This is obviously not true because there are many countries that had many introductions from travel, just like this, and even large outbreaks, and got it under control without anything like China’s shutdowns. There are other proven strategies that work well.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @DouthatNYT
Take a look at my article. Almost every country got multiple introductions, just like the United States, and some even had bigger outbreaks than we did early on and did not have draconian shutdowns, just appropriate response to the threat, and it worked.https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/09/k-overlooked-variable-driving-pandemic/616548/ …
2 replies 12 retweets 61 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @DouthatNYT
To a first approximation, no large country outside the Pacific Rim got it right that early (counting Canada, which had significant exposure to Original SARS)
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Germany got it right secondarily, but with pretty significant restrictions; every other large European country failed. Trump's not an outlier until summer.
3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
I mean, I think we should have done better, because we had longer to get it right, but bad US policy doesn't show up in the data in the early, critical months.
4 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @asymmetricinfo @DouthatNYT
Yes, almost all of Western Europe flunked because they went with the flu playbook, rather than SARS/MERS (hence my article) but it's not just Japan and South Korea. Yes, Germany. But also Uruguay. (Despite elsewhere in Latin America failing badly). Uganda. There's more.
2 replies 5 retweets 23 likes -
It's not true that we were doomed because introductions happened. And, look, South Korea had a massive, massive early outbreak because of terrible luck. The Pacific Rim didn't do well by magic. Aggressive response to outbreak+targeting indoors/ventilation/crowds/clusters+masks.
2 replies 6 retweets 32 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @DouthatNYT
I think there are two separate questions: first, were there policy interventions that could have minimized this despite multiple introductions? Absolutely, yes. Second, were those interventions politically possible in places that hadn't had a major pandemic in 100 years?
4 replies 2 retweets 12 likes -
Leaving aside small countries (because statistically, you'd expect small countries to have both the best and the worst outcomes, even if policy was the same everywhere, just due to natural variance), I think the evidence on #2 is "Not really".
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Germany did it, but Germany is second only to Scandinavia and Singapore in bureaucratic competence, and had a leader who worked as a research scientist until 1990.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
Germany is a legislatively decentralized nation, like ours. No experience with a recent pandemic. Yes, of course, they had good leadership, and that's the point. Could we avoided this fate with a bit of effort? Absolutely. The introductions mean nothing. They happened everywhere.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @DouthatNYT
Germany has a vastly, vastly better bureaucracy than the United States, and also, a very strong culture of bureaucratic compliance. (I love
@mungowitz's story about being attacked for jaywalking across an empty street by an old lady screaming "Die kinder! Die kinder!")2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
I have family in Germany and lived there. Yes, they have the recycling police and all, but they also have all sorts of counter dynamics. All the culture and immunity arguments fail, because there are things common to sustained success, but it is simply not culture or geography.
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
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.