We are still in the thick of it. We didn’t nip COVID in the bud. Some believe it’s not possible and was never possible to stop this or any viral contagion. I disagree, but a lot hinges on what we mean by “possible”. Save that for a future essay. In any event, it was clear in mid-2020 that governments were banking on a vaccine to solve the problem. Not only that, but it is clear that a vaccination strategy had other side-benefits from perspective of central government, for instance the rationale to implement more granular digital tracking and bookkeeping for command and control purposes of all kinds, that made them doubly attractive as an agenda-fit solution.
Very thoughtful exposition. While reading I kept wondering, what would the precautionary principle suggest in this case? Compared with the onset of the pandemic, cost of inaction seems equally very high, effectiveness of considered actions may be comparable (despite uncertainties in vaccine effectiveness through), and cost of considered actions are considered too high in the first case, being neglected in the case of vaccines. In the face of uncertainty in side effects of vaccines and long term effectiveness, in the short term they seem to work just well enough. Wouldn't the precautionary principle suggest to leave aside the uncertainties related to the cost of action considering the certainties of cost of inaction?
Great to see this following on your tweet a while ago! Thank you. All in mandated vaccination is what "Roundup" is to a mono crop. Another whoopsie. Evolution needs complexity or rather the conservation of flexibility.
This nuance is lost in the public dialogue
Thank you. You succinctly communicated a large part of my inner monologue whenever this subject comes up.
Very thoughtful exposition. While reading I kept wondering, what would the precautionary principle suggest in this case? Compared with the onset of the pandemic, cost of inaction seems equally very high, effectiveness of considered actions may be comparable (despite uncertainties in vaccine effectiveness through), and cost of considered actions are considered too high in the first case, being neglected in the case of vaccines. In the face of uncertainty in side effects of vaccines and long term effectiveness, in the short term they seem to work just well enough. Wouldn't the precautionary principle suggest to leave aside the uncertainties related to the cost of action considering the certainties of cost of inaction?
Great to see this following on your tweet a while ago! Thank you. All in mandated vaccination is what "Roundup" is to a mono crop. Another whoopsie. Evolution needs complexity or rather the conservation of flexibility.