>>11968923Yeah, if its a rhinovirus type thing then we would be in the same situation. However, colds have affected humans for thousands of years, atleast as far as Hippocrates.
Coronavirus poses a relatively unique problem, in that (unlike viruses causing colds) we may not be adapted to resist them (by natural selection favouring people with cell surface proteins that resist entry of the virus into cells as an example) and coronavirus hasn’t evolved to be less dangerous.
In this case, it may be the case that the countries of the world put in a greater effort into eradication. For example, even short term immunity would be useful if it could be synchronised via vaccine. If we vaccinate say 95% of the population, then after three months maybe no one would be a carrier, and we’d have eradicated it.
Vaccine compliance and distribution globally, as well as synchronicity is unlikely. It’s not like the polio vaccine which prevented children from being crippled for a life time. So probably there wouldn’t be so much international cooperation or pressure; when your main affected group is unproductive retirees (rather than children pre-employment) the government has no incentive to help (since there’s not much tax income) especially since old age health care is a net cost and most of people’s health costs are the last few years before their death. So a quick 2 week death from covid is cheaper than several years of geriatric medicine, chemotherapy, dementia treatment, surgery, and so on.
On the other hand, in the case that a temporary vaccine is cheap, it would probably be the case that every three months at risk individuals would receive a booster shot.
Basically, eradication is possible even with the limitations of short-term immunity. It’s more about the cost and political pressure and social response.
