jcblass -mataleo1 -jcblass -Stache - That Oxford model is interesting but, like they ask at the end of the article, how do you explain the explosion in cases in Italy, Spain, NYC, etc?
A specific set of circumstances tailor made to spread the virus. Circumstances not at all inline with the rest of the country, i.e., old sick population, Italy. Densely populated, international hub with public transport and people living on top of one another, NYC...
It's not the same in Toledo Ohio, or Ft. Walton Beach Florida. Hell even Los Angeles is managing just fine, a couple deaths every other day, if that.
True, but these are only hypotheses. Why do you explain that Rome wasn't as hardly hit as Milano? Rome's population is more densely populated, is older, and receives more tourists.
Other small towns were hit hard.
I would imagine Rome might have more resources, the people more wealthy and in better health than Lombardy, or there is something about this virus, we haven't quite figured out, that makes it pray on some people more than others. However, generally speaking, these outbreaks have been regional and afflicted the elderly and immune compromised. That one variable has been stable throughout and mainly why I think a good % of the country can get back to work in the next week or two.
Obviously, if it is a regional hot spot you don't, but we can start relaxing some of this.
I get your points and they are completely valid. But neither you nor I should be making these decisions. It worries me to see calls for "extreme and total isolation" or "a full stop to isolation procedures" without any kind of experience.
Nobody knows for sure, but some know more than others. We've got pretty smart people in this country who do this for a living and I defer to them on how strict isolation should be, how long it should last, and where it should be done.