3 ms·

The fact that some countries are using test-and-trace effectively doesn't seem to be refuted by the fact that other countries are doing poorly. Are those countr

The fact that some countries are using test-and-trace effectively doesn't seem to be refuted by the fact that other countries are doing poorly. Are those countries also following South Korea's model? Do they have the medical and biotech resources of S. Korea and the US?

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
There are enough degrees of freedom to define South Korea's model such that only successful countries are following it. The fact that every single Western European country is sitting together at the top of the per-capita charts makes it hard to believe that it's just a matter of picking the right policies and executing them. In every region of the world, countries with lots of medical and biotech resources are generally doing worse. Korea, China, and Japan are all doing worse than Thailand and Vietnam, Eastern Europe is doing better than Western Europe, and Canada and the US are the worst hit countries in the Americas. The list of countries which have seemingly controlled the coronavirus despite being unable to control tuberculosis and malaria is very long.
- matthewdgreen 6y ago
  The degree of the epidemic in a given country during March-April seems to reflect at least three factors: (1) luck (e.g., did you get early spread like Lombardy), (2) public health policy, and (3) resource limitations that were unavoidable given the short warning period. South Korea was well prepared by SARS, and did extremely well on (2)+(3). Other Western nations had good policy responses, but didn't have the resources in place by February/March. However, many countries that were unprepared have since made significant efforts to increase resources and deploy successful policy. A look at the epidemic curves in May shows that results are diverging even between Western countries that had similar initial growth. Some, despite starting with a similar initial case spread, are seeing significantly greater declines than others. Some are deploying testing resources at a higher rate. Ignoring current performance and lumping all Western nations together completely ignores all of this and makes it seem like humans are helpless to control epidemics, which is an absurd claim.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    Looking at current epidemic curves reinforces my belief that humans are helpless to control epidemics. Epidemic curves of individual American states shows the same thing [1]; some states have seen a speedy decline, and some are kinda stuck, with no correlation to any policy decision I'm aware of. [1] https://www.endcoronavirus.org/states https://www.endcoronavirus.org/states
    - ghaff 6y ago
      For example,there are doubtless exacerbating factors in the case of NYC (density, transit, lots of travelers). However, whatever you may like or not like about the specific policy responses at all levels of government with respect to NYC, I think it's hard to make the case that it was a uniquely bad response compared to not only everywhere else in the US but everywhere else in the world.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

There are enough degrees of freedom to define South Korea's model such that only successful countries are following it. The fact that every single Western European country is sitting together at the top of the per-capita charts makes it hard to believe that it's just a matter of picking the right policies and executing them. In every region of the world, countries with lots of medical and biotech resources are generally doing worse. Korea, China, and Japan are all doing worse than Thailand and Vietnam, Eastern Europe is doing better than Western Europe, and Canada and the US are the worst hit countries in the Americas. The list of countries which have seemingly controlled the coronavirus despite being unable to control tuberculosis and malaria is very long.

matthewdgreen 6y ago
The degree of the epidemic in a given country during March-April seems to reflect at least three factors: (1) luck (e.g., did you get early spread like Lombardy), (2) public health policy, and (3) resource limitations that were unavoidable given the short warning period. South Korea was well prepared by SARS, and did extremely well on (2)+(3). Other Western nations had good policy responses, but didn't have the resources in place by February/March. However, many countries that were unprepared have since made significant efforts to increase resources and deploy successful policy. A look at the epidemic curves in May shows that results are diverging even between Western countries that had similar initial growth. Some, despite starting with a similar initial case spread, are seeing significantly greater declines than others. Some are deploying testing resources at a higher rate. Ignoring current performance and lumping all Western nations together completely ignores all of this and makes it seem like humans are helpless to control epidemics, which is an absurd claim.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  Looking at current epidemic curves reinforces my belief that humans are helpless to control epidemics. Epidemic curves of individual American states shows the same thing [1]; some states have seen a speedy decline, and some are kinda stuck, with no correlation to any policy decision I'm aware of. [1] https://www.endcoronavirus.org/states https://www.endcoronavirus.org/states
  - ghaff 6y ago
    For example,there are doubtless exacerbating factors in the case of NYC (density, transit, lots of travelers). However, whatever you may like or not like about the specific policy responses at all levels of government with respect to NYC, I think it's hard to make the case that it was a uniquely bad response compared to not only everywhere else in the US but everywhere else in the world.