Just a point of clarification...the Canadian wave-1 trailing off in early May would be the result of physical distancing. The "paradox of prevention" is that this will have maintained a lot of population susceptibility.

@izzspeaks

We project that abruptly returning to "normal" at that time will have us right back to raging epidemic by early June.

By contrast, partial reduction in distancing (say going from 70% reduction to 30-50% reduction) would slow resurgence, and push it further ahead.

The best analogy is dimmer vs. light switch. We can't just flick distancing on and off. But economically and psychologically we have to figure out what we can restart and what we can't.

The jeopardy created by large gatherings is a signature of this epidemic. Many of those sectors (sports, entertainment, fitness) are transitioning remarkably to generating revenue via streaming and personal training. I realize it's not back to normal...

but it's survival mode.

I think businesses and services that don't require large gatherings of humans can be re-opened safely (opinion, don't @ me) in much the same way we have maintained opening of essential businesses.

Many of us can work, study and teach from home. It sucks, but we should continue. Not my area but my understanding is that 40% of Ontario's work force has the potential to work remotely.

I have spent much of my career studying seasonality. I do think physical environment is an important determinant of infectivity (UV, temp, humidity). That's counterbalanced in a pandemic by high prevalence of susceptibility, which buoys Rt.

But it does suggest that we can (and I think should) give people access to parks and green spaces, which we can use safely much as we use grocery stores and pharmacies safely.

(Sorry Trinity Bellwoods hipsters...no carrying the couch over to the park for beer, weed, and snuggling).