Well, what we do know is that it’s primarily institutional. The elderly, and especially those in nursing homes, and their care givers, as well as hospitals are the main areas that needed a vax developed.
For most of the rest of the healthy population, the concern realistically isn’t more than we should have over an especially strong flu season.
In other words, a drastic exaggeration and fear mongering. The world destroyed their economic system and really -that wasn’t necessary. In fact the lockdowns, by design were bound to fail.
If you are going to have a quarantine, it can’t be half-baked. Stay home, but it’s ok to go to Walmart - just don’t go to church. That ain’t the way it works.
A true quarantine means no one in or out. The approach that the Front Line Doctors and others took, to treat their patients and reduce hospitalizations turned out to be not only the best ethical choice, but also the most effective way to “flatten the curve”. JMHO. YMMV.
That's true. But one country that didn't lock down, Sweden. had the same drop in their economy 2nd quarter last year as we did (8% absolute, 32% annualized). Their mortality outcome was just as bad as ours. Sweden did worse in every economic and health measurement than Denmark, Finland, and Norway. In fact 10 times worse than Norway in per capita mortality and economic contraction, Simply put, the people were scared and stayed home and caught it anway.
Yes, you put your finger on it: fear mongering. But lockdowns, while part of the fear mongering elsewhere, were not the deciding factor anywhere. Nor were border controls (see Easten Europe that got pummeled anyway six months later), or universal tracking (anti-privacy). In fact, nothing worked. You simply have to take your medicine: 0.2% of your entire population dies or you get a lot of people vaccinated or a combination.
People might be tempted to point to Taiwan or Vietnam, with almost complete surveillance and tracking in homogenous obedient cultures. But their time is coming too, just more slowly.