Social Distancing -- 15 days that make the difference.
So says the government.
Here's what you're looking at.
The native R0 is 3.0. If everyone socially distances we don't stop the virus, but we suppress the rate of growth. That suppression results in a temporary R0 of 2.0.
The "infected" rate is the R0 minus the percentage of infected and recovered (that is, R0 starts to burn out.)
We presume that (1) you have six days from infection until you can infect others (the generation time) and you have a known resolution of 10 days (that is, you will recover or you will die.) The latter is not necessarily known but all it does is shift the "Recovered/Ok" and "Immune" lines down.
We will further presume nobody actually dies. That's of course stupidly optimistic.
Ok, so what if we do nothing?
Well, you get the left side. That looks awful but in four months it has burned out. Why? Because between day 121 and 127 the percent immune reaches 66%, and when that happens it can't sustain transmission anymore.
Ok, so we do the "suppression" for 15 days. What happens?
That's the right side.
In 15 days nothing happens. At all. If you drop the restrictions in less than approximately six months you've accomplished nothing. If you try to do it for 15 days note that even if you start when there are 1 million cases after 15 days, or just under 3 "turns", the left side takes over again and you're ****ed. You've bought nothing.
You're talking three months of active suppression (assuming we're already three months into it) and this assumes we are going with an R0 "suppressed" of 2.0. Note that 2.0 only drops the load in the medical system by about a third, which is probably not enough.
If it turns out people "distance" more than that (because they choose to or you force them to, say, with lockdowns and/or at gunpoint) and the R0 is lower than you're really in trouble because each of the "turn times" does even less in terms of gaining on the immunity required, and now the time you must hold the suppressed policies in place increases exponentially. In other words instead of "building immunity" in the population what you wind up doing is simply stopping the clock at the cost of a shutdown of the economy! As soon as you unlock the clock you're right back where you were and have gained nothing unless you hold said suppression measures for outrageous lengths of time.
If you hold the suppressed R0 to 1.3 (approximately seasonal flu) you now have to hold these policies, assuming we are starting at 1 million cases when implemented, for six months, not three. If we start before we get to 1 million cases then it really gets ugly because the lower we hold R0 with suppression the longer it takes if you start from a lower level.
In fact, where we are now, you likely would have to hold these policies for anywhere from six months to a full year, depending on where we manage to clamp R0 at. If you let the measures go early everything you did is laid waste as any release of those measures prior to achieving immunity of approximately 40% still overloads the medical system when you drop the restrictions.
This cannot work folks.
There will be nothing left of the entire leisure and hospitality industry if we try that, nothing of any pension, nothing of the federal budget and 30-50% of households will be completely financially destroyed. We're not talking Recession or even Depression here - we're talking financial Armageddon. The EBT cards will not work. Federal tax collections will go to an effective zero and the deficit will skyrocket to an effective 100% of the budget.
You may as well zero basically every public company on the planet in terms of stock price, all their bonds will be worthless as the firms will go bankrupt and all the promises made based on all of that will be worth nothing too.
We must implement something different as 15 days of this claimed "policy" will make no difference. We will have to lock down the country for six months or more to stop it and that assumes we can target R0 precisely. We can't target R0 precisely, we can't measure it accurately enough and quickly enough, and if we undershoot by the time we figure it out we'll have to hold the restrictions for a full year. The nation will not survive that.
Every single one of the CEOs, politicians and ********** celebrities urging people to do this are advancing a fraud that is mathematically impossible and can only work through an extension for six months or more. There will be nothing left of the economy or any financial market by then.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THIS EXTENDING UNTIL AT LEAST CHRISTMAS FOLKS!
DON'T LET PEOPLE BULL**** YOU ON THIS -- MATH IS NEVER, EVER WRONG! NOT ONE SMALL BUSINESS IN 100 WILL SURVIVE THAT. AND IF WE SUPPRESS TO 1.2 OR 1.3 THEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A TIME REQUIRED OF 12-18 MONTHS!
I'm not the only one who can do math. Here's another group out of the UK that came to the same conclusion and this is exactly why I have maintained since these "steps" were announced they're stupid.
We must instead look at mitigating steps so those who are high risk do not become hospital admissions. We won't get them all, but we must get enough of them to prevent an overload. If we do that this is over in four months and the economy survives.
I've put forward a couple of ideas (e.g. aggressive prophylaxis) in that regard., and there are others, such as making clear that self-isolation is voluntary for anyone at high risk, and isolation means there's nobody who can give it to you who you come in contact with but that would have to be backed up with the clear statement that if you are at high risk and get it anyway, and there are fewer than 150% of the hospital beds required the previous day when you show up you will be denied.
Yeah, I know that's going to raise people's hair on the back of their neck.
But what we're attempting now will not work because mathematically it cannot.