(03-15-2020 08:02 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(03-15-2020 07:58 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(03-15-2020 07:48 PM)Claw Wrote:  

(03-15-2020 07:27 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-15-2020 05:04 PM)TripleA Wrote:  The nudge theory is a risky strategy, but def a way to build herd immunity, lol. While killing more peeps short term.

I just don't think many other countries are going to try that. It's the opposite of "flattening the curve."

The problem is the breakdown of society we will see if the panic is still going strong into April. At some point, this is going to have to run its course and the chips fall where they may. Looting, empty shelves, violence, takedown of the economy, overwhelming the health system. Pick your poison. Wait until most people have no food or income, which is inevitable in a very short period. Whats the point in having a hypothetical hospital bed if I have to murder my neighbor to feed my family dinner tonight. We need to return to normal after Easter regardless of what the virus is doing. While this will probably be worse than the flu, it isn't yellow fever. Either we nip it in the bud in the next two weeks or life will have to go on. We've been through much worse and Americans aren't going to comply with a military state indefinitely. This isn't Nazi Germany or Communist China.

Im not taking this lightly but we can't shut down society for the rest of the year. If there is a better alternative, Im all ears, but right now the UK plan and herd immunity sounds like the best approach to me insofar as minimizing deaths and disruption while getting society back on track quickly. Quarantine the sick and elderly and let it run through the rest of us rapidly. We can have SARS parties and be done with it by Easter.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The problem with flattening the curve is it does not reduce the area under the curve. Unless something happens (weather, treatment breakthrough, etc), the number of sick and dead is essentially the same in both cases. The economic damage would appear to be much worse in the flatten the curve scenario. EDIT TO ADD: Ok. Maybe the number of dead is less if there are insufficient resources to treat curable patients during the peak.

Thats not true. The number of sick is essentially the same---the number of dead is greatly reduced because you dont lose people you could have saved simply because the health care system cant provide what they need (thats where they are Italy right now). Look at this way---if you have 100,000 ICU beds, the name of the game is keeping the number of people needed ICU beds below 100,000 at the peak. Thats how you save extra people.

I added an edit to that effect. I will note, however, that until you reach capacity, there is no benefit to this approach.