I have a theory. Obviously it was established yesterday that we are scientifically illiterate on here so feel free to disregard!
I just feel that this virus is going round the globe, burning through the population with quite a big degree of ferocity to those most vulnerable, but burn through it does. However, once it has been in an area it doesn't seem to have many 'victims' left and cases/numbers continue downwards even when restrictions are lifted.
My son is at uni in the states so obviously I have a vested interest in how soon I can send him back! If you drill down on worldometer by state then NY, NJ, Illinois, Massachusetts etc all have graphs and curves that look very like ours. The headlines are all about the south, but they took ages to get going, the exception to that is California, whose numbers do seem all over the place.
So what does this mean for lockdown as a strategy? Makes me think the virus is gonna do what the virus is gonna do and the only reason for suppression is to wait for better treatments - of which we have definitely more options now.
I know we just don't seem to be able to get to the bottom of antibodies and immunity but if the T cell research has got legs then the burn through argument could stand up because many more of us may either have had it, or more likely, are never going to get it, because of T cells.
Don't really know where I'm going with this, I just find it interesting that cases aren't spiralling out of control in areas that had a really high exposure to the virus once they lift restrictions.
And does that mean that situations like Australia are unavoidable as they went for suppression and it then leaves them vulnerable as soon as they lift restrictions because it's not already burnt through. Fine, if you can afford to prop up your economy indefinitely!
Will we ultimately decide that Sweden nailed it?