SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : AMD, ARMH, INTC, NVDA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: neolib who wrote (36161)3/20/2020 12:14:26 PM
From: slacker711Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 73781
 
What I actually find shocking is that there isn't much in the way of good analysis published on the expected delta from specific countermeasures. I.e. closing large gatherings will have x% impact, shutting down air travel y%, using face-masks, all home isolation, takeout dining, etc. Doesn't the science of epidemiology know these sort of thing?




I think they only have broad conclusions on things like this (useful vs not useful). As far as I can tell, they don't even know much about transmission profiles for routine diseases like the flu much less something new.

npr.org

Slacker



To: neolib who wrote (36161)3/20/2020 4:42:20 PM
From: VattilaRespond to of 73781
 
This from BBC says a little bit about the effect and impact of different measures considered and applied:

The UK government has always said it is relying on scientific advice to fight the pandemic, and the documents released on Friday (see our earlier entries) reveal the internal discussions of the scientists themselves.

One disagreement was over when to close schools. One of the documents spells out how different models came up with very different results for how much closures would reduce the spread of Covid-19. Some said it would bring a reduction of between 20-60% while another suggested it would be 7.5-30%.

Other insights include the age for people to be considered at risk. The government’s advice is aimed at over 70 - but behind the scenes scientists have been discussing a threshold of 65.

And it’s clear that in developing the advice, there is a pessimistic view of how the British public will respond. It’s assumed that only 50% of households will abide by the request to self-isolate if one member shows symptoms of the virus and that even this “may be unachievable”.

The scientists and the Home Office explored whether the measures would lead to public unrest but this was judged unlikely.

bbc.co.uk



To: neolib who wrote (36161)3/21/2020 12:39:52 PM
From: J_F_ShepardRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 73781
 
If one values freedoms, then having data that supports trade-offs in choosing restrictions vs the economic impact would be nice to have. But I haven't seen a single article that attempts to show any of that.

But you have seen projections of numbers of people likely to be infected and also projections of deaths by the time the disease has run it's course. To get those numbers, the modelers will have had to include the questions you ask....and they will vary by location...