4 ms·
Let’s suppose we won’t hit 100% vaccination rates, for whatever reason. Are we doing this lockdown thing forever, then?
by mwint 5y ago
Let’s suppose we won’t hit 100% vaccination rates, for whatever reason. Are we doing this lockdown thing forever, then?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- pfg 5y agoWe'll have to do it as long as there's a risk that the healthcare system would get overloaded to a degree that significantly affects the population as a whole, due to delayed treatment of things like cancer or ICU beds not being available in the event of a medical emergency. Beyond that, a lockdown is not the only non-pharmaceutical intervention that's available to us. It's just that many governments have failed to use other tools at the right time and in a way that's actually effective, often only implementing them right before the peak of a wave when it's way too late.
- giarc 5y agoNo, most definitely not. Vaccinated individuals are hospitalized less, are intubated less, die less, quite simply, they use up our healthcare system less. Lockdowns are in essence a way of preserving that limited resource (hospital beds). Where I live, in Alberta, we had a really bad 4th wave in September/October. Prior to that we were at ~75% vaccination rate in those over 18. The wave almost killed our healthcare system and it was primarily unvaccinated individuals using the beds. Had we been at 100% vaccination rate, we most definitely wouldn't have been in the same position.