Most countries have already had SARS-2 work its way through them significantly. The utility of a vaccine might be lower than you think.
NZ comes to mind as a country that has barely built up any immunity (due to them trying to contain it completely). They can expect more utility from a vaccine than otherwise.
Anyway, given the incredibly low rate of both mortality and also any real consequences in, say, those under age 55, their personal benefit of a vaccine is incredibly low. So it really comes down to whether you’re a Sweden person or a New Zealand person.
> Most countries have already had SARS-2 work its way through them significantly.
Noope, that isn’t what antibody testing shows. Take England for example. Coronavirus working its way through a mere, say, 6% of the population is devastating.
> The utility of a vaccine might be lower than you think.
The problem with aggregate numbers like that 6% is that they assume a uniform distribution of the virus within the population, which is not the case: some areas are far more hit than others. I think this should always be kept into account.
NZ comes to mind as a country that has barely built up any immunity (due to them trying to contain it completely). They can expect more utility from a vaccine than otherwise.
Anyway, given the incredibly low rate of both mortality and also any real consequences in, say, those under age 55, their personal benefit of a vaccine is incredibly low. So it really comes down to whether you’re a Sweden person or a New Zealand person.
I’m a Sweden person personally.