Lockdowns are an incredibly fragile “solution”. It’s a multi agent problem with lots of probabilities. All lockdowns allow some “essential workers” to not lockd

Lockdowns are an incredibly fragile “solution”. It’s a multi agent problem with lots of probabilities. All lockdowns allow some “essential workers” to not lockdown. You could have only 2% of workers deemed essential—and there is no general rule since all geographies are different and in situations like the exact details matter—and have the exact same long term outcomes as no lock down at all. It’s fun to run multi agent simulations and see how easy it is to screw up any centralized plan through the injection of little probabilitities. In my opinion anything that does not allow people to exercise conditional probability at the last mile is bound to have negative expected value. Things that I do think make a difference: better airflow, more outdoor time, less obesity, better testing, a public equipped with better tools to diagnose and treat conditions at home, vaccines, better data infra and publishing of medical data, etc. Dumb blanket mandates that are applied across a population are stupid.