5 ms·
If you can persistently keep the rate < 1, you will by mathematical definition eradicate the disease. (0.99 * 0.99 * 0.99 ... eventually sums to zero.) Keepin
by 9nGQluzmnq3M 6y ago
If you can persistently keep the rate < 1, you will by mathematical definition eradicate the disease. (0.99 * 0.99 * 0.99 ... eventually sums to zero.)
Keeping it under control but not eradicated means averaging exactly 1 over time, which seems like a much harder balancing act.
- colechristensen 6y agoWe're at 26k cases per day in the US, yes if you continue with r<1 for long enough you have few enough cases that you change strategy to eradication, but that isn't really important. Saying what your strategy is now doesn't mean you're bound to it for months or years, you have to shift based on reality, we're not just dealing with a mathematical model. Focusing on the rate as the metric of attention seems very much like the right thing to be at the center of public policy.
- soledades 6y agoYeah but the r is by various proxies a function of the # of cases, so it is not so simple.
- richk449 6y ago> Keeping it under control but not eradicated means averaging exactly 1 over time, which seems like a much harder balancing act. Just put the control rods - I mean open restaurants - on a control loop driven by number of number of hospitalizations. Helps if you have prompt and delayed transmission modes, so you can regulate at the slower speed.