Quote:
Originally Posted by KCChiefsFan88
Or how about people being realistic and recognizing that the “maintain stringent social distancing until there is a vaccine” approach is laughably stupid/naive/unrealistic because there will likely not be an effective/scalable vaccine for a very long time or ever.
If there is no effective/scalable vaccine for ten years are you willing to support a continued social distancing mitigation strategy of no mass crowd events, full capacity restaurants or “non essential” retail establishments?
Explain why you think an effective vaccine that is scalable to provide to millions of people is a more realistic short term strategy than herd immunity.
|
Because every virus has a basic reproduction number and if you can lower than number to less than one through mitigation efforts, it will die out. If you do that, you don't need to reach herd immunity nor do you need a vaccine.
You put out the main fire through the initial measures, develop a system of testing and contact tracing, and slowly reopen with the flexibility to quickly address outbreaks thereafter while your newer distancing measures keep the reproduction number low enough to ensure the virus decreases in prevalence.
__________________
"When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read 'all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and Catholics.' When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty – to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy.”--Abraham Lincoln
|