim Operational Considerations for Implementing the Shielding Approach to Prevent COVID-19 Infections in Humanitarian Settings
CDC ^ | 7/26/2020
Posted on 8/7/2021, 7:17:37 AM by logi_cal869

“This document presents considerations from the perspective of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) for implementing the shielding approach in humanitarian settings as outlined in guidance documents focused on camps, displaced populations and low-resource settings.1,2 This approach has never been documented and has raised questions and concerns among humanitarian partners who support response activities in these settings. The purpose of this document is to highlight potential implementation challenges of the shielding approach from CDC’s perspective and guide thinking around implementation in the absence of empirical data. Considerations are based on current evidence known about the transmission and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and may need to be revised as more information becomes available.”

(Excerpt) Read more at cdc.gov ...

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3982930/posts

Yes, old document by date, but I’ve never seen citation or discussion of this here or anywhere else until today.
“Segmentation & Shielding” (”S&S”) is the label applied by the UK to such an approach (and outlined in one of the references, #25), ironically the very approach the intelligent among us asserted the CDC should have adopted to protect the vulnerable in this country while the rest of us went about our lives in overwhelmingly normal fashion.

Clearly that was not the method the CDC adopted. Though this document is not directed at domestic population in the US, it is telling that the CDC would expound on the method (take note of the language used throughout the document),

“High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or “green zones” established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level depending on the context and setting.1,2 “

There are a number of facets to this ‘shielding approach’ and its corollaries which merit attention, including,

“Consideration: Plan for an extended duration of implementation time, at least 6 months.

Explanation: The shielding approach proposes that green zones be maintained until one of the following circumstances arises: (i) sufficient hospitalization capacity is established; (ii) effective vaccine or therapeutic options become widely available; or (iii) the COVID-19 epidemic affecting the population subsides.”

In addition,

“Vaccine trials are underway, but with no definite timeline. Reaching the suppression phase where the epidemic subsides can take several months and cases may resurge in a second or even third wave. Herd immunity (the depletion of susceptible people) for COVID-19 has not been demonstrated to date. It is also unclear if an infected person develops immunity and the duration of potential immunity is unknown. Thus, contingency plans to account for a possibly extended operational timeline are critical.”

Posting for discussion/analysis (as opposed to conspiracy theory) in consideration of what most intelligent FReepers agree is the result of this >yearlong ‘dry run’ for protocols to be implemented for the next ‘virus crisis’.

1 posted on 8/7/2021, 7:17:37 AM by logi_cal869

No replies. FR musta gone dark yesterday, huh? /s