In every argument for and against any covid related policy, the debate falls apart when the participants fail to realize people have different risk assessments. Age, co-morbidities or lack thereof, pre-existing risk-taking lifestyle or not, co-habitating with anyone else or not, and the list goes on.

Also irrelevant. Think it through over the long term. Since the virus is now endemic and can't be eradicated anyone who lives outside of a sterile bubble will occasionally be exposed regardless of the protective measures they take. Just like with the other endemic coronaviruses such as HCoV-OC43. Differences in personal risk assessment won't change that reality. Unfortunately some people still have an irrational, unscientific belief that they will somehow magically be able to avoid the virus forever.

That said, I do hope that remote working will continue to be an option for those who want it as there are advantages besides virus exposure.

I'm usually on the lifting restrictions side of the argument, but do you honestly not see the difference in health risk of contracting the virus x times vs potentially (x + y) times? So far it seems like immunity is not permanent..

I honestly do not see the difference in health risk. Reinfections are rare but will be more common over time, just as with any other coronaviruses (or most upper respiratory viruses in general). Fortunately the vaccines and other treatments are pretty effective, and the natural immunity from surviving an infection typically reduces the symptom severity for subsequent reinfections.

The evidence indicates that another coronavirus HCoV-OC43 probably caused the 1889-90 pandemic and killed millions of people worldwide. The same virus is still endemic. It doesn't kill many people today because most of us get infected as youths and then retain some level of immunity which protects us later in life.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7252012/

There's more to life than avoiding disease. I'm not going to put my life on hold and hide.

I'm not saying you should..I'm completely back to my pre covid behaviors and only wear a mask when I have to. That being said, I think a lot of your post is basically just conjecture; the claim that exposure to covid past the first infection or vaccination does not increase risk needs a little bit more evidence, and I don't blame people who are coming to the opposite conclusion.

Biologically speaking SARS-CoV-2 is just one more coronavirus and isn't particularly special or unusual. We already know that prior infection with other coronaviruses such as HCoV-OC43 provides pretty good protection against symptomatic reinfection with the same coronavirus as long as the patient is otherwise healthy. If anyone claims that SARS-CoV-2 is somehow different then the burden of proof is on them; extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

As for vaccines, we obviously can't have any data on long term effectiveness. But short term effectiveness against severe symptoms is pretty good, and periodic boosters are available to those who want them.

I don't think it's very constructive to call every personal risk assessment "irrelevant" without qualifications.

For one, there might be vaccines that work more broadly and give immunocompromised individuals better protection in the future, or cures/remedies that help your body fight the virus better when you do fall ill.

For another, right now hospitals are starting to overflow here and if I decide today to start going out and about as if nothing is amiss again, me or a loved one might end up there at a time where they're actually full. That is not cool for the covid patient, the medical personnel that usually already do overtime during normal times, or the people whose treatments are delayed again because it's full of covid patients again. We do still have a period to work through, either by (booster or initial) vaccinations or by forced inoculation for anti-vaxxers (aka having covid).

It's not about being too short-sighted to see that it's very likely we'll all be exposed eventually.

My sweet 79-year-old father-in-law has had his “elective” hernia surgery rescheduled twice, and now cancelled without a rescheduled appointment because too many people in Germany “trust their natural immunity” or “deserve to do their own research”.

The 2020s: when residents of the wealthy West discovered that “elective” procedure doesn’t only mean cosmetic or gender-affirming surgery, but anything that isn’t literally preventing you from dying right now, or a baby coming out.

New treatments are becoming available all the time, better vaccines will emerge, why wouldn't I want to delay? I take care of an elderly parent; becoming sick and not knowing it is potentially fatal to her.

I can be cautious and likely avoid significant exposure for another year or two at least, but not if my employer disallows it.

Sure, but I'm betting that an everybody does what they want to to the point that it doesn't endanger anyone else isn't even good enough for some people who feel the need to control the behavior of others.

What is this obsessive need to bring everyone back into the same poorly ventilated rooms? What business goal is served here other than literally making them look busy? Do you want to wear a mask for 7 to 12 hours a day on the job when you could be at home?

But also for those who feel that doing so is better than working from home, more power to you. Just don't make me join your club. It's just not my thing.

I can choose to willingly not go into a closed space with 1000+ people. The risk of exposure is going to be higher in the office. I have no qualms with meeting my team for lunch or dinner or even a team offsite for a whole day once a month but the notion of coming into potential close contact with hundreds of people day to day is very scary.

The sorts that wish to require you to work in spaces like that are not worth working for under any circumstances. You can do better if you try, don't settle...

If you don't see the value in delaying exposure to that virus until there is something close to a sterilizing vaccine that's your viewpoint and you are entitled to that viewpoint. I hope you realize others see things differently. I understand that people feel isolated and I support them doing as they please up to the point that it endangers others.

To that end, opening up all the corporate offices for those that feel the need to be in the office once again whilst 100% allowing work from home seems the best of both worlds. We have vaccines. But we also have a rapidly evolving virus and a perfect storm right now for it to evolve further. I'm betting on the virus to win this one in the short-term. But I'm also betting in the long term that it's doomed, fortunately.

> To that end, opening up all the corporate offices for those that feel the need to be in the office once again whilst 100% allowing work from home seems the best of both worlds.

Except that's not what's likely to happen. Even if 100% WFH is the official policy, people will be leaned on to come into the office. And as the number of people working remotely shrinks, that will only get worse, because it's very hard to be an outlier when everyone else is communicating real-time face to face.

Speak for yourself. I've been WFH mostly for over a quarter century. No fate but the one you make and all that stuff...

I think it's fair that being the one remote member on a team is difficult. But especially going forward I don't expect that to be the norm. And in practice I'm generally communicating with people in a lot of different locations anyway.

I didn't say it can't work, I said it was harder to be the only remote person.

I've seen all-remote, all-local, and mixed environments. I just don't have faith that mixed environments work well, but every situation is different.

The secret is not hiring fungibles and instead hiring people you can trust. But also those sorts are in demand and your overlords will probably not give you the $$$ to hire them. So we're forced to make do with fungible talent and that's where it all falls apart IMO.

Got any sage advice? That's a rare amount of time to have done WFH in 2021

Stand up for your needs. And deliver sufficiently that your manager prefers to keep you working. The one exception where I tried to work 100% in an open office led to me catching the flu and staying stick for 4 months. People complained about my coughing so they gave me a private office rather than allow me to WFH until I felt better (got to keep the private office though). I had no complaints, but just about no one is going to do that.

I have been offered a job in a new SARS vaccine design team and, ironically, they want to put me in a tiny crowded office with no HVAC.

Of course, when I stated I'm less than happy about that, they claimed it's very safe. Yet all workers are traveling by bus and masks are not mandatory.

So are you seeing the red flags here or not? This doesn't seem like a winning effort. This seems more like the opening scene to The Stand or the French lab that spawned the zombie apocalypse. Not that I think this virus is the end of the world but I do think it is the global marshmallow test. I can wait a really long time. I'm not a people person anyway.

Aside: genuine bona fide former bench scientist who used to work in a hot lab here. I stopped working in hot labs because the safety practices of my coworkers terrified me. Many of them are dead of cancer now, decades later. While there's no strong evidence for it, I cannot entirely dismiss the lab Leak theory here based on my prior experience working with fellow scientists and their cavalier attitudes towards safety. Had I stayed I think I would have lost my mind.

Why is it ironic? The outcome from a proper vaccine would be eliminating masks and other measures. It seems 100% aligned with the company goals, but not the common perpetually-anxious-but-loves-to-look-rational dream.

We're so confident we'll stop the zombie apocalypse that we require all our new employees to be bitten by zombies!

I mean you could opt to stay super safe in a bunker and automatically die after 70 years or so, or go play along with the zombie wearing a helmet. There is a risk to living life to the fullest. Not everyone is you.

I don't intend to stay locked down anywhere.

During the peak of the pandemic I was still going to my office at Oxford University. However, this other institution I'm potentially joining has much more relaxed safety measures.

I think having a low-density office is a must even if there is no pandemics. I want to be productive, and I don't want to be surrounded by tens of coughing people during the flu season. It's just commonsense.

Um, one is pretty safe outdoors so far. I'm living a pretty good life modulo I miss watching movies on the big screen, mostly addressed by procuring a cheap 70" flatscreen. What's not so safe is congregating in poorly ventilated spaces. Why are you so hellbent on suggesting life is incomplete without doing so?

I'm not hellbent on proving anything, but looking at the thread at large, it seems you are very much. Carry on.

A slightly different formulation:

"All of that is pointless. You're inevitably going to be exposed to ionizing radiation many times throughout your life regardless of what your employer does. Whether you're exposed in the office or somewhere else hardly matters."

Viral loading matters a great deal.

> Fortunately the vaccines and other treatments make the risk minimal.

For some definition of 'minimal', for most people, this is thankfully very true.