Read on Twitter
It seems like lockdown is not all or nothing, and there& #39;s likely a third path that could be beneficial both to epidemic management and individual& #39;s economic outcomes.
Specifically, we need to figure out what we& #39;re doing, just flattening the curve or reducing the aggregate infection rate over time. Obviously these aren& #39;t exclusive from one another, but if we understand real mortality rates, capacities, and use better models we can be more
strategic. As social distancing is effectively a network theory problem in which we& #39;re trying to break down edges of the graph-there& #39;s likely a solution where we can strategically break linkage for high-risk individuals, "flatten the curve," and allow society to function too.
I ran a few simulations this morning based on less-lockdown strategies, which substantially reduce risk, specifically:
1. Anyone 50+ and anyone who is a caretaker or has a pre-existing condition, go to lockdown, we& #39;ll work with you on WFH, groceries, necessities.
1. Anyone 50+ and anyone who is a caretaker or has a pre-existing condition, go to lockdown, we& #39;ll work with you on WFH, groceries, necessities.
2. Young healthy non-essential employees business as normal, two days a week. Five days of broken graph edges, two days active would substantially slow the spread and "flatten the curve." .. and also break up future graphs with antibody immunity.
3. Masks for everyone coming to the workplace, sew your own, whatever. Essentially use the masks as a friction point for further spread. Gloves, anything else.
