Team from Imperial College

Not a happy forecast. Significant rebound next fall/winter unless we persist in lockdown for a substantial amount of time. Universities should prepare for an online academic year 2020-21.

quote:

Universities should prepare for an online academic year 2020-21.

Ugh... I've been thinking a lot about this possibility. I wonder if my university (and my uni's football team!) will have the guts to commit to this. Or, depending on how things unfold, they may not have a choice...

I sure hope I can keep my job through it all...

quote:

Originally posted by Piano*Dad:
Team from Imperial College

Not a happy forecast. Significant rebound next fall/winter unless we persist in lockdown for a substantial amount of time. Universities should prepare for an online academic year 2020-21.

I have been saying that for a few weeks. Ask Mary Anna.

Well that's a cheery read.

Am I reading the graphs right? If we do nothing, we get a quick high death toll but the virus doesn't return?
Otherwise we are dragging out the inevitable?

If correct, then the best solution--assuming the demand can be met--is let the virus peak early but put the infrastructure, medical people, supplies and equipment in place to treat everyone who needs it. A tall order but possibly the best allocation of our resources if it means the economy can recover with the same number of deaths we would have had over time with full suppression.

Does that make any sense? Put a trillion $ into medical care instead of using it for economic stimulus.

Again, if that means, as the chart suggests, that then C19 won't return.

The virus isn't going to wait for us to build up our infrastructure to meet demand. Virus is operating on short term horizon; infrastructure improvements are long term.

This virus is new and how it operates is still largely unknown. Wwe have no idea if it won't come back. Influenza does every year because the beast mutates enough to infect people who have had previous forms of the virus.

The Chinese built 16 hospitals in 10 days. We couldn't do that. Sad, but true. And 16 hospitals were enough because they locked everyone up.

It's already too late. See Italy.

Plus you can't let the rest of the economy grind to a halt. Millions of people are going to be out of work in very short order (if they aren't already - unemployment numbers over the next couple of weeks will be eye-opening).

They won't have any way to pay rent, buy food.

Armageddon if they don't get some help. At least part of the trillion is not economic stimulus. It is survival money for individuals. That's why the Dems have been pushing for better, longer term unemployment benefits more than the direct payments.

quote:

Originally posted by piqué:
Am I reading the graphs right? If we do nothing, we get a quick high death toll but the virus doesn't return?
Otherwise we are dragging out the inevitable?

If correct, then the best solution--assuming the demand can be met--is let the virus peak early but put the infrastructure, medical people, supplies and equipment in place to treat everyone who needs it. A tall order but possibly the best allocation of our resources if it means the economy can recover with the same number of deaths we would have had over time with full suppression.

Does that make any sense? Put a trillion $ into medical care instead of using it for economic stimulus.

Again, if that means, as the chart suggests, that then C19 won't return.

If we do nothing, the initial spike completely overwhelms our capacity. The result would be a substantial number of preventable deaths. If we do our current responses (distancing and closures) and then let up our guard over the summer, the problem recurs in the fall, though with a lower spike. The message is, absent a magic bullet (cure/vaccine) we cannot stop our lockdown for a long time.

quote:

Originally posted by Piano*Dad:

The message is, absent a magic bullet (cure/vaccine) we cannot stop our lockdown for a long time.

Yup.

My best guess is all of 2020, and maybe a big chunk of 2021. And the only way to do it is by printing money.

quote:

Originally posted by wtg:
The virus isn't going to wait for us to build up our infrastructure to meet demand. Virus is operating on short term horizon; infrastructure improvements are long term.

This virus is new and how it operates is still largely unknown. Wwe have no idea if it won't come back. Influenza does every year because the beast mutates enough to infect people who have had previous forms of the virus.

The Chinese built 16 hospitals in 10 days. We couldn't do that. Sad, but true. And 16 hospitals were enough because they locked everyone up.

It's already too late. See Italy.

+1

quote:

Originally posted by Piano*Dad:

quote:

Originally posted by piqué:
Am I reading the graphs right? If we do nothing, we get a quick high death toll but the virus doesn't return?
Otherwise we are dragging out the inevitable?

If correct, then the best solution--assuming the demand can be met--is let the virus peak early but put the infrastructure, medical people, supplies and equipment in place to treat everyone who needs it. A tall order but possibly the best allocation of our resources if it means the economy can recover with the same number of deaths we would have had over time with full suppression.

Does that make any sense? Put a trillion $ into medical care instead of using it for economic stimulus.

Again, if that means, as the chart suggests, that then C19 won't return.

If we do nothing, the initial spike completely overwhelms our capacity. The result would be a substantial number of preventable deaths. If we do our current responses (distancing and closures) and then let up our guard over the summer, the problem recurs in the fall, though with a lower spike. The message is, absent a magic bullet (cure/vaccine) we cannot stop our lockdown for a long time.

Italy is in lockdown. This isn't a lockdown.

quote:

Originally posted by QuirtEvans:

quote:

Originally posted by Piano*Dad:
Team from Imperial College

Not a happy forecast. Significant rebound next fall/winter unless we persist in lockdown for a substantial amount of time. Universities should prepare for an online academic year 2020-21.

I have been saying that for a few weeks. Ask Mary Anna.

He has.

There’s a credible case that we can do better, keeping the second waves from happening via Singapore/Taiwan/South Korea methods. He calls it the ‘hammer and the dance’ strategy.

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo...e-dance-be9337092b56

Scott Gottlieb (former CDC dir3ctor) expanded on this recently too.

As I said " assuming it is possible to meet demand"

Why couldn't we do what the Chinese did? Build hospitals in ten days? Mass produce thousands of respirators and millions of masks on a dime? Has anyone here actually looked into why not? Or are you just repeating what you've read?

From Jon's linked article:

"Understand the True Problem: Testing and Tracing
Right now, the UK and the US have no idea about their true cases. We don’t know how many there are. We just know the official number is not right, and the true one is in the tens of thousands of cases. This has happened because we’re not testing, and we’re not tracing.
With a few more weeks, we could get our testing situation in order, and start testing everybody. With that information, we would finally know the true extent of the problem, where we need to be more aggressive, and what communities are safe to be released from a lockdown.
New testing methods could speed up testing and drive costs down substantially.
We could also set up a tracing operation like the ones they have in China or other East Asia countries, where they can identify all the people that every sick person met, and can put them in quarantine. This would give us a ton of intelligence to release later on our social distancing measures: if we know where the virus is, we can target these places only. This is not rocket science: it’s the basics of how East Asia Countries have been able to control this outbreak without the kind of draconian social distancing that is increasingly essential in other countries.
The measures from this section (testing and tracing) single-handedly curbed the growth of the coronavirus in South Korea and got the epidemic under control, without a strong imposition of social distancing measures.
Build Up Capacity
The US (and presumably the UK) are about to go to war without armor.
We have masks for just two weeks, few personal protective equipments (“PPE”), not enough ventilators, not enough ICU beds, not enough ECMOs (blood oxygenation machines)… This is why the fatality rate would be so high in a mitigation strategy.
But if we buy ourselves some time, we can turn this around:
We have more time to buy equipment we will need for a future wave
We can quickly build up our production of masks, PPEs, ventilators, ECMOs, and any other critical device to reduce fatality rate.
Put in another way: we don’t need years to get our armor, we need weeks. Let’s do everything we can to get our production humming now. Countries are mobilized. People are being inventive, such as using 3D printing for ventilator parts. We can do it. We just need more time. Would you wait a few weeks to get yourself some armor before facing a mortal enemy?
This is not the only capacity we need. We will need health workers as soon as possible. Where will we get them? We need to train people to assist nurses, and we need to get medical workers out of retirement. Many countries have already started, but this takes time. We can do this in a few weeks, but not if everything collapses."

This is what I have been saying. We can do better. We can do more. We have to think beyond perceived limitations.