4 ms·
So, this projects 3-months out. But what about after that? The graph for my state (MN) showed 3 months of sheltering in place would keep infections down, but th
by LargeWu 7y ago
So, this projects 3-months out. But what about after that? The graph for my state (MN) showed 3 months of sheltering in place would keep infections down, but then start to rise immediately afterwards. Then the graph ends. I think super-extended voluntary isolation is going to be a tough sell.
- maxwhenderson 7y agoHey guys - owner of the model in question here. Yes, that's exactly right, but 3 months (or even 1 month) may be enough time to prevent unnecessary deaths by preparing hospitals, getting more ventilators, rolling out testing, and hopefully finding a therapeutic drug (vaccines are probably farther off). Nobody can predict the future, though.
- LargeWu 7y agoI sure hope so. Thanks for your effort educating people.
- int_19h 7y ago3 months is definitely not enough to grow the hospital and ICU capacity 7x, which is what's necessary to prevent deaths due to lack of healthcare availability. It'll improve some, and that will save some lives, but not most of them. Pervasive testing looks like the best short-term hope right now - it's easier to drastically ramp up test manufacturing, and you don't need a full-fledged hospital for mass testing.