Thread on shocking exponential growth, yet still fails to understand exponential growth.
If your small interventions fail to stop growth, ~everyone is infected anyway. Then your small intervention has a small effect, because herd immunity is an approximately linear equation. https://twitter.com/dsymetweets/status/1246933275093938182
If your small interventions fail to stop growth, ~everyone is infected anyway. Then your small intervention has a small effect, because herd immunity is an approximately linear equation. https://twitter.com/dsymetweets/status/1246933275093938182
This is why widely contagious pandemics usually have binary outcomes: either everyone who can be infected, is infected, or approximately no-one is infected.
SARS could be stopped, and infected 10,000 people.
H1N1 couldn't, and infected 1,000,000,000 people.
SARS could be stopped, and infected 10,000 people.
H1N1 couldn't, and infected 1,000,000,000 people.
Similarly in communities where it's possible to spread HIV it's shockingly common: estimated ~5% in people who inject drugs in North America, even w/ aggressive efforts to stop it.
Outside at-risk communities, R0 was pushed <1 via safe sex, testing, etc. and ~no-one has it.
Outside at-risk communities, R0 was pushed <1 via safe sex, testing, etc. and ~no-one has it.
This is why in theory the best strategy to stop a disease like COVID-19 is to do *really* strict lockdown, as strict as you possibly can. And if that doesn't work/isn't possible, best strategy may be to give up and get it over with quickly.
But not very politically palatable. :/
But not very politically palatable. :/