3 ms·
But the key issue is, _who gets it first_. If older people get it first, you get what happened in New York and New Jersey. If young people get it first and you
by m0zg 6y ago
But the key issue is, _who gets it first_. If older people get it first, you get what happened in New York and New Jersey. If young people get it first and you effectively isolate the old, then the number of cases doesn't matter - younger people aren't dying from C19. Unfortunately Sweden failed to protect their elderly - hence the body count. But they couldn't really do anything else, since they treat their constitution seriously, and it does not allow the restriction of freedoms.
There is no guarantee whatsoever that there _will_ be an effective and safe vaccine. There is no vaccine for any other coronavirus, and it's not for the lack of trying.
- pedrocr 6y agoWe don't have a guarantee of a vaccine but we've already gotten better at both treating the disease and at defending ourselves from it. People and businesses didn't change their habits overnight. They're much more prepared now than before because of that extra time. And again, dying later rather than sooner is a benefit in itself. Sweden has had 4000 extra people die early in the pandemic directly related to the strategy they chose. Treating that as "you just wait and see if it doesn't pay out in the end" is not an argument for why their strategy is better. And it's not true that there was any constitutional problem with doing lockdowns as they did do them. Just less because that's the strategy they chose.