The standard for something "working" is very much up for debate though, even if it is carefully avoided.

"Slowing the spread" is not a good enough argument in my opinion. Everyone wants to slow the spread, the only question worth asking is: at what cost?

At what point do you deem something effective and worthy of sacrificing your freedoms for? 1% efficacy "slows the spread". Is that worth it? Where do you draw the line? 20%? 50%?

Life is risky, everything is a gamble, yet somehow with COVID, all nuance has disappeared, life is not worth living until we can be 100% sure that there is no risk at all.