2 ms·

I don’t get the impression that anyone expects anything to be 100% safe. This is a straw man. Everyone agrees the goal is to prevent it from spreading “too much

I don’t get the impression that anyone expects anything to be 100% safe. This is a straw man. Everyone agrees the goal is to prevent it from spreading “too much,” but any proposed school reopenings (from kindergarten up to university) look like they’d land way above the line of acceptable spread. Maybe a line we can all agree on is: If the expected resulting R_0 is above 1, it’s probably not a good plan as it will not be sustainable. Since you probably can’t know whether it’ll result in an R_0 above 1 before doing it, then in order to reopen you must have robust surveillance in place to quickly detect the R_0 and have a plan to shut back down in the case it reaches 1.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
There's quibbles about whether the boundary needs to be exactly 1, but yeah, I agree with your core point. A reopening plan needs a strategy for how to scale back if something goes wrong, and it's hard to imagine how you could scale back transmission in a dorm full of college students.
- ethanbond 6y ago
  Yeah, I think there’s maybe a more general solution of the form: Places can publicly declare their R_0 threshold for shutdown and their surveillance mechanism to detect when it’s hit. I would imagine that, given a detailed surveillance mechanism that’s strictly adhered to, you could calculate the maximum “time to detection” of how soon after hitting that threshold you’d know about it. Post those 4 things: R_0 threshold, surveillance mechanism, time-to-detection, and shutdown plan then people can choose if they want to sign up for that risk. Of course in the education case specifically, the real crux of the issue is the differential between the educators’ (generally older) risk tolerance and those of the students/the needs of students families (in the pre-university case).
  - ethbro 6y ago
    > Post those 4 things: R_0 threshold, surveillance mechanism, time-to-detection, and shutdown plan then people can choose if they want to sign up for that risk. That's exactly what's driven me batty about governments' responses. After the initial lockdown, that's precisely what they should have done. Instead, we got a schizophrenic "Everything is fine" and then "Everything is danger! Surprise second lockdown!" No wonder people are pissed. It'd be better and more effective policy to just lay out the methods, criteria, and current status. (PS: Technically, you're talking about R_t, or current, rather than R_0, or initial)
    - ethanbond 6y ago
      Oof, indeed! Thank you for the correction. Lots of things broken with public response unfortunately.
      - ethbro 6y ago
        Sure! Ethan's have to watch out for each other. Just noticed your first name on this reply. Btw (because I also peeked at other links), if another UX discovery data point re: pharma research would help, flip me an email (in profile). My father just retired from T10 drug discovery R&D (pathology), and would probably be willing to talk your ear off re: process issues.
        ethanbond 6y ago
        Amazing! Thank you. Will be reaching out :)

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

There's quibbles about whether the boundary needs to be exactly 1, but yeah, I agree with your core point. A reopening plan needs a strategy for how to scale back if something goes wrong, and it's hard to imagine how you could scale back transmission in a dorm full of college students.

ethanbond 6y ago
Yeah, I think there’s maybe a more general solution of the form: Places can publicly declare their R_0 threshold for shutdown and their surveillance mechanism to detect when it’s hit. I would imagine that, given a detailed surveillance mechanism that’s strictly adhered to, you could calculate the maximum “time to detection” of how soon after hitting that threshold you’d know about it. Post those 4 things: R_0 threshold, surveillance mechanism, time-to-detection, and shutdown plan then people can choose if they want to sign up for that risk. Of course in the education case specifically, the real crux of the issue is the differential between the educators’ (generally older) risk tolerance and those of the students/the needs of students families (in the pre-university case).
- ethbro 6y ago
  > Post those 4 things: R_0 threshold, surveillance mechanism, time-to-detection, and shutdown plan then people can choose if they want to sign up for that risk. That's exactly what's driven me batty about governments' responses. After the initial lockdown, that's precisely what they should have done. Instead, we got a schizophrenic "Everything is fine" and then "Everything is danger! Surprise second lockdown!" No wonder people are pissed. It'd be better and more effective policy to just lay out the methods, criteria, and current status. (PS: Technically, you're talking about R_t, or current, rather than R_0, or initial)
  - ethanbond 6y ago
    Oof, indeed! Thank you for the correction. Lots of things broken with public response unfortunately.
    - ethbro 6y ago
      Sure! Ethan's have to watch out for each other. Just noticed your first name on this reply. Btw (because I also peeked at other links), if another UX discovery data point re: pharma research would help, flip me an email (in profile). My father just retired from T10 drug discovery R&D (pathology), and would probably be willing to talk your ear off re: process issues.
      - ethanbond 6y ago
        Amazing! Thank you. Will be reaching out :)