Would a different approach to covid-19 be wise for the military?

Without a doubt this is nutty just thinking if this gets to a critical mass situation there is not enough gear or medical professionals to deal with this. Its a quarantine or get infected situation. Using the Diamond Princess as an example - most of them will survive.

However what about considering how that was handled - more or less forcing people to remain in in a contaminated environment. Feel that titters on the side of unethical.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/coronavirus-infections-keep-mounting-after-cruise-ship-fiasco-japan

I'm not going to freak out about this. I'm going to continue living my life. Ill let the professional's try to figure this one out. I will spend exactly zero seconds trying to determine what is best for mankind.

This is slow rolled - say .01% or .02% of troops at a giving time. For a troop strength of 1 million that 100-200 SM's. As well small number to measure the effect. Just thinking a managed approach would allow for better results as apposed to say having this spread uncontrolled and infecting 60% to 70% of our force.

SPC David S. - Are you wanting a "Captain Tripps" type of worldwide pandemic from "The Stand?" Because this is how you could get one. Purposefully exposing people to viruses is never a good idea. Yea, the flu shot is a live virus...but it's a well controlled virus. Same as other vaccines. But you are talking of purposefully exposing people to the actual virus. This is probably one of the most unethical and immoral things I have ever heard.

MSG (Join to see) - yes there are ethical considerations however that may be the case at some point down the road if this goes unchecked.

If there aren’t enough masks or ventilation machines available, what is an ethically defensible way to allocate them? Might it be ethically acceptable to remove one patient from a ventilator so another could use it? Should clinicians who are forced to make such choices be legally protected? And who should get priority access to vaccines if and when they become available?

Lets say US produces a vaccine not so easily mass produced who's getting the vaccine?

More or less 2% of people with diagnosed Covid-19 have died, and between 5% and 10% have required intensive care. But if even a small fraction of a very large number of infected people might benefit from critical care resources like mechanical ventilation or extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation to help them breathe, difficult triage decisions could be required. Just thinking if this gets to a critical mass point a control infection would mitigate some of the previous ethical consideration mentioned.

Its the old if you know that by killing one person thousands will live - however that ethical debate takes on a different meaning when you are the one in question.

I feel MIGAL will be the first to market - just so happens they were working on a new approach for a viral vaccine using a coronavirus in their base line model. I was just thinking the easy way is to let the body naturally produce the antibodies - however curious how nature will respond. Will covid-23 or some other virus mutate into something more lethal.

https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/news/israel-migal-covid-19-vaccine/

The flu my wife and I had in December would feed on covid. Lasted two weeks each with me a week ahead. You name it and it had it. Had endurance too. First week started with internal cough that grew until ribs ached times 3 days. Then the rest of the trash. We had gifts but couldn't go to kids.

Good news on vaccine though. Detection is a shortfall now i.e. testing, but vaccine is needed.