[the_gastropod]

Option 1 is the ideal case, yes. And New Zealand pulled it off (unfortunately, it was undone when a covid patient re-entered the country). But it's not the only benefit. Reducing the number of cases obviously reduces the risk of the disease spreading.

The idea is to seriously lock down / wear masks, etc. for ~6 weeks to get to a point where the case-load is so small that it's manageable with little effort (not back to 100% normal). Instead, the U.S. strategy has been to put in medium effort / inconvenience indefinitely.

[SpicyLemonZest]

New Zealand officials don't currently believe that their new outbreak was caused by a patient re-entering the country - they haven't found any link between the detected cases and overseas returnees.

No country I'm aware of believes that even the smallest outbreaks can be handled with little effort. Health officials across the globe have been consistently saying that the coronavirus will spread unless people stay very far from normal.

[zaroth]

New Zealand is the perfect example. They have zero immunity, therefore they have to stay absolutely quarantined from the rest of the world indefinitely.

If a vaccine is only partially effective, and their tolerance for cases is literally lockdown at the first case, then they will never re-open.

[xapata]

> vaccine is only partially effective

Different vaccines will have different efficacy. None will be perfect.