You are reading a single comment by @drøn and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
I guess it's potentially about limiting the peak, smoothing the number infected so that the hospitals can cope. The question then is whether that lower peak is still higher than the capacity or not.
This is exactly the reasoning here in DK. I think it's worth it to get that peak as low as possible even if it still exceeds hospital capacity. Having 100 people you can't treat is better than having 1000.
I think the question is rather whether you can afford to lock down.
drøn
Merak
I see what you're saying.
However, it also seems strange to me that you're going to get rid of this by lockdown. I can see that will delay it but at some point in the future the lockdown has to end and I can't see that it will be completely eradicated so will flare up again.
If there's a vaccine on the horizon then I understand the lockdown. If not, then how long can it realistically go on for?
I guess it's potentially about limiting the peak, smoothing the number infected so that the hospitals can cope. The question then is whether that lower peak is still higher than the capacity or not.
I've no real idea but I'm not sure if I buy the our leaders are the worst in the world kind of thinking.