4 ms·
I said explicitly that I didn't intend my comment as a defense of incompetent government responses, so I'm not sure why anyone would take it that way? It's cert
by tripletao 6y ago
I said explicitly that I didn't intend my comment as a defense of incompetent government responses, so I'm not sure why anyone would take it that way? It's certainly true that e.g. the USA would have fewer deaths if our response hadn't been so late and chaotic; but that doesn't mean the same measures that brought South Korea to five deaths per million would have brought the USA anywhere near that.
- Johnjonjoan 6y agoYes I agree. I understand the point you are making and I don't think what we have contradicted each other. I accept South Korea's measures won't get most Western countries near their death rate. However I felt the need to add that the methods are based on past experience and just because they won't have the same power they will still be extremely effective in combating the virus.
- tripletao 6y agoCertainly fair, though I'd probably replace "extremely effective" with "our best ideas to solve a very serious problem, and therefore worth trying". For example, is Reff < 1 in Korea only because of contact tracing? They're doing a commendable job with that, and it's certainly helping, but by how much? Is their voluntary physical distancing actually responsible for most of their success? Or some yet-unknown factor? I'm not sure how anyone could answer that now with confidence. That uncertainty shouldn't stop us from implementing the best ideas we have, but I believe it should be acknowledged.
- Johnjonjoan 6y agoAgreed. Especially the last part, well put.