2 ms·
I think this seems reasonable. The initial hope (well, at least my initial hope) was that the vaccine would significantly reduce transmission to the point at wh
by jonnycomputer 3y ago
I think this seems reasonable. The initial hope (well, at least my initial hope) was that the vaccine would significantly reduce transmission to the point at which the virus might be extirpated; but we were quickly disabused of that notion. Nonetheless, once people were vaccinated, they stopped wearing masks or staying home, and so the virus spread more freely. That said, other things are responsible for the huge resurgence in the virus after the first wave. First and foremostly, the virus mutated to evade both the original vaccine and to just become more transmissible. But it also became less deadly, and without morgues filling up like they did in the first wave, and vaccines readily available, and a lot of people with acquired immunity through infection, people made the largely rational decision to get on with their lives. Of course, for some people particularly vulnerable, this was not a good thing, but then, again, the isolation was particularly horrific for a lot of people (like my aunt stuck in a convalescent home, did not see family for almost a year, and then afterwards, only very sporadically, until a couple of days before she died in the ER)