4 ms·
> But no clear way to confine it to the harmless crowd. That won't be what the public policy decisions will be based around if the asymptomatic and already exp
by vmception 7y ago
> But no clear way to confine it to the harmless crowd.
That won't be what the public policy decisions will be based around if the asymptomatic and already exposed rate is so high.
We don't know enough to make that decision yet, but testing more broadly was the first step.
Remaining steps:
- Do they get sick in two weeks?
- Skip testing for current sickness, and test for antibodies instead.
- Get a better antibody test that is more accurate
- Understand how well antibodies work, and for how long
and then we can make decisions, even if they are as simple as "this is a systemwide over the air update, some people will get bricked"
it's becoming clear that we might end up with a society where the average BMI is under 24.9 simply due to the lower oxygen and resource requirements to support those body systems.
- taeric 7y agoNot sure I follow. I confess I'm biased in thinking we could have locked down nursing homes and shaved a large chunk of deaths. Catch is, we should have done that in January.
- pbhjpbhj 7y ago> locked down nursing homes // How would you do that without locking down the rest of the population? You're going to isolate all nursing home workers?
- taeric 7y agoWe could have done dedicated housing for them for cheaper than what we have currently done. So, maybe?
- pbhjpbhj 7y agoI'm in the UK, I can't see this being accepted: it would be pretty hard for every care home to have space found near it to create temporary housing for all the workers. And basically imprisoning workers just because of their current job wouldn't be popular with the population -- if they quit, how do you replace them? Who would sign up? Confining people to their own home, and locking them in their workspace are markedly different. I'm not sure there's a better solution; financial incentives and let the workers decide if they want to do it? Care home workers have their own families and dependents too, but that could make it possible for many of them without having to lock them up against their will.
- taeric 7y agoApologies, my thought was it would not have to have been Draconian. We could have basically done a tight job on funneling access to them. Would have been expensive, but so is everything we have been doing. Which is a large part of my point/question. Would it have been more effective than what we have been doing? This is frustrating with a lot of news coming out that it had been spreading longer and faster than thought. Conceivable that much of the peak in deaths is the highest risk crowd having hit a saturation.
- vmception 7y agoMy post is just a blueprint for letting us know what to do at all. Its the plan for making a plan.