Tweet
You have to be living in a cave without connection to the outside world to not recognize that as mobility and social interaction increased with easing of restrictions, the virus began infecting susceptible humans again. Different countries by region and state have experienced different growth rates but that is unimportant to the undeniable fact that you cannot control SARS-CoV-2 as in eradicate it through even the most stringent mitigation measures up to complete lock downs. We can't even sufficiently dampen its spread to the goal posts established by public health experts. That's a problem. The other undeniable problem is the data by which officials are measuring viral spread or disease burden are proving to be unreliable. This is particularly true in the US.
My point, for the last month at least, has been that here in the US, we are faced with a choice of continuing with mitigation measures that involve restricting social and economic activity, such restrictions producing marginal public health benefits while incurring significant costs, and approaching the virus in ways that stress managing outcomes in an essentially unrestricted economy and social circumstances. Here in the US, a better response to the pandemic involves focusing attention and resources on testing, tracing, medical management of hospitalized patients with COVID and protecting vulnerable populations - I'd define three levels of mitigation measures based on age: Americans over 80 at level three measures (the strictest), 56-79, level two and 55 and under level three (least restrictive).
You should know where I got those age breakouts if you've been reading my posts. I'm not pulling them out of my ass - various studies clearly show who is at risk of serious complications from C-19 by age and who isn't. Most aren't at risk yet we are applying the same irresponsibly designed and implemented restrictions across all age groups. What mitigation measures might be included in each level I mention above are debatable but you could develop a mechanism to tighten or ease them in each level based on local outcome data - some of that, e.g., hospital admission rates, ED visits for COVID like symptoms, represent hard data that has a long standing record of being accurate unlike the inaccuracy we are seeing in the data commonly being used to develop the PH response to the virus.
Right now, the process of imposing mitigation measures varies widely, is based on questionable data including new case #s, CFR, % positives - and accordingly, inappropriate measures implemented locally. That crazy process leads to some areas having no mitigation measures, people traveling unknowingly infected and unknowingly seeding the virus elsewhere where, heretofore the virus was not present. That's just one of the problems, although a big one, associated with the US's decentralized approach to battling the pandemic. There are many others too numerous to recount in this post that I've posted about previously. But make no mistake, the US is involved in a disastrous flailex facing an unprecedented PH crisis. It may be ameliorated with the introduction of a vaccine but if some leadership doesn't emerge at the federal or, at least at a regional level in the next 3 months, my concern is that important sectors of the economy will be irrevocably crushed. Social consequences will be immense if not our social fabric being unimaginably torn apart with long term impact.
Have a nice day.
My point, for the last month at least, has been that here in the US, we are faced with a choice of continuing with mitigation measures that involve restricting social and economic activity, such restrictions producing marginal public health benefits while incurring significant costs, and approaching the virus in ways that stress managing outcomes in an essentially unrestricted economy and social circumstances. Here in the US, a better response to the pandemic involves focusing attention and resources on testing, tracing, medical management of hospitalized patients with COVID and protecting vulnerable populations - I'd define three levels of mitigation measures based on age: Americans over 80 at level three measures (the strictest), 56-79, level two and 55 and under level three (least restrictive).
You should know where I got those age breakouts if you've been reading my posts. I'm not pulling them out of my ass - various studies clearly show who is at risk of serious complications from C-19 by age and who isn't. Most aren't at risk yet we are applying the same irresponsibly designed and implemented restrictions across all age groups. What mitigation measures might be included in each level I mention above are debatable but you could develop a mechanism to tighten or ease them in each level based on local outcome data - some of that, e.g., hospital admission rates, ED visits for COVID like symptoms, represent hard data that has a long standing record of being accurate unlike the inaccuracy we are seeing in the data commonly being used to develop the PH response to the virus.
Right now, the process of imposing mitigation measures varies widely, is based on questionable data including new case #s, CFR, % positives - and accordingly, inappropriate measures implemented locally. That crazy process leads to some areas having no mitigation measures, people traveling unknowingly infected and unknowingly seeding the virus elsewhere where, heretofore the virus was not present. That's just one of the problems, although a big one, associated with the US's decentralized approach to battling the pandemic. There are many others too numerous to recount in this post that I've posted about previously. But make no mistake, the US is involved in a disastrous flailex facing an unprecedented PH crisis. It may be ameliorated with the introduction of a vaccine but if some leadership doesn't emerge at the federal or, at least at a regional level in the next 3 months, my concern is that important sectors of the economy will be irrevocably crushed. Social consequences will be immense if not our social fabric being unimaginably torn apart with long term impact.
Have a nice day.
Comment