There are several empirically successful models for reducing the medical, social, and economic costs of COVID until the vaccine
1) crush it and get back to normal (Vietnam, New Zealand, Taiwan)
2) Mask up + test, trace, and isolate (South Korea)
3) Mask up + cluster bust (Japan)

There are also a few models that have had high-profile failures:
1) Let it burn while shielding the vulnerable (failed in Sweden)
2) Wait until the right moment and then intervene (failed in UK)

There's also "shut down but not enough to crush it, then rapidly reopen", but I'm not sure I'd dignify that by calling it a model

Given this, I am somewhat frustrated to see people advocating for "let it burn plus shield" by implying it's the only alternative to indefinite lockdown until the vaccine.

Not only is it *not* the only alternative, it's an alternative that has already had a high profile failure

Meanwhile, there are alternative alternatives () with a solid empirical track record