Two years into the pandemic, is the end in sight?

"There is a widespread, rosy misconception that viruses evolve over time to become more benign," Katzourakis said.

"This is not the case: there is no predestined evolutionary outcome for a virus to become more benign," he said, pointing out that the Delta variant was deadlier than the first strain that emerged in Wuhan, China.

This is something endlessly repeated by lots of anti-scientific groups including antivaxxers and it is likely it will be still be repeated here (along with the other pseudo- and anti-scientific fallacies they like to repeat) but it is still false as the article mentions.

Global vaccination is necessary for the reduction of the risk of new variants appearing, if this is achieved then the pandemic will end much sooner (hopefully), eventually the risk from COVID will be reduced to background levels and specific measures against it will no longer be justified, the question is how many unnecessary deaths will happen before that.

Global vaccination is necessary for the reduction of the risk of new variants appearing, if this is achieved then the pandemic will end much sooner (hopefully), eventually the risk from COVID will be reduced to background levels and specific measures against it will no longer be justified, the question is how many unnecessary deaths will happen before that.

I was just going to say that when a more informed poster beat me to it.

We in the developed world can boost ourselves til the cows come home. But the risk of variants, some that will be resistant to the vaccines, is very real. The world has to come together and realize we either all sink or swim together.

The pandemic is already over. It's just the media and the government that keep trying to persuade us otherwise.

When the media and the governments are just repeating what the experts say then your comment makes no sense, it is not the media the origin of the recommendations and warnings, is the scientific consensus that say there is still a realistic chance for things to get complicated again, specially if whole populations remain unvaccinated.

No, it’s of course not over yet. And we still have higher infection and death rates than in the first year, when all were still panicking and even big events like Olympic were postponed. The only thing that can be observed is that the pandemic has been pushed into the background by the war between Russia and Ukraine, but that’s by far not a prove for the pandemic has disappeared or the circulating virus loads have in sum decreased anyhow.

Governments are treating Covid according to their political needs.

China, Japan and NZ are using it to seal borders or restrict incomers. In Europe, the Covid mandates and restrictions are vanishing. In the UK, Omicron is now treated as a flu variant. You can pick your personal behaviour up to government limits. You can move to an isolated property, work from home and rarely venture out, always wearing a mask, in the UK if you want, whilst everyone else gets on with their lives. Some countries will remain restricted, perhaps permanently. It is the same thing everywhere, the different approaches depend upon politics, not science.

The third inoculation aka booster, reduces the incidence of hospitalization and/or medical treatment for SARSCoV-2 to essentially 0.014% and 0.027% for omicron. That from a peer-reviewed, nationwide, scientific, medical study in Switzerland. The Swiss keep very good records.

As is well documented, individuals who are asymptomatic transmit the virus and the latest variant is highly contagious. Refusing to be inoculated means you are essentially a disease vector, with the pretense it is a personal choice without effect upon others or worse a dismissal of actual personal responsibility for spreading a deadly virus and ignorance of the common good and body social.

The resultant variances emerge primarily from unvaccinated populations. In order for the pandemic to flatten out and diminish, the virus itself must be eradicated and the only means to do that is by vaccinating the population as close as possible to 100%. Upwards of 80% does highly reduce the factor of transmission, but still allows the emergence of variants.

The rather solipsistic arguments based on logical fallacies are exactly that - an egocentric argument to justify a completely irrational refusal to be vaccinated and among some ignore established protocols. There is no basis in established fact, let alone science and medicine to justify what is essentially posturing and a vapid ignorance of the havoc wreaked by SARSCoV-2. Such individuals deserve, at a minimum, to be ostracized and disallowed into common and shared spaces.

As for claiming immunity from the more severe symptoms of SARSCoV-2, there is no evidence to support such an assertion, it is a vaguery which supposes some peculiar homogenized path of infection and either a stereotype or archetype of supposed physical health and age which disallows viral infection. There is no optimal configuration of health and age that prevents infection or mortality.

The insipid arguments which are basely absurd and self-serving, for exactly what reason other than to be contrarian, are baffling and dumb.

Indeed, if vaccination progresses, perhaps by the end of the summer, he pandemic will have subsided and flattened out & diminished - the ongoing problem is international travel, in that, not all countries have the same level of immunity due to vaccination schemas.

In the state in the US where I am now, only 455 people died last week from Covid. Covid was considered to be ended months ago.

I guess it depends on your definition of the word “end.”

For those that assume the pandemic is declining and omicron is less than virulent:

The United States recorded more than 61,000 COVID-19 deaths in February 2022, making January and February this year the fourth and fifth deadliest months in the entire pandemic, exceeded only by the peak last winter before vaccines were widely available. 65% of US citizens are fully immunized. 45% have received the booster inoculation.

Under the worst-case scenario, new unpredictable variants build into repeated damaging virus waves, requiring the return of harsh restrictions.

Is it okay to now admit that the restrictions were in fact harsh? I was once criticized for making this claim. "They're not harsh. Just temporary revocations of personal freedoms and liberties due to an emergency situation." It's not like there's been centuries of philosophical debate and bloodshed that have lead us to our democratic models and protections of human rights or anything. Rights and freedoms are outdated. What about my right to not get sick or die?

Is it okay to now admit that the restrictions were in fact harsh? I was once criticized for making this claim.

This has been repeatedly said by health care authorities, so your statement lacks validity. Precisely because people have a right not to get sick and die is why the measures end up being necessary, to protect that right. Countries in particular can make good or bad use of the measures, but in general it is justied and valid to make a common sacrifice in order to avoid the worst case scenarios as seen in countries like India or Brazil.