How is herd immunity viable? The policy literally would translate to "let the careless infect themselves, and with enough of them infected the virus would go aw

How is herd immunity viable? The policy literally would translate to "let the careless infect themselves, and with enough of them infected the virus would go away." So if we were all careful, herd immunity would be delayed. And if the careless are out and about, the vulnerable become especially vulnerable in public, and anyone who might come in contact with someone vulnerable, and anyone who didn't know they were vulnerable. And we'd all suffer from the prolonged effects of the disease which may include breathing issues and even mental health issues. If herd immunity truly was viable it should be made policy and the answer would be to deliberately infect everyone deemed "safe" and get it over with. Yet the argument is "for mental health" or "for the economy" and never "because it's the right path". No one is 100% "safe" and deliberate infection is unethical even in a medical academic context. Until these two facts change, herd immunity is out of the picture, and so should be these doctors. I'd be interested to know if these doctors were ever infected and if not willing to infect themselves. Otherwise, they're putting themselves in a special class as non-participating beneficiaries only.