Every tool in the quiver is about reducing Rt below 1. If it's above 1, cases double every few days. If it's far about 1, it's hardly any days, if it's just above 1, it's more days. But either way, the cases are still doubling at some rate, not just spreading but growing.
So every single tool in the quiver is about reducing Rt below 1. A lockdown will give you a few points. Vaccines will give you more. Masks give you more. Social distancing give you more. None of them get you all the way there. Some are more temporary than others, so have to be implemented at the right times.
So...
> they don't do very well at stopping spread, so why all the fuss to force people to get vaccinated?
The do help limit spread. Going from "they don't stop spread entirely" to "why force people to get vaccinated?" is like saying "body armor doesn't prevent being killed, so soldiers shouldn't wear them". Plus, there's the aspect of it being contagious - vaccines make it less contagious overall. Vaccines reduce Rt.
> we still haven't built a significant amount of hospitals?
The goal was never to permanently increase supply of hospitals, it was to reduce the demand for them, by putting measures into place to reduce Rt.
> anti-mask at the beginning
During that time, scientists thought that COVID was chiefly droplet-transmitted, so the emphasis was on distance, washing hands, hand sanitizer, etc. In an environment where people were already hoarding toilet paper, then if it had been true that droplets were the only source of transmission, masks were overkill, wouldn't do a lot to reduce Rt, and also had the risk of limiting supply to people who needed them. After it became clear that it was also aerosol-transmitted, the scientific recommendations changed, because then it was clear that masks would help reduce Rt.
As for Germany... Delta has a higher Rt than the Wuhan strain. Their lockdowns were effective.
So every single tool in the quiver is about reducing Rt below 1. A lockdown will give you a few points. Vaccines will give you more. Masks give you more. Social distancing give you more. None of them get you all the way there. Some are more temporary than others, so have to be implemented at the right times.
So...
> they don't do very well at stopping spread, so why all the fuss to force people to get vaccinated?
The do help limit spread. Going from "they don't stop spread entirely" to "why force people to get vaccinated?" is like saying "body armor doesn't prevent being killed, so soldiers shouldn't wear them". Plus, there's the aspect of it being contagious - vaccines make it less contagious overall. Vaccines reduce Rt.
> we still haven't built a significant amount of hospitals?
The goal was never to permanently increase supply of hospitals, it was to reduce the demand for them, by putting measures into place to reduce Rt.
> anti-mask at the beginning
During that time, scientists thought that COVID was chiefly droplet-transmitted, so the emphasis was on distance, washing hands, hand sanitizer, etc. In an environment where people were already hoarding toilet paper, then if it had been true that droplets were the only source of transmission, masks were overkill, wouldn't do a lot to reduce Rt, and also had the risk of limiting supply to people who needed them. After it became clear that it was also aerosol-transmitted, the scientific recommendations changed, because then it was clear that masks would help reduce Rt.
As for Germany... Delta has a higher Rt than the Wuhan strain. Their lockdowns were effective.