4 ms·
Not really. The IFR has trended downwards fairly dramatically over time - it's the rapidity and novelty of the spread which is driving deaths in an extremely (a
by giantDinosaur 6y ago
Not really. The IFR has trended downwards fairly dramatically over time - it's the rapidity and novelty of the spread which is driving deaths in an extremely (and I don't use that word lightly, it is extreme) stratified by age manner.
If the vaccine doesn't work, you'd seriously never consider going back to normal ever, in your entire lifetime? That's absurd.
It's rather concerning that people like you are pinning all your hopes on a vaccine. I don't know about you, but at some point living a life with such restrictions and a complete halt or threat to halt many of the things that make life interesting becomes a trade-off that's not worth making. If a vaccine does not work to protect the elderly particularly well, would you seriously be willing to close international borders for the next 5-10 years, for example? Even worse, since there's zero endpoint to anything if you are unwilling to tolerate life as normal without a vaccine, why not just extend all restrictions indefinitely?
- adrianN 6y agoChances are pretty good that at least one of the vaccines we currently have under development will work decently well. Probably well enough to reduce the risk to be comparable with Influenza. I don't think discussions about a vaccine-free world are particularly productive right now.
- giantDinosaur 6y agoWhile I hope that's true, it's never a good idea to plan exclusively for the best case scenario. There's a lot riding on your 'probably' when it's considered by many to be the only viable way forward.
- adrianN 6y agoI don't see any benefit in discussing what to do without a vaccine right now. There is no time pressure. We'll have plenty of time to figure things out if the vaccines turn out not to work.
- giantDinosaur 6y agoAre you saying that we should wait to see if we have a vaccine/one that is effective enough and only then if it does not go to plan start planning for the alternative case? I'm not sure I have it right. If that's the case, I couldn't disagree more from a disaster/public health/societal planning perspective. If we do that, we'll always be behind.