Mike4 wrote:dealtn wrote:Mike4 wrote:
There are still more than enough unvaccinated people for a third wave to rampage through.
It depends on what is being counted I suppose.
There are plenty unvaccinated to have another wave of cases. The fact there are relatively few unvaccinated in the most vulnerable groups suggest the extent of a wave of deaths would be more muted (but not non-existent).
Yes falling back on semantics is often useful. To be honest I'm not entirely sure what I mean by a third wave, or what you mean by "muted".
I keep hearing well qualified people in the media telling us "
It isn't over for any of us until its over for all of us". Do you disagree with this and think a third wave of say, mainly asymptomatic infection is inconsequential and can safely be ignored? I can't decide on this point and wonder if the experts are just trotting out a meaningless cliché.
I don't listen much to the media, nor note that many I would describe as "well qualified", so I doubt I am a person that can add much here. Nor do I think infection would be mainly asymptomatic or inconsequential.
I would think with the majority of the currently unvaccinated being in the least likely to die if infected categories, then the degree of deaths, or worst possible outcomes, would be lower than in previous waves (however they are defined). I suspect therefore that for the majority there will come a point, perhaps relatively soon, and before any future wave arrives, that this will come to be seen as being over (as a pandemic to worry about and have lockdowns etc.), even if it won't be over in terms of cases, hospitalisations, and deaths in an absolute sense.
At the point deaths are seen as being under control, and lower than other causes of deaths we have accepted over many years, regardless of the exponential potential of them increasing, that acceptance will translate into many, possibly even the majority, considering it (at least domestically) to no longer be a significant cause of alarm to society as a whole.