For now they seem to aim at R = 1, which means waiting for the vaccine with whatever is possible to keep it at 1. (Probably not much more than barbers and very few school classes.)

those "oops" are painful suffering deaths that could have been avoided

everything has been reduced to numbers we mindlessly argue when we are talking about deaths that could have been avoided

even people who recover, this does long term lung and maybe heart damage

all could have been avoided with a true two week lockdown to let the virus die off, but nope, trade two weeks for months more of "resurgence and adjust measures"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/coronaviru...

this is also why I get upset at "just let everyone get infected for herd immunity" arguments - this isn't a cold, it does -damage-

What is mindless is refusing to consider any action that might conceivably increase the number of deaths without considering tradeoffs. Or should we shut down the country during every flu season and universally limit cars to 20mph?

this isn't a cold, it does -damage-

Lockdowns also do damage; not just economic and psychological but also medical. We've stopped "elective" procedures like cancer screenings, which is guaranteed to result in worse outcomes for some patients. I agree that as of right now it's best to maintain the lockdown, but in order to make that determination we really do have to use numbers.

> even people who recover, this does long term lung and maybe heart damage

The problematic ACE2 receptor sites are also in the brain, intestines and liver and have seen damage. The brain one is the most alarming one from a survival perspective. We survive, but with irreparable permanent brain damage. We're no longer ourselves, we have a different personality, and we are incapable of doing our previous jobs. Is death preferable?