Thought experiment: Given that flattening the curve simply postpones infections as opposed to stopping them, should the places with the least current impact be trying to AVOID infections or trying to INCREASE infections to get herd immunity, short of crashing hospitals?
-
-
I wouldn’t say the “same” infections. Opening up back to work puts LTC community’s (Lont term care) and other at risk at an even higher chance of coming in contact. I mean if senicides your thing by all means I don’t judge.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The number of deaths (assuming no hospital overloads) is the area under the curve. In mathematical terms the integral. Is it the same for both curves?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
-
-
-
It reduces casualty count if the extension gives us enough time to develop care strategies that reduce the severity of the infection or treat it outright.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I would add that ‘seasonality’ is another factor to play out - so it is worth buying time to see. Whilst spread still happens - no real epicentres in the southern hemisphere.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There is a good argument that prolonging the time to achieving herd immunity will increase the mortality. We can hide the at-risk for a month, not for 3-6 months.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.