Kel Varnsen wrote:Slowdown is the only viable long term strategy, and we have to just hope tracking and isolation of infected cases can replace some of the more draconian social isolating measures.
Good read Kel. This is basically the same view that the existing science and research in the field suggests too as near as I can tell. The epidemiologists talked about it on tv this evening: how the goal of every government is essentially to slow the spread rate in order to avoid exhausting their healthcare systems and better protect risk groups in society.
I think the only reason it might seem controversial is because people don't understand concepts like herd immunity, like the public debate in the UK has shown. It's not a goal, and it has never been a goal for anyone, it's just an inescapable conclusion. It's the only way a viral disease like this will disappear. Which is why war metaphors miss the mark, because we're not under war, we're under siege. There seems to be a public view that the world can still stop the coronavirus, but the only thing that anyone can do until there's either a vaccine or a naturally achieved herd immunity is to slow the spread. It's impossible to get rid of the virus through lockdowns and aggressive testing. Those are just control measures, much like social distancing, staying home when you feel sick, etc. If any government claims differently then they're not being transparent and honest with people.
