6 ms·

I mean, what is the alternative? We spend the rest of our lives hiding in our houses? He is right - at some point we will collectively decide COVID is a risk wo

• hef19898 5y ago
  Vaccination. Once herd immunity is reached, and maybe maintained by regular booster shots, the risk of returning to normal life is negligable. And that's why this whole conspiracy nonsense around vaccines is so dangerous.
  • 0-_-0 5y ago
    The flu vaccine didn't stop the flu, it mutates faster than vaccines can keep up. You can make the argument [0] that vaccinating during a pandemic (during which new variants arise faster) creates evolutionary pressures that favor variants resistant to vaccines, increasing the chance that virus mutation can get ahead of vaccine development. (Which is not to say we should stop depoying vaccines of course) [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PgIUDn__WU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PgIUDn__WU
    • hef19898 5y ago
      Oh, sure. That's why yearly flu shots are a mix against the most likely flu strains for the given flu season. For Covid, I am not aware of a particular mutation defeating the existing vaccines. Besides the Indian one, which seems to cope better with a population that is to large extent vaccinated. And even that variant is then only dangerous for those not vaccinated. Short version: Any vaccine is better then no vaccine.
    • oddmiral 5y ago
      We can use face masks, which automagically produce vaccines (occulants) by killing viruses and then allowing us to ingale dead viruses, to alert immune system. I use this for myself. It's easy to make such mask at home for flu and SARS viruses, which means "no profit" for VC's. I tried to spread information about such masks dozens of times in my country with zero effect.
  • xyzzy123 5y ago
    I don't know about conspiracy, but the general population hasn't needed constant vaccination before. Maybe it's bad, maybe it's good and I suppose it's not that different than seasonal flu shots... but immunity by subscription still feels new to me. If we take it to the logical limit, does that look like family subscriptions to McAfee mRNA edition? A flu is sequenced in London and x weeks later the vaccination is included in my quarterly update package? EDIT: I'm getting downvoted a lot and I haven't even started on future doctor's office mRNA printers yet! Regulated to heck, partly for security reasons, vendor locked consumables and they use proprietary encryption. They have to jailbreak them in sanctioned countries and enterprising hackers work to decrypt the updates. You wouldn't pirate a vaccine! Would you?
    • ahevia 5y ago
      Constant vaccination? Are we all collectively forgetting all the vaccines we received as children...? The fact we’ve eradicated most childhood viruses because we vaccinated the general population? None of this is new. Just like the recommended seasonal flu vaccine. Most folks won’t bother to get their seasonal covid vaccine. If you were in that group before. Your life hasn’t changed.
      • xyzzy123 5y ago
        I'm pro vaxx! If covid is more severe than the flu yet requires a similar vaccination cycle (nobody knows yet!) that does seem like a major change to me. Childhood and travel vaccinations are once-offs and seasonal flu vaccination is a good idea but not a big deal for most.
        • irishsultan 5y ago
          You say that nobody knows whether covid will require a similar vaccination cycle to the flu, but that seems overly pessimistic. We have a fairly good idea how fast covid mutates and how fast the flu mutates and they are not in the same league, so it's very unlikely we would need a similar schedule.
• 0-_-0 5y ago
  My issue is with the article calling that scenario "the end".
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • kypro 5y ago
    You're misrepresenting what OP is saying. > The flu "epidemic" never ended. The common cold epidemic never ended. It's almost like you didn't read the article because the point was made very clear that the "epidemic" does end when it transitions to something "endemic". Most people wouldn't regard the common cold as an epidemic as you suggest it is. You're correct that we still live with it, but that doesn't make it an epidemic. As daily deaths continue falling at some point people will stop seeing COVID-19 as an epidemic but something that's endemic and treat it more like seasonal flu. It's not the eradication of the virus that marks the end of a epidemic, but it's declining severity and our changing approach to the virus.
    • 0-_-0 5y ago
      You're misrepresenting what I'm saying. I put "epidemic" in quote marks for the reason you suggest. The argument that an epidemic ends when people get used to it is in itself nonsense. You need declining severity to an acceptable baseline too, and there's no guarantee that will happen with COVID. I mean you wouldn't replace a vaccination campaign with a "just get used to it" campaign, right? Although many people have actually tried to suggest that now that I think about it...
• idnefju 5y ago
  Stopping world travel would’ve worked it out better. Like New Zealand and Australia. Suppression strategy with vaccines would have a solid effect.
  • logicchains 5y ago
    Here's an interesting geological fact about New Zealand and Australia: they're both islands! Believe it or not, it's much easier to control population flow into an island, than it is over a land border.
    • throwaway3699 5y ago
      Why is it hard to police a land border? Cameras and weapons are effective deterrents.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    • geogra4 5y ago
      The uk is an Island too and it didn't seem to help them
      • thinkingemote 5y ago
        The idea is that an island helps with closing borders. The borders have been and are open in the UK.
      • SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
        It could have helped the UK, but you have to make use of it. If "it's much easier to control population flow into an island" then you still have to step up and control it. The UK government did not even show interest in doing that. The UK government mismanaged their borders, and most other aspects of the pandemic; notable exception being vaccination.
        • makomk 5y ago
• bobthechef 5y ago
  Aye. Health and avoiding death aren't the goal of living. They are needed to live to some extent, but they're not the reason for living. Those disproportionately obsessed with self-preservation fail to live. There are more important things. And people seem to forget the other part: your death will come for you eventually so it's not as if by avoiding COVID you've avoided a car accident. Besides, the danger of COVID has been vastly exaggerated, but irrational and disproportionate fear has gripped the brains of a lot of people. People (typically white collar) also forget the deaths and health effects of the lockdown itself.
  • rorykoehler 5y ago
    I don’t think most people being cautious are scared of Covid-19. I know I’m not but I’m still not visiting my parents until they’re fully vaccinated because I don’t want to spread it and I don’t want to kill my parents who are both in a much higher risk group. I’m not remotely scared of Covid-19 now that we have more data though.
  • r0b05 5y ago
    So what is the goal of living then Bob?
    • loveistheanswer 5y ago
      Thats a subjective question. My answer: to live life fully with what little time we have. Memento mori.
      • r0b05 5y ago
        It is subjective and I do believe love is the answer.
  • amanaplanacanal 5y ago
    Avoiding death may not be the goal of living, but it certainly is a prerequisite.
• homero 5y ago
  There was never a lockdown vs no lockdown. The entire point was to slow it down temporarily until we get treatments, vaccines and hospital capacity. We won't need quarantines any more if it stays slow enough. The biggest problem last year was no treatments and no hospital beds.
• deegles 5y ago
  The alternative was to lock down properly for a few weeks early on and prevent it from becoming endemic, but that cat is out of the solar system at this point.
  • tartoran 5y ago
    Its too late for that and as it turns out it’s very hard to accomplsh. If a small group doesn’t comply they can re-spread it when the lockdown is over or eases
  • rhino369 5y ago
    You'd also have to make sure no new cases were imported (which means closed borders--i.e. troops on the ground not just canceling flights), AND you'd have to eliminate every internal case. It took Melbourne like 3 months to eliminate all cases. Far more than a "few weeks." It would take the sort of effort (for the US or EU) only possible with total hindsight. But if Trump tried to seal our borders with force in Jan 2020, there is no way Democrats would have accepted it. They'd call it rationalization for an attack on immigration.
    • TMWNN 5y ago
      >It would take the sort of effort (for the US or EU) only possible with total hindsight. But if Trump tried to seal our borders with force in Jan 2020, there is no way Democrats would have accepted it. They'd call it rationalization for an attack on immigration. Much worse than that. Remember, Trump's (first) impeachment by the House had occurred in December 2019. He was not acquitted in the Senate until early February. Patient Zero for the US is believed to have entered on January 15. Had Trump on January 14 announced a total and complete shutdown of the US border, Democrats and 95% of mass media would immediately have denounced it as Trump preparing a coup to seize total power, using the ridiculous pretext of a disease that had had zero impact on the US (and was racist to ascribe in any way to China).