2 ms·
I would argue that reducing the rate of deaths is the #1 problem, followed by reducing the rate of infections, followed by being able to determine the rate of i
by dnautics 7y ago
I would argue that reducing the rate of deaths is the #1 problem, followed by reducing the rate of infections, followed by being able to determine the rate of infections.
So, unless you believe california results are 10x off, based on empirical results and your assertion that the testing and reporting infrastructure is "the worst", the state of california has at least done a fair job of managing its effort in the face of a limited resource. Knowing in detail what's going on is strictly secondary to reducing deaths.
- zaidf 7y agoI believe California has done an amazing job so far on the whole; “fair” would be a gross understatement. So I think we are in agreement there. That said, I do think as new casualties and hospitalizations are on the decline, test reporting and infrastructure matters disproportionately more for the next phase (planning for gradual reopening) and phases after.