4 ms·
When you really dig into what you wrote, my feeling is you're not describing a solution that's feasible in large countries, short of (very) authoritarian enforc
by realtalk_sp 7y ago
When you really dig into what you wrote, my feeling is you're not describing a solution that's feasible in large countries, short of (very) authoritarian enforcement.
Keep in mind, for example, that the US is not technically under quarantine at the moment. And there are plenty of examples of people across the country recklessly defying the advisories.
The virus is especially virulent and controlling it in the way you describe requires stamping it out totally with extreme measures. We know that if even one case remains in the general population, it's just a matter of time before we're once again under pandemic threat.
- lostapathy 7y agoWhile this is true - with enough testing capacity, you could stamp out a new hot spot through a combination of local testing and local restrictions, and get it done before the healthcare system is overcome. Especially if we implement something like china did where you have to "check in" at businesses with your phone. At least in less-dense areas of the country if people stay somewhat social distanced i.e., if one case shows up in my town of 25,000 people - we could test everyone that possibly had any contact with that person and likely require a couple hundred tests. If those measures fail, you implement a more local lock-down much sooner, test more aggressively, and then ease up again locally.