Earlier quoted context omitted.
Math? Any particular transmission event is chance of someone being infected X probability of transmission. Reduce the first term and the total number of infected individuals at a given time T is reduced (until any exponential growth swamps the terms). Point of saying "it's impossible to prevent" is that it's not possible to reduce the first term to 0.
Okay, even if it works (which is unlikely), what about the costs to society? Do the benefits outweigh those costs? There are other things in life to worry about than slowing the spread of exactly one illness... is it worth continuing to put those on the backburner? When does this end?
I think this is a fair question many people are asking. I also think a simple answer does not exist.
It's interesting. This is the first pandemic of what I might describe as the most connected version of humanity in the history of our species. I mean this in every possible sense, not just electronic communications (for example, travel is massively easier and faster than, say, one hundred years ago).
This means this is new to us (the world). In the prior pandemic people died by the tens of millions and that was that. This time we have a fairly reasonable ability to slow it down and fight it. Yet, I don't think anyone truly understands how far this goes and where the end of the "event" might be. I happen to be travelling outside the US at the moment and, at least where I am (Mexico) they seem to be taking it far more seriously than in Los Angeles. For example, I have yet to see people complaining about mask usage as some form of reduction-of-freedom issue.