3 ms·
> In this case, I'm flabbergasted anyone ever thought that lockdowns alone would eliminate the disease, or that elimination was the goal of lockdowns. Are eithe
by com2kid 3y ago
> In this case, I'm flabbergasted anyone ever thought that lockdowns alone would eliminate the disease, or that elimination was the goal of lockdowns. Are either of these common beliefs?
Quarantines and lockdowns work really well for less communicable diseases. Given we didn't know how communicable COVID was early on, or that the absurdly easy to spread omicron variant would come along, assuming proper lockdowns could contain COVID wasn't unreasonable.
Also, prior to omicron, some countries (Vietnam, China are the two I know of) did manage to completely stop COVID with targeted lockdowns and quarantines.
- justrealist 3y agoWhat China was doing before Omicron was still unsustainable. It was crushing exports and demographics.
- _delirium 3y ago> work really well for less communicable diseases In particular, SARS was successfully contained and then eliminated using similar measures in 2002–2004, so it was not totally absurd to think in the initial phases that it might work again for SARS 2.
- mrtesthah 3y ago>Also, prior to omicron, some countries (Vietnam, China are the two I know of) did manage to completely stop COVID with targeted lockdowns and quarantines. Ironically Omicron was exactly one such "cryptic lineage" that effectively descended from alpha and incubated in a presumed immuno-compromised and/or AIDS patient in South Africa while delta was already dominant. So any potential for global elimination was already foiled by exactly the sort of thing discussed in the article.