• The blind stupidity and inactivity of our governments has prevented the implementation of measures that could have made containment possible

    What should we have done instead? Shutdown the entire country after the first case? Forcibly place the infected in solitary confinement?

  • For the NHS to cope, we needed to flatten the curve. We could have been far more proactive in at least four areas:

    • requiring effective social distancing measures;
    • far broader based testing, to identify and contain cases (to the scale of South Korea);
    • foreign travel restrictions, or at least strong government advisory against unnecessary leisure travel;
    • required 14 day self-quarantine of all international arrivals from affected regions (as has been implemented in China);
    • advisory self quarantine of anyone with cold or flu like symptoms.

    The alternative is waiting for the wave to hit then implementing the measures above, which is where I think we will end up. You end up with the same (or greater) economic impact, but with a far higher public health impact.

    The following was understood in late January / early February:

    • R0 was estimated above 2;
    • There were known to be mild or asymptomatic cases that were unlikely to be detected, but that would lead to onward spread;
    • It was estimated that testing would pick up, at best, 1 in 4 imported cases.

    A containment strategy limited to testing people with symptoms from affected regions followed by contact tracing was self evidently doomed to failure.

    Carrying on as normal and hoping it wouldn't happen here, in the face of the evidence, was crushingly stupid.

  • Carrying on as normal and hoping it wouldn't happen here, in the face of the evidence, was crushingly and fatefully stupid.

    I would say it's crushingly stupid to assume this is the government position. I'm fairly sure the trained, experienced epidemiologists making decisions for us know what they're doing better than anyone here

  • There is a balance between pure epidemiological response and behavioral psychology. Going hard too early risks people not believing the seriousness and/or getting bored of the restrictions and not following them when it is most necessary.
    It's not 'carrying on as normal', it's waiting for the time when each action will be most effective, in the knowledge that actions are all only going to be able to slow things so much.

    I'm no fan of the government (and I'm certain they will use this to cover multiple failures elsewhere) but it seems a reasonable, expert-led process thus far.

About

Avatar for deleted @deleted started