[simonh]

We can't stop it dead, but we can dramatically reduce the number of critical illnesses and deaths, and have done so in many countries. I'm a Brit and our lockdown and vaccination policy has been extremely effective. We've largely lived normal lives since the summer, with low case rates and very low mortality thanks to strong vaccine uptake and popular support for protective measures. If we need to lock down again, we will because we have experienced the benefits that this strategy has produced. I'm having my booster shot on Saturday.

I fully expect to contract the virus at some point, and that's fine. I'm well protected by vaccination and the rate of propagation in the country is moderate enough that the hospitals aren't being overwhelmed by huge surges in infections and deaths any more.

Slowing down and limiting the impact of the virus doesn't stop it, correct, but it does massively reduce the damage it causes. That is very much worth doing, as the experience here in the UK clearly shows.

[adam_arthur]

The UK has roughly equivalent covid deaths per capita as the USA, where vast parts of the country never locked down and still by and large don't wear masks or get vaccinated.

Did the stricter lockdowns make a difference in the end?

[simonh]

Were demographically and geographically completely different. Our population is much denser, more like a populous US state than a sprawling continental giant. People used to compare virus control in the US to places like Singapore and New Zealand, as though their ability to control the virus has any lessons that are realistically applicable.

We were hammered early on because we are very highly connected with the rest of the world. London is very international, and Heathrow is one of the busiest airports in the world, out of proportion to our population size. We were always going to take a heavy hit.

Nevertheless as soon as vaccines became available we have had broad adoption, and ever since we've been reaping the rewards. Delta arrived here early, but by then our vaccine take up was enough that it didn't really make as much of an impact on us as it has elsewhere.

It's just amazing to me that in 2021 here on HN the fact that vaccines protect against viruses is an actual question, or in any way political.

[adam_arthur]

Yes, vaccines mitigate the impact of the virus on individual health outcomes.

They likely also have some marginal impact on transmissibility.

But the data shows pretty clearly that the effect on reduction in transmissibility is quite low, or else there would be an obvious relationship in the data in infection rate vs vaccine uptake... Which clearly there isn't. If you believe otherwise, please share data proving some macro effect of reduced case counts correlated with vaccine uptake.

There's nothing political about what I'm saying. I am arguing against policies that are not backed by the data or science.

People proposing policies that are not evidence based are the political ones.

[simonh]

It's true that vaccines are less effective at slowing down delta. They slowed previous variants down by 80% or more. They still slow it down, but not as much. But in the UK we had high vaccination rates before delta hit and in the first 6 months of the year this saved a _lot_ of lives. It's still saving lives by reducing transmission, but now mainly by simply protecting us from the worst effects of the virus.