bigsnake49
Regular Member
- Messages
- 1,800
- Reaction score
- 402
- Points
- 83
- Ethnic group
- Thracian
- Y-DNA haplogroup
- R-PF7558 (LDNA)
- mtDNA haplogroup
- U5a1b
I'm starting to wonder if the kind of "total lockdowns" they did in certain parts of Europe made it worse. You keep people enclosed inside together. They give it to each other, the national or regional numbers go down, you loosen restrictions, and they go out and give it to other people, some of whom will have bad outcomes based on a host of factors.
Maybe it's a case of, you don't believe anything coming out of China, at the first hint of a new virus there you close down all international travel (which the WHO said not to do), you mask everyone (which the WHO said not to do), you contact trace the hell out of every single case with the national police force doing it, not hospitals.
If you did that really early, you're in good shape. If you didn't, which none of the western democracies did, it's too late and all that's left is mitigation.
See:
https://twitter.com/zakkohane/status/1323084465602809856/photo/1
I agree with you but we got caught with our pants down in the US, we had absolutely no PPE stock and definitely no stocks of ventilators. The lockdown was necessary to avoid overwhelming the health care system. If we had actually closed the borders to China or ravelers that originated in China or had been to China or Italy or Spain and isolated others that came from Europe, mandated masks (after of course securing masks), isolating older people, banned large gatherings then we would have had a lot more of success. In the US we usually do not have multi-generational cohabitation so it would have been relatively easier to isolate the old and the young.