3 ms·

it's been obvious since march of last year that this was the inevitable outcome of covid, yet we've spent nearly two years hand-wringing and fearmongering over

it's been obvious since march of last year that this was the inevitable outcome of covid, yet we've spent nearly two years hand-wringing and fearmongering over it. it's the novelty of the virus combined with the general unpreparedness of our immune systems (obesity, sickness of all sorts, and age correlate with lowered immune preparedness) that's created this wave of initial severity as the virus works it's way to a steady-state similar to other coronaviruses. most people had, and still have, very little idea about how these things work, yet grandstand and moralize on about ineffective but distruptive remediations like masks and lockdowns that they hear about via propagandized media. even vaccines need only be seriously considered by the aforementioned immune-deficient (obese, elderly, etc.), not everyone (this article providing that evidence for children specifically).

bjoli 5y ago
I think it has been pretty clear for a very long time that covid is something we will all get, and that it might even become something bot unlike the seasonal flu. The message has to my ears been "less contact = less infection = better access to healthcare for those who really need it". What would you suggest instead? I am all for discussing the losses contra gains of lockdowns, but I dont think any options have sounded much better.
- clairity 5y ago
  frankly, there wasn't a whole lot we could do to alter the trajectory we were on. even a month(s)-long, wuhan-style lockdown could only temporarily arrest infection rates, unless the whole world literally did it together. even then, reintroduction via animal reservoirs would be a significant threat. that's what we should have come to grips with early on, accepting that we are not the masters of even our own little earth out of the vast universe. regarding "= better access to healthcare for those who really need it", that was entirely a political and economic choice to focus primarily on profit over critical care services and availability (not just the past 2 years, but decades). even so, hospitals aren't overflowing, as we keep hearing on the news, except in short-lived, isolated cases. 'exponential growth' was mediopolitical fearmongering, not mathematically sound modeling. if anything, that our limited hospital capacity has weathered the storm gives more hope, not less. the biggest mistake we (that is, our various levels of government) made was not hyperfocusing on the immune deficient, and only the immune deficient (obese, chronically ill, elderly, etc.). for instance, we should have locked down care facilities immediately (along with care staff, perhaps 2 weeks on, 1 week off, 1 week quarantine, with generous benefits/pay). we should have enouraged physical fitness nine ways to sunday (more bikes, less cars!). beyond that, give people timely and accurate information (as in, if it's uncertain, tell people how uncertain), encourage (don't mandate) pro-social (not self-righteous) behavior, and then ride it out. people already modulate their behavior (e.g., distancing, socializing) based on prevailing local conditions, so mask mandates and (theatrical) lockdowns really have had very marginal (and possibly no) effect on infections, hospitalizations, and death. certainly don't shut down gyms, parks, restaurants, small businesses, offices, and the like. perhaps consider limiting venues that encourage hypersocial behavior (i.e., partying), like bars and clubs. again, we already modulate our behavior, so shutdowns likely had no or marginally small effect. once vaccines were emergency-approved, encourage the immune deficient to take them, and allow the risk-averse to take them as well. don't mandate them for anyone, since they're non-sterilizing (and mRNA tech is new). with that, we'd probably be right around where we are now, but without all the stress, fear, anger, and divisiveness.

bjoli 5y ago

I think it has been pretty clear for a very long time that covid is something we will all get, and that it might even become something bot unlike the seasonal flu. The message has to my ears been "less contact = less infection = better access to healthcare for those who really need it". What would you suggest instead? I am all for discussing the losses contra gains of lockdowns, but I dont think any options have sounded much better.

clairity 5y ago
frankly, there wasn't a whole lot we could do to alter the trajectory we were on. even a month(s)-long, wuhan-style lockdown could only temporarily arrest infection rates, unless the whole world literally did it together. even then, reintroduction via animal reservoirs would be a significant threat. that's what we should have come to grips with early on, accepting that we are not the masters of even our own little earth out of the vast universe. regarding "= better access to healthcare for those who really need it", that was entirely a political and economic choice to focus primarily on profit over critical care services and availability (not just the past 2 years, but decades). even so, hospitals aren't overflowing, as we keep hearing on the news, except in short-lived, isolated cases. 'exponential growth' was mediopolitical fearmongering, not mathematically sound modeling. if anything, that our limited hospital capacity has weathered the storm gives more hope, not less. the biggest mistake we (that is, our various levels of government) made was not hyperfocusing on the immune deficient, and only the immune deficient (obese, chronically ill, elderly, etc.). for instance, we should have locked down care facilities immediately (along with care staff, perhaps 2 weeks on, 1 week off, 1 week quarantine, with generous benefits/pay). we should have enouraged physical fitness nine ways to sunday (more bikes, less cars!). beyond that, give people timely and accurate information (as in, if it's uncertain, tell people how uncertain), encourage (don't mandate) pro-social (not self-righteous) behavior, and then ride it out. people already modulate their behavior (e.g., distancing, socializing) based on prevailing local conditions, so mask mandates and (theatrical) lockdowns really have had very marginal (and possibly no) effect on infections, hospitalizations, and death. certainly don't shut down gyms, parks, restaurants, small businesses, offices, and the like. perhaps consider limiting venues that encourage hypersocial behavior (i.e., partying), like bars and clubs. again, we already modulate our behavior, so shutdowns likely had no or marginally small effect. once vaccines were emergency-approved, encourage the immune deficient to take them, and allow the risk-averse to take them as well. don't mandate them for anyone, since they're non-sterilizing (and mRNA tech is new). with that, we'd probably be right around where we are now, but without all the stress, fear, anger, and divisiveness.