Acharya Prashant responds to a question about the coronavirus, contrasting his warnings to improve and change with the popular notion of relying on herd immunity. He addresses the query on two levels: spiritual and scientific. On the spiritual level, he questions the tendency of the mind that gives rise to such a question, suggesting it stems from a desire to avoid the effort of change and to continue with old, familiar ways of life. He points out that those who are young and feel invincible are particularly drawn to the idea of herd immunity as it absolves them of the responsibility to be careful. On the scientific level, Acharya Prashant explains that herd immunity, or social immunity, is when a large portion of a community gets infected and develops antibodies, thereby protecting the rest. However, he argues that the proponents of this idea are often those with vested interests in maintaining the old system. He warns that attempting to achieve herd immunity quickly would be catastrophic, leading to an overwhelming number of deaths that would collapse the healthcare system, law and order, and the entire social fabric. He illustrates this by calculating that if 4% infection in the US has caused 100,000 deaths, reaching the 70% threshold for herd immunity would mean millions of deaths in India. He refutes the idea that Indians have superior immunity by citing the Spanish Flu of 1918, during which India suffered the most casualties globally. He highlights that India has the world's largest malnourished population, along with high rates of hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, and a significant number of HIV-positive individuals, all of which increase vulnerability. Furthermore, he explains that the immunity gained from this virus may not be long-lasting, and the virus itself mutates, making immunity to one strain potentially ineffective against another. He also contrasts the social structures, noting that unlike in countries like Sweden where the elderly can be isolated in care homes, in India, multiple generations live together. This means a young person getting infected will inevitably endanger the elderly in their own household. Acharya Prashant concludes that the old world is not coming back, and waiting for it is a fatal delusion. This crisis is an opportunity to innovate and find new ways of living and working. Herd immunity should be allowed to develop slowly over a year or two, not rushed. Until then, the disaster must be managed through measures like staggered lockdowns and, most importantly, by using our intelligence and effort to create a new reality and new ways of life.