3 ms·
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 per
by 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 agoThe 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 agoYou 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 agoOh, so I did, my apologies.