Quote
Rams43
Quarantine the ‘high risk’ population, plus anyone showing symptoms, plus anyone already diagnosed (for 2 weeks0. Do so vigorously.
Continue with the masks and 6 foot social distancing for all others.
But otherwise let those not in the first 3 groups mentioned above go about their business.
No need to overthink this. Wish we had done this from the jump, tbh.
Sweden let the less vulnerable go about their business and made efforts to protect the more vulnerbale.
According to Sweden's own chief medical official in charge of all that, it did not work. The death rate among the more vulnerable (particularly the elderly) was as high as if not higher than places like the USA. In fact the death rate among the population in general is higher than neighboring scandinavian countries that did have stricter lockdowns. I can quote you a ton of very recent info on this.
Part of the reason for that is that there's no such thing as completely isolating the vulnerable. With the elderly for example you need staff and medical people. Those people only need to be in contact with someone who was in contact with someone who is infected, and boom--a whole facility is in danger.
Oh and it's not just "the vulnerable," medical people and staff in medical facilities also get sick at a high rate.
On the other hand, everyone wearing masks? That approach has a lot of promise. But it has to be (according to what I read) at least 80% of the population and has to be strictly adhered to. Japan did that and its death rate, accounting for the population difference, is 2% of the American death rate.
....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2020 08:58AM by zn.