miro
8
7
miro has not written any posts yet.
Hm. Doesn't the paper go on to say that full lockdowns would need to be in effect for 2/3 of those 18 months? I will read that article, but I don't think the paper is saying that we could return to normal with monitoring and case tracing and localized lockdown to quash outbreaks for the remainder of the 18 months.
e: Okay, read the paper. Respectfully, many of the estimated numbers there seem entirely inconsistent with the literature that I've been reading from epidemiology experts. I haven't seen a single paper estimating 10 million deaths in the United States, and I'm not inclined to trust an uncredentialed medium post (I know this is
I don't think this decision is up to the public health officials. Indeed, you can read an interview with Fauci where he is making this exact point and saying that he has asked, and asked, and asked, for social distancing to be observed at press conferences.
I actually do not think I've seen any honest recounting of the Imperial College study. Unless I'm misreading it, the study appears to be saying that we either need to have essentially a complete lock down for the next 18 months (which **definitely has not** been reported by most media organizations) or we shouldn't be implementing full social distancing, but rather an optimal policy of social distancing of those over 70 and school closures. Complete social distancing followed by relaxation before the development of a vaccine leads to almost as many deaths as unmitigated spread.
I've seen so much discussion of how the Imperial College paper has influenced governmental policy, but our current... (read more)
It's interesting because you would intuitively think this, but there is actually not terrible evidence linking periods of economic growth to increased mortality.
Here is the article in nature.
Is non-profit funding really that inelastic in depression?
China is not going to recover and rebound quickly if they have no herd immunity. They're either going to have to be on permanent war footing, decide that the number of deaths they will face is acceptable. All the best epidemiology modeling I've said points to a resurgence in cases in any country that does a complete lockdown (a la China) for only a few months.
Just look at the Neil Ferguson study if you want an understanding of the likely impact of various interventions.
We were headed for a big recession anyway
Always odd to me when people lead with a comment like this, since recessions are essentially unforecastable due to the nature of market pricing. [1]
This comment seems heavy on claims, but I'd like to at least see some of the reasoning behind it. Why will female employment go up? I suspect employment in general will go down, so predicting an increase is surprising.
[1]: https://www.themoneyillusion.com/stop-predicting-recessions/
Yep, I meant it in the correct fashion :) Prescribe would imply the opposite of what the paper said.