6 ms·

What will end the pandemic then? You can put the blame on people who don't want to get vaccinated, but looking at the countries that have high % vaccinated, it

What will end the pandemic then? You can put the blame on people who don't want to get vaccinated, but looking at the countries that have high % vaccinated, it doesn't look like it's the solution either. It's just moving goalposts. First it was "let's vaccinate the elderly and we can reopen", then "let's vaccinate most people and then we can reopen", now it's "let's vaccinate everyone, children included and then we can reopen". I wonder what the next goalpost will be. A new variant like with Delta? "Yeah, those vaccines were good for Delta, but now with Omega variant we have to shut down to wait for a new vaccine". If you want to live few more years in fear, you are free to do that. Otherwise, let people live their lives. For many people, the pandemic only exists on TV and in the government. Stop fearmongering every day about "rising number of cases" and we can go back to normal.

LurkingPenguin 5y ago
I think you're a bit quick on the trigger there. If I want to live a few more years in fear? I've probably traveled to more countries during the pandemic than 99.999% of the people on the planet. Let people live their lives? Did I miss the part where I suggested people can't? I simply stated: > It's clear that vaccines are not going to "end the pandemic". "End the pandemic" is in quotes for a reason. It's obvious that this virus is going to be endemic, if it isn't close to already. Given time, it will almost certainly become another cold-causing coronavirus. None of this means that having prophylactic antivirals is a bad thing, especially right now for high-risk individuals who have been vaccinated but are more likely to have bad breakthrough infections. If anything, having more treatment options available will make it harder to justify restrictions that negatively impact the lives of the majority who are at lower risk to begin with.
jjeaff 5y ago
You might want to poke your head out from behind your computer screen. Most of the world has been fully opened, albeit in some places with masks required, for months now.
- skocznymroczny 5y ago
  What places have fully opened? I don't know of any. My definition of fully opened is no masks, no vaccine passports and no test/quarantine required to enter the country. I don't know of any country that fits even half of these criteria at the moment.
  - rsynnott 5y ago
    > My definition of fully opened is no masks, Many countries have reduced mask requirements to "just on public transport, in shops, in hospitals etc". You should expect some of those rump restrictions to hang around for years. > no vaccine passports and no test/quarantine required to enter the country. Realistically, international travel to most places is probably going to require a vaccine passport or else a test for the next few years. Other uses of vaccine passports (restaurants and bars etc) are likely to be more time-limited, and many places are already phasing them out. However, beyond those items, many countries are fully opened or will be soon. (Obviously, this is all based on current circumstance; if tomorrow a vaccine which gives 99% sterilising immunity comes out, 7 billion doses are rapidly manufactured, distributed and administered, all of this goes away. But that's very much the hopelessly optimistic outcome...)
  - chki 5y ago
    Sorry, but now who's the one shifting the goalposts? Masks on public transport or vaccine requirements for entering another country are very small things that can have a big effect on the virus. It's unreasonable to demand a "pure" response to the virus.
  - jjeaff 5y ago
    I won't consider us fully open until all public spaces allow me to go there fully naked! I don't think many people would consider having to wear a mask to an event/store to mean that the event/store is closed.
pjc50 5y ago
This has been really badly communicated because so many countries are operating reactively. It's been "we need to get the rollout going as fast as possible because deaths are over a thousand a day" rather than looking to the future. The new status quo seems to be determining what "politically acceptable death levels" are. > For many people, the pandemic only exists on TV and in the government You're lucky. For many people, it exists in the form of a death of someone they knew. And for more it exists in the form of a chronic condition.

LurkingPenguin 5y ago

I think you're a bit quick on the trigger there. If I want to live a few more years in fear? I've probably traveled to more countries during the pandemic than 99.999% of the people on the planet. Let people live their lives? Did I miss the part where I suggested people can't? I simply stated: > It's clear that vaccines are not going to "end the pandemic". "End the pandemic" is in quotes for a reason. It's obvious that this virus is going to be endemic, if it isn't close to already. Given time, it will almost certainly become another cold-causing coronavirus. None of this means that having prophylactic antivirals is a bad thing, especially right now for high-risk individuals who have been vaccinated but are more likely to have bad breakthrough infections. If anything, having more treatment options available will make it harder to justify restrictions that negatively impact the lives of the majority who are at lower risk to begin with.

jjeaff 5y ago

You might want to poke your head out from behind your computer screen. Most of the world has been fully opened, albeit in some places with masks required, for months now.

skocznymroczny 5y ago
What places have fully opened? I don't know of any. My definition of fully opened is no masks, no vaccine passports and no test/quarantine required to enter the country. I don't know of any country that fits even half of these criteria at the moment.
- rsynnott 5y ago
  > My definition of fully opened is no masks, Many countries have reduced mask requirements to "just on public transport, in shops, in hospitals etc". You should expect some of those rump restrictions to hang around for years. > no vaccine passports and no test/quarantine required to enter the country. Realistically, international travel to most places is probably going to require a vaccine passport or else a test for the next few years. Other uses of vaccine passports (restaurants and bars etc) are likely to be more time-limited, and many places are already phasing them out. However, beyond those items, many countries are fully opened or will be soon. (Obviously, this is all based on current circumstance; if tomorrow a vaccine which gives 99% sterilising immunity comes out, 7 billion doses are rapidly manufactured, distributed and administered, all of this goes away. But that's very much the hopelessly optimistic outcome...)
- chki 5y ago
  Sorry, but now who's the one shifting the goalposts? Masks on public transport or vaccine requirements for entering another country are very small things that can have a big effect on the virus. It's unreasonable to demand a "pure" response to the virus.
- jjeaff 5y ago
  I won't consider us fully open until all public spaces allow me to go there fully naked! I don't think many people would consider having to wear a mask to an event/store to mean that the event/store is closed.

pjc50 5y ago

This has been really badly communicated because so many countries are operating reactively. It's been "we need to get the rollout going as fast as possible because deaths are over a thousand a day" rather than looking to the future. The new status quo seems to be determining what "politically acceptable death levels" are. > For many people, the pandemic only exists on TV and in the government You're lucky. For many people, it exists in the form of a death of someone they knew. And for more it exists in the form of a chronic condition.