Would the costs of figuring that out and implementing it exceed the expected benefits? Assuming that everyone in the household is already boosted with the monovalent version, it seems unlike for the costs to be worthwhile.
I doubt it would cost very much. Epidemiologists have software they can use to model it. Moreover, an easy way to do controlled experiments would be dorm assignments on college campuses.
At any rate, my unabashedly Bayesian gut feeling is that it’s obviously a good idea to do it. See above for my priors.
To the extent that this kind of thing is hard, I’d put it squarely in the “hard but worth it” bucket, along the lines of JFK’s speech at Rice University. I’m calling for us to stop meekly accepting case surges as inevitable, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to speculate that by leading with mass vaccination, we’ve unwittingly created a kind of “bang bang control system” with similar issues to overworked thermostats—a public health analog of metal fatigue, if you will.
Would the costs of figuring that out and implementing it exceed the expected benefits? Assuming that everyone in the household is already boosted with the monovalent version, it seems unlike for the costs to be worthwhile.
I doubt it would cost very much. Epidemiologists have software they can use to model it. Moreover, an easy way to do controlled experiments would be dorm assignments on college campuses.
At any rate, my unabashedly Bayesian gut feeling is that it’s obviously a good idea to do it. See above for my priors.
To the extent that this kind of thing is hard, I’d put it squarely in the “hard but worth it” bucket, along the lines of JFK’s speech at Rice University. I’m calling for us to stop meekly accepting case surges as inevitable, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to speculate that by leading with mass vaccination, we’ve unwittingly created a kind of “bang bang control system” with similar issues to overworked thermostats—a public health analog of metal fatigue, if you will.