4 ms·

I'm sorry, but this just bolsters my position. There is no society where people will perfectly obey "stay put" orders. It's not possible. You have to tend to

by mc32 4y ago

I'm sorry, but this just bolsters my position. There is no society where people will perfectly obey "stay put" orders. It's not possible. You have to tend to the infirm, you have to run critical systems, people need to eat (not even 50% people have ten days worth of rations stocked up; who is going to distribute more food, water and meds as they run out, etc?)

epgui 4y ago
> There is no society where people will perfectly obey "stay put" orders. It's not possible. It doesn't need to be perfect. Depending on the specific intervention in question, you only need to exceed some critical threshold of compliance to get R_t below 1.0.
- bsaul 4y ago
  i think the last two years shown that nothing acceptable from a human rights pov could have been done to stop the pandemic from spreading once it was out of the bag. i'm not sure which example makes you think things could have been different.
  - sudosysgen 4y ago
    R_t was under 1 in the US for extended periods of time, so your idea that the required measures can't be implemented there is empirically false.
cameldrv 4y ago
Original COVID had an unmitigated R of about 3. All you have to do is reduce transmission 66% and you beat it. China did this very successfully. The later variants were much more transmissible though. With BA.5 the unmitigated R is probably north of 10 and China had to throw in the towel, because reducing transmission 90+% is much harder.
- bsaul 4y ago
  "china did this successfully" We have absolutely no idea what happened in china. We know they hid things in the beginning, and in the end ( when they stopped counting infections after opening the fates to omicron). What makes you think they told the truth in the middle ?
  - saalweachter 4y ago
    Because we know what a disaster it was at the end? We got the footage and reports of hospitals and mortuaries overwhelmed when it ran rampant at the end, but in the middle we just got complaints about how much the isolation policies sucked. Why did the propaganda masters hide all the death in the middle but not at the end? Why did it look like a disease spreading through a mostly-naive population in the end, rather than a wave-N population like everywhere else? Doubt was a reasonable position in the middle, from the outside, but after how it ended it looks pretty clear there was very little in the way of COVID in China for two years.
  - cameldrv 4y ago
    If there were widespread covid on the scale of every other country, China is not so closed off that they could keep that a secret.

by mc32 4y ago

epgui 4y ago

> There is no society where people will perfectly obey "stay put" orders. It's not possible. It doesn't need to be perfect. Depending on the specific intervention in question, you only need to exceed some critical threshold of compliance to get R_t below 1.0.

bsaul 4y ago
i think the last two years shown that nothing acceptable from a human rights pov could have been done to stop the pandemic from spreading once it was out of the bag. i'm not sure which example makes you think things could have been different.
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  R_t was under 1 in the US for extended periods of time, so your idea that the required measures can't be implemented there is empirically false.

cameldrv 4y ago

Original COVID had an unmitigated R of about 3. All you have to do is reduce transmission 66% and you beat it. China did this very successfully. The later variants were much more transmissible though. With BA.5 the unmitigated R is probably north of 10 and China had to throw in the towel, because reducing transmission 90+% is much harder.

bsaul 4y ago
"china did this successfully" We have absolutely no idea what happened in china. We know they hid things in the beginning, and in the end ( when they stopped counting infections after opening the fates to omicron). What makes you think they told the truth in the middle ?
- saalweachter 4y ago
  Because we know what a disaster it was at the end? We got the footage and reports of hospitals and mortuaries overwhelmed when it ran rampant at the end, but in the middle we just got complaints about how much the isolation policies sucked. Why did the propaganda masters hide all the death in the middle but not at the end? Why did it look like a disease spreading through a mostly-naive population in the end, rather than a wave-N population like everywhere else? Doubt was a reasonable position in the middle, from the outside, but after how it ended it looks pretty clear there was very little in the way of COVID in China for two years.
- cameldrv 4y ago
  If there were widespread covid on the scale of every other country, China is not so closed off that they could keep that a secret.