Quote:
Originally Posted by Titty Meat
Not sure this is true. Singapore had been through this before with SARS. It wasnt just the lockdown flattening the curve but also the aggressive tracking of the virus which has helped them.
|
And yet...
Ultimately I think the tracking/tracing model is extraordinarily noble and I applaud the approach. I'd love it to work.
But I think the invasion of Normandy is probably the most involved and successful combination of logistics and administration ever seen in recorded human history.
And it would be
dwarfed by the efforts needed to successfully contact trace anyone who's tested positive. Especially when you want to talk about 'exponential models' of who sees who who sees who. I mean the premise of all this fear was that 1 person who gets infected can expose 10 people who expose 10 more and suddenly that one person yields a needed dragnet of 100 in the span of 3 'generations'. With a 3-5 day incubation period compounded at every F level, aren't you just pushing water uphill? There's no way for that to eventually become overwhelming.
And we conceded that point early one when we said the possibility of exponential spread was inevitable so it was vital to just lock everyone down.
But now we're going to ignore that same math when trying to talk about the efforts needed to successfully trace the contact/behavior of people? Especially those who are potentially dishonest or forgetful?
The idea of a wholesale contact tracing/testing effort being some sort of panacea is folly. Could it bring this back a bit? Probably. But it would still only remain manageable in a situation with extremely tight social isolation measures in place.
Because the trick isn't to fix this for 2-3 weeks and never has been. It's to develop a long-term plan and I just don't see that plan being viable over the needed timeline.