> Two and a half month of draconian quarantine may work
That will probably be insufficient in duration:
”We [...] show that policy strategies which aim to mitigate the epidemic might halve deaths and reduce peak healthcare demand by two-thirds, but that this will not be enough to prevent health systems being overwhelmed. More intensive, and socially disruptive interventions will therefore be required to suppress transmission to low levels. It is likely such measures – most notably, large scale social distancing – will need to be in place for many months, perhaps until a vaccine becomes available.”
Wuhan is on track for zero new cases by the end of this month after starting the quarantine on January 23. So, in no way is the collapse of their heath system part of a total quarantine. But, I am saying what happens after that? Do you shut everything down on the next case, when infections it 100 or 10,000 etc.
Basically the quarantine option has a known outcome in the short term, and doing nothing as millions die is another option. But, they have such high costs and are so far apart a middle ground seems desirable.
That will probably be insufficient in duration:
”We [...] show that policy strategies which aim to mitigate the epidemic might halve deaths and reduce peak healthcare demand by two-thirds, but that this will not be enough to prevent health systems being overwhelmed. More intensive, and socially disruptive interventions will therefore be required to suppress transmission to low levels. It is likely such measures – most notably, large scale social distancing – will need to be in place for many months, perhaps until a vaccine becomes available.”
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/196234/covid19-imperial-rese...
> A middle ground between doubling every 3 days and total shutdown looks really appealing in that context.
A middle ground between “do nothing” and “don’t do enough to stop the healthcare system from collapsing” sounds really appealing?