I've been asking those questions for about 16 months now and hardly anyone of those in charge is willing to even consider an answer. They just botch and bumble their way through from one lockdown to the next.
The COVID-19 vaccines are a boon and a vital component for ending this crisis. However, they're not the panacea those in charge made them out to be. Make no mistake, those vaccines, particularly those of the mRNA variety are more successful and have been available much more quickly than one could've reasonably hoped them to be.
Still, it should have been clear right from the start that virus variants against which vaccines are not as effective anymore are a distinct possibility.
Hence, my suggestions for a "new normal" (though I dislike that term because it implies both that the world in general is static and that on the other hand we have to accept the current situation as the new default indefinitely) for the time being (that is until COVID-19 has become endemic and most of the population has built up at least some level of immunity - through vaccines or by "natural" means) are these:
1. getting vaccinated, if possible
2. getting booster shots and / or updated vaccines regularly, in case that's proven to be useful (the jury still being out on both counts)
3. wearing masks in certain settings, e.g., on public transport
4. the most important one: having everyone - vaccinated or not - tested for indoor gatherings or large-scale events (rather than prohibiting those outright)
Other than that, life has to continue as normal: No further lockdowns, no social distancing, no civil rights restrictions.
Unfortunately, and totally incomprehensibly, #4 seems to be highly controversial, with some countries now even shutting down their previous - if perhaps not exemplary then at least adequate - testing schemes or implementing truly asinine measures such as mandating people to pay for tests and only requiring those not vaccinated to be tested at all.
Yeah, right. What could possibly go wrong? I suppose the rationale behind that one is: "No tests. No problem."
My impression is that the tests are not yet fast, accurate, and noninvasive enough for #4. I'm skeptical that we can vaccinate our way out of this mess completely, and I don't think we can test our way out yet either.
If we can improve the tests sufficiently, though, then I think your plan makes a lot of sense. I think of COVID as fire. Keep the fuel damp (#1, #2, natural immunity), don't pile up too much in one place (#3, low cost forms of social distancing), and watch for flare ups so you can douse them quickly (#4, sorta). Don't worry about putting the fire out, just keep it from burning down the forest.
There are saliva tests, which is probably as non-invasive as it gets. They're currently not quite as accurate (about 95%) as nasal swab tests (99%, if applied correctly) but still good enough to catch most infections. The biggest problem with these tests probably is getting a proper sample.
Still, that's at least by orders of magnitude better than simply doing nothing. Besides, an accuracy >= 95% with results in less than 15 minutes isn't that bad at all already.
#2 because if the virus gets an update it might make sense to give the immune system an update, too (the same way we do with the flu, by the way).
#3 because it further reduces the risk to get even mildly sick at little to no cost. I'll continue to wear a mask on public transport even after this pandemic is over. I don't need to catch the flu or even the common cold either, if I can avoid it.
#4 because it enormously helps with keeping new infections at a minimum. Hence, further lockdowns neither required nor justifiable anymore.
On public transport? Where people are getting on and off the train or bus every few minutes and you don't have a closed system?
I don't know about the specifics of UV air filters but I'm not sure they'd be an alternative in this particular scenario. They seem to be more useful in situations where the same people are in the same room for a prolonged period of time.
I'm all in favour of small, incremental improvements. Those can be a huge contributing factor, so we don't have to wield the blunt instrument that is lockdowns anymore.
Using air filters probably is more of such an additional improvement, rather than a complete solution in its own right.
Getting tested - have you? - is not neutral on your body. The nasal swab is sterilized by a carcinogen gas which exposure should be limited and you can’t avoid wrong gesture by a nurse physically damaging your nose. It’s fine time to time but not everyday.
That an object has been exposed to a compound during that object's lifetime doesn't necessarily mean that you'll be exposed to that compound upon touching the object.
The COVID-19 vaccines are a boon and a vital component for ending this crisis. However, they're not the panacea those in charge made them out to be. Make no mistake, those vaccines, particularly those of the mRNA variety are more successful and have been available much more quickly than one could've reasonably hoped them to be.
Still, it should have been clear right from the start that virus variants against which vaccines are not as effective anymore are a distinct possibility.
Hence, my suggestions for a "new normal" (though I dislike that term because it implies both that the world in general is static and that on the other hand we have to accept the current situation as the new default indefinitely) for the time being (that is until COVID-19 has become endemic and most of the population has built up at least some level of immunity - through vaccines or by "natural" means) are these:
1. getting vaccinated, if possible
2. getting booster shots and / or updated vaccines regularly, in case that's proven to be useful (the jury still being out on both counts)
3. wearing masks in certain settings, e.g., on public transport
4. the most important one: having everyone - vaccinated or not - tested for indoor gatherings or large-scale events (rather than prohibiting those outright)
Other than that, life has to continue as normal: No further lockdowns, no social distancing, no civil rights restrictions.
Unfortunately, and totally incomprehensibly, #4 seems to be highly controversial, with some countries now even shutting down their previous - if perhaps not exemplary then at least adequate - testing schemes or implementing truly asinine measures such as mandating people to pay for tests and only requiring those not vaccinated to be tested at all.
Yeah, right. What could possibly go wrong? I suppose the rationale behind that one is: "No tests. No problem."