To me, the interesting part of the approach is focusing extra hard on the elderly and trying to keep some semblance of economy running smoothly. I think these are important ideas.https://www.itv.com/news/2020-03-14/elderly-to-be-quarantined-for-four-months-in-wartime-style-mobilisation-to-combat-coronavirus/ …
-
-
Replying to @joshmh
It's clearly an attempt at a strategy that doesn't immediately disable the economy the way most others have, but it relies on a number of assumptions that cannot be made confidently at this point & it may be risking one of the highest COVID-19 death rates in the world
4 replies 0 retweets 15 likes -
Replying to @webdevMason
Yes but all other plans also make a lot of assumptions and don't really add up. I think at this point we should be trying everything,
#staythefuckhome but really, really make sure old people do that because they're the ones that will be disabling the hospitals. And do it NOW.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @joshmh
Many other plans make assumptions that are a lot more conservative. The UK plan hinges on large numbers of younger people getting a highly infectious illness without infecting older people, which admittedly seems implausible to me unless you eliminate all contact between the two.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @webdevMason
I think the idea is to eliminate all contact. They are talking about extreme quarantine measures.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @joshmh
It simply can't be done unless you remove the old from their homes and place them in a hospital environment suitable for infectious disease. Elder care workers, home nurses, grocery delivery people, loved ones — all stewing in a vat of infectious illness.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @webdevMason @joshmh
The elderly who live alone in an isolated home, permit no visitors whatsoever and require no health care will probably be fine. Those with health problems requiring treatment, living in care facilities or living with younger family will all be at risk of infection.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @webdevMason
Yes but isn't that true with all the other plans as well?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @joshmh
The other plans focus on stringent social distancing for all age groups such that the rate of infection slows. Ideally, this means that the young who interact with the old at any given time are less likely to have the virus & the hospitals aren't overcrowded if they do catch it.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @webdevMason
I'm not convinced that it's possible to do sufficient social distancing to save the hospitals at this point. Important to keep the oldest people in severe isolation and keep important economic supply chains running.
#staythefuckhome but also prioritize.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
If the healthcare system collapses, you will have economic collapse. People will stop going to work, participating in non-essential activities in public & patronizing most businesses if they know that they're now facing the same odds as Italians when they became seriously ill.
-
-
Replying to @webdevMason
I agree, we need to protect the healthcare system as much as possible. It's a very delicate game but I think prioritizing extreme isolation on the elderly is an obvious move. They will overrun the hospitals fastest and have the smallest effect on the physical economy.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.