4 ms·
That's what I'm asking myself too. It's way too early for any kind of herd immunity, and you only need a handful of people who have broken the rules (or simply
by kmm 7y ago
That's what I'm asking myself too. It's way too early for any kind of herd immunity, and you only need a handful of people who have broken the rules (or simply due to delayed intrafamilial infection) to have a few infectious people back out in the wild, and we're back to square zero.
Is the plan for a lockdown to completely eliminate the disease? Are we hoping the heat of the summer will stop it? Or does flatten the curve really mean that eventually 60-70% of the population will get infected. If so, we're in for a rough 2020.
- thaumaturgy 7y agoThe numbers I've seen so far are assuming 40% to 70% total infections over the next several months. The current efforts are just trying to take some energy out of the first wave of hospitalizations, to buy time for more supplies and staffing and to get the current infected out of health care as new cases come in. After a few weeks, it may turn out that hospital capacity and more widespread testing allows some restrictions to be lifted. Or, it may turn out that the situation in the US is far more severe than expected, and the restrictions will only worsen by then. I'm hoping for the former but betting on the latter.
- admax88q 7y agoFlatten the curve _does_ mean that 60-70% of the population will get it. But it also means that the peak will be lower do that hospitals are less overwhelmed. It also pushes more infections later in time, so that we have more time to develop and deploy a vaccine.
- thombat 7y agoNot back to square zero - you have the core of a new outbreak amidst wide-spread monitoring for it and a population that is generally practicing better infection control. So perhaps a few dozen are infected before the flames are doused again.