4 ms·

> there'll probably another closure next time the disease surges Honest question: do you think a second quarantine will be as effective as the first? Tracing a

> there'll probably another closure next time the disease surges Honest question: do you think a second quarantine will be as effective as the first? Tracing and isolation after the first quarantine must be as close as spotless as possible, because personally I don't believe that the population will tolerate a second lock-up as easily as the first.

yyyk 7y ago
Hmm.. I think it can be done effectively enough. Public will may decline/increase depending on country and political climate, but enforcement, tracking and treatment mechanisms will have improved everywhere. So a 2nd quarantine need not be as effective as the first, and overall, governments that will want to lock down will be able to do it. The real question is whether a political/economical calculation will delay a 2nd quarantine unnecessarily in cases it is necessary.
- yyyk 7y ago
  Reading this article[0] things look far worse in Italy than how I thought they are. Still I suspect the state can enforce this. It would be nice if its EU partners offered actual assistance... [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/singing-stops-italy-fear-social-unrest-mount-coronavirus-lockdown https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/singing-stops-...
  - lbeltrame 7y ago
    It's not a matter of assistance or not. If you want lockdowns, you have to have plans on when to lift or ease them (even if you just re-evaluate them every two weeks). Governments and their expert panels can't just think that people will "reprogram" themselves to stay away from most social contacts. It's alienating at best and outright dangerous for one's mind at worst. Once the number of cases gets low, it won't be possible, or justifiable, to keep people locked up. Even more so that some countries that were affected after my own have already begun their plans to lift lockdowns (some with definite dates, some without).

yyyk 7y ago

Hmm.. I think it can be done effectively enough. Public will may decline/increase depending on country and political climate, but enforcement, tracking and treatment mechanisms will have improved everywhere. So a 2nd quarantine need not be as effective as the first, and overall, governments that will want to lock down will be able to do it. The real question is whether a political/economical calculation will delay a 2nd quarantine unnecessarily in cases it is necessary.

yyyk 7y ago
Reading this article[0] things look far worse in Italy than how I thought they are. Still I suspect the state can enforce this. It would be nice if its EU partners offered actual assistance... [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/singing-stops-italy-fear-social-unrest-mount-coronavirus-lockdown https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/01/singing-stops-...
- lbeltrame 7y ago
  It's not a matter of assistance or not. If you want lockdowns, you have to have plans on when to lift or ease them (even if you just re-evaluate them every two weeks). Governments and their expert panels can't just think that people will "reprogram" themselves to stay away from most social contacts. It's alienating at best and outright dangerous for one's mind at worst. Once the number of cases gets low, it won't be possible, or justifiable, to keep people locked up. Even more so that some countries that were affected after my own have already begun their plans to lift lockdowns (some with definite dates, some without).