I think epidemiologists shoot themselves in the foot as a profession when they started talking about herd immunity, which is the one situation we are trying to

I think epidemiologists shoot themselves in the foot as a profession when they started talking about herd immunity, which is the one situation we are trying to to avoid in infections, and really the entire reason their profession exists. We could reach herd immunities without them but the toll is dramatic and untenable. Politicians mistook the term to mean some kind of solution and made it a buzzword, but it really is the worst solution. Swedens situation is not the worst in the world, but they really did not win much with their "strategy" either. Talk of "reaching herd immunity in a few months" was irresponsible and heavily fatalistic. As a country with a big public sector they could easily have followed a slightly more conservative approach. An "initial freeze, then plan accordingly" would be a more rational way to go. It was also irrational to assume that their economy can "rebound faster" when most of the rest world is shut down. Epidemiology did not wear its best suit in this pandemic, and will lose a lot of respect in the eyes of many[1]. Scientists have a duty to inform people when their results are being misused or misinterpreted 1. https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/04/what-does-this-economist-think-of-epidemiology.html https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/04/wh...