3 ms·

It’s also to slow the rate of infection in order to buy time until we figure out more effective treatments and potentially a vaccine, and also to improve detect

by obelos 6y ago

It’s also to slow the rate of infection in order to buy time until we figure out more effective treatments and potentially a vaccine, and also to improve detection and isolation practices. The goal isn't “spread 1,000,000 deaths out over a longer period of time.” It’s also to reduce the number of deaths and infections altogether. Unfortunately, in the US we haven’t used our lockdown time in a useful way. We’ve kept hospitals (mostly) from being overwhelmed for now, but none of the infra that supports an effective test/trace/isolation regime was deployed. Hospitals still can’t get sufficient PPE. Etc.

mikem170 6y ago
The purpose of the lockdowns initialy was to keep the hospitals from being overwhelmed, i.e. Flatten the Curve. Are there other useful ways to use a lockdown at this point, when there are already millions of infected? There's no precendent/evidence that anything else can be done at this point, there's too many cases. Are you thinking that we should change the goal of the lockdown, to be eradication? Is that possible? This thing is still spreading, even during the current lockdowns.
- obelos 6y ago
  The purpose of TTI isn’t necessarily to eradicate the virus altogether, which does seem unlikely. It’s the alternative to lockdowns. Like lockdown, it reduces the new infection rate. Unlike lockdown, society is more able to carry on with something resembling regular economic activity and mobility liberties. In the US we have squandered our lockdown time in a way that will make TTI more difficult, more expensive, and less effective because, the outbreak is more widespread. But even with those marks against it, it would be better (in terms of economics, health outcomes, and personal liberty) than extending lockdown indefinitely or “opening up” the economy to what will quickly result in resuming exponential growth of infections and, consequently, deaths.

by obelos 6y ago

mikem170 6y ago

The purpose of the lockdowns initialy was to keep the hospitals from being overwhelmed, i.e. Flatten the Curve. Are there other useful ways to use a lockdown at this point, when there are already millions of infected? There's no precendent/evidence that anything else can be done at this point, there's too many cases. Are you thinking that we should change the goal of the lockdown, to be eradication? Is that possible? This thing is still spreading, even during the current lockdowns.

obelos 6y ago
The purpose of TTI isn’t necessarily to eradicate the virus altogether, which does seem unlikely. It’s the alternative to lockdowns. Like lockdown, it reduces the new infection rate. Unlike lockdown, society is more able to carry on with something resembling regular economic activity and mobility liberties. In the US we have squandered our lockdown time in a way that will make TTI more difficult, more expensive, and less effective because, the outbreak is more widespread. But even with those marks against it, it would be better (in terms of economics, health outcomes, and personal liberty) than extending lockdown indefinitely or “opening up” the economy to what will quickly result in resuming exponential growth of infections and, consequently, deaths.