3 ms·

No one has answered this? Come now. It's not hard to solve. Nursing homes remain closed to visitors. Staff and residents only. Staff are tested daily for c

by cwhiz 6y ago

No one has answered this? Come now. It's not hard to solve. Nursing homes remain closed to visitors. Staff and residents only. Staff are tested daily for covid. Nursing home residents do not leave the nursing home. Staff and residents wear contact tracing bracelets and residents stay distant from one another. You do the best you can. The common cold can be deadly for people in nursing homes. We cannot drop the risk to zero.

fwip 6y ago
And how do you propose to keep staff from getting covid if "infection rates skyrocket?" Daily testing doesn't help much if you end up disqualifying most of your staff.
- cheeze 6y ago
  The same way the NBA did. With strict rules around quarantining. If you're staff, you're part of that "70+ at risk population"
- cwhiz 6y ago
  This isn’t rocket science. You quarantine, test frequently, keep skeleton crews, contact trace, etc. Like I said, it isn’t going to be perfect. It can’t be perfect. You do the best you can. You don’t shut down the entire US economy because nursing homes aren’t bulletproof. With daily testing, constant PPE for staff, contact tracing, and other preventive measures it will be fine. It won’t be perfect but it will be fine. It will likely be better than typical.
  - fwip 6y ago
    The NBA quarantine works because it's for a multi-billion dollar industry and aimed to protect fewer than 500 players. Over a million people are in nursing homes, and more than another million work in them. I am not sure why you think it's more realistic to lock down three million people totally than have most people take moderate precautions. Remember, this is in a proposed scenario in which the average grocery shopper will have a high likelihood of being infected, without masks or any social distancing measures being taken. The White House tried the "frequent rapid testing" strategy, and that didn't seem to do a very good job of protecting the staff there. Again, this was in the current situation in which we have a relatively low prevalence of contagion, with social distancing measures and masks in the outside environment.
    - cwhiz 6y ago
      You replied to the wrong person. I didn’t say we should, or could, do an NBA lockdown. >I am not sure why you think it's more realistic to lock down three million people totally than have most people take moderate precautions. Realistic? How about legal, likely, or plausible. The March lockdowns aren’t happening again, not on a wide scale. People will riot.
      - fwip 6y ago
        Oh, so I did, my apologies.

by cwhiz 6y ago

fwip 6y ago

And how do you propose to keep staff from getting covid if "infection rates skyrocket?" Daily testing doesn't help much if you end up disqualifying most of your staff.

cheeze 6y ago
The same way the NBA did. With strict rules around quarantining. If you're staff, you're part of that "70+ at risk population"
cwhiz 6y ago
This isn’t rocket science. You quarantine, test frequently, keep skeleton crews, contact trace, etc. Like I said, it isn’t going to be perfect. It can’t be perfect. You do the best you can. You don’t shut down the entire US economy because nursing homes aren’t bulletproof. With daily testing, constant PPE for staff, contact tracing, and other preventive measures it will be fine. It won’t be perfect but it will be fine. It will likely be better than typical.
- fwip 6y ago
  The NBA quarantine works because it's for a multi-billion dollar industry and aimed to protect fewer than 500 players. Over a million people are in nursing homes, and more than another million work in them. I am not sure why you think it's more realistic to lock down three million people totally than have most people take moderate precautions. Remember, this is in a proposed scenario in which the average grocery shopper will have a high likelihood of being infected, without masks or any social distancing measures being taken. The White House tried the "frequent rapid testing" strategy, and that didn't seem to do a very good job of protecting the staff there. Again, this was in the current situation in which we have a relatively low prevalence of contagion, with social distancing measures and masks in the outside environment.
  - cwhiz 6y ago
    You replied to the wrong person. I didn’t say we should, or could, do an NBA lockdown. >I am not sure why you think it's more realistic to lock down three million people totally than have most people take moderate precautions. Realistic? How about legal, likely, or plausible. The March lockdowns aren’t happening again, not on a wide scale. People will riot.
    - fwip 6y ago
      Oh, so I did, my apologies.