There are a populations of experts that promulgate that view. There is another population of experts which strongly disagree with the assessment of inevitability.

I gravitate towards those that say something can be done; that we have both the science and the ability to do it, though I'd say we do have a lot of people with a lot of power that want to tell us to give up on the precautionary principle.

Which specific experts claim that it will be feasible to avoid a highly contagious respiratory virus for decades? That seems implausible based on what we now about viral transmission. The virus will be around forever, and all it needs is one mistake or a bit of bad luck.

We have avoided widespread measles outbreaks for decades

So what? That's a total non sequitur. The measles vaccine is highly effective at preventing infection and transmission. That situation doesn't obtain with SARS-CoV-2. The vaccines are pretty good at preventing deaths but they have only a marginal and temporary effect on preventing infection and transmission. For the foreseeable future, every time you interact with another person (or certain other mammal species) there is a significant risk they will transmit the virus to you. That is our reality and wishful thinking won't change it.

Instead of trying to avoid infection and most likely failing, a more productive approach is to focus on reducing the risks of a bad outcome when you inevitably do get infected. For most people that means getting vaccinated plus resolving any major risk factor conditions such as obesity, type-2 diabetes, and hypovitaminosis D.

And you didn't answer the question. Which specific "experts" claim it will be possible to avoid infection?

All the ones signed up here for a start https://peoplescdc.org/ They recently had an opinion run in the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/03/people...

Neither of those links support your claim. They don't state that it will be possible to avoid infection. Certain non-pharmaceutical interventions can potentially delay exposure for certain individuals, but unless you hide in a sterile bubble you will be exposed.

And the so-called "People's CDC" isn't even a serious scientific or medical group. Unlike the real CDC, they're not doing any original research or useful analysis. It's merely a political advocacy group. There's nothing wrong with political advocacy but don't confuse it with actual science.

It is a novel virus, new to us, so it is different.

How different, and what this means in terms of individual and public health, is what we are currently finding out.

Notably, Long Covid effects have a considerably higher prevalence than 'Long Flu'.

SARS-CoV-2 is only "novel" in the sense that no one had acquired immunity to it before 2019. But otherwise it's very similar to other betacoronaviruses such as HCoV-OC43.

https://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2FS0262-4079(20)30862-9

We don't actually know the prevalence of "long flu".

Closer relatives would be SARS-CoV-1 and MERS. Thankfully -2 is nowhere near as virulent as either.