Two problems with this:
- even if you accept that every country will eventually achieve herd immunity, the time that this could take matters a lot. Thursday's messaging from HMG sounded like we could do this in the next few months in order to avoid a 2nd peak next winter. This is quite different from a country achieving herd immunity over several years with a relatively steady and mostly controlled number of critical cases
- we don't know if every country will eventually achieve herd immunity. The WHO has said that this virus is unique in being highly contagious and at the same being possible (so far!) to almost stop it (slow it significantly) in several countries.
Look at Singapore or Hong Kong: they are both very densely populated, they had a relatively high number of infections early on and yet they have reduced the spread significantly to a very slow drip. They didn't even close their borders, they used social distancing, meticulous testing and contact tracing and the majority of the workforce worked from home for a time.
Communication to the public has been excellent too. for example in Singapore, publicly available charts and maps details patients' ages, nationalities, length of hospitalisation, where they live, their connections to one another etc. Contrast this to our approach, where the govt even said yesterday that we'll only be testing the seriously ill in hospitals. The WHO keeps saying that every country should track and test every case!
You could argue that it's all hopeless and one day it will spread all over Singapore, but I am not sure at all. I would keep an open mind about what our govt and (some of?) our scientists are saying. Yes, we have great scientists and experts, but they won't always be right and several other countries have great experts too. We don't even know if our approach is entirely based on science, there is no proper transparency.
We could be sleepwalking into a major disaster and this is not Brexit, it would cost many lives.
Originally Posted by: xioni2