Viral Mitigation: Weak Theoretical Underpinnings

Mitigation measures included primarily lockdowns and masks and, later in the pandemic, mass vaccination. All of them were supposed to eradicate the disease or at least to “flatten the curve.” To stress the need for disease eradication and/or the need for reduced transmission rates, three postulates were put forward by the proponents of the pandemic policy responses. First, it was claimed that the virus poses a high death risk to all age-groups, and so we need policies that will be able to offer protection to all people. This is the first postulate, which I would like to call the “equal vulnerability thesis.” Second, the claim that there is no pre-existing immunity and hence all people are equally susceptible to the virus, which is the “equal susceptibility thesis.” The third postulate is that the coronavirus can be transmitted not only by symptomatic but also by asymptomatic people. This is the “equal infectivity thesis.” These three premises were mistaken, and the pandemic policies, i.e., lockdowns, masks, and mass vaccination, failed to achieve their declared goals, i.e., they did not eradicate the disease and they did not impact on transmission rates.