Pandemics grow the size they need to be acknowledged, and then 100x after that.
(thread)
1/N
(thread)
1/N
An example: China.
Wuhan (same population as Lombardy) was locked down after ~600 cases.
Hubei (same population as Italy) saw 62000 cases more.
That was with Draconian measures. And that was considered a success.
2/N
Wuhan (same population as Lombardy) was locked down after ~600 cases.
Hubei (same population as Italy) saw 62000 cases more.
That was with Draconian measures. And that was considered a success.
2/N
Some might say: China numbers were underestimating cases.
Probably. But so are the numbers of whatever country you're living in right now.
3/N
Probably. But so are the numbers of whatever country you're living in right now.
3/N
Example: Korea seems on track to cap cases to 8k.
However, Daegu's streets were empty already when cases were only 100. Again, that's about a 80x from the beginning of social distancing, not so far from 100x.
And that's because they tested A LOT and did excellent tracking.
3/N
However, Daegu's streets were empty already when cases were only 100. Again, that's about a 80x from the beginning of social distancing, not so far from 100x.
And that's because they tested A LOT and did excellent tracking.
3/N
The 100x from the first tweet is not a fixed number, of course.
It depends on how well the infected were kept separate from the sane. It can be 5x or 5000x.
That said, we're overestimating the effects of "European-style lockdown".
4/N
It depends on how well the infected were kept separate from the sane. It can be 5x or 5000x.
That said, we're overestimating the effects of "European-style lockdown".
4/N
For example, Italian lockdown was extremely porous, especially in the first days. Trains were still working. Police checks were few. Now it's working better.
Second: even if families stay in their house, one asymptomatic family member can infect his/her family members.
5/N
Second: even if families stay in their house, one asymptomatic family member can infect his/her family members.
5/N
The Chinese allegedly went door to door to test people and more or less voluntarily isolate them. People were allowed to exit the house once per week, to get groceries. People were wearing masks. And cases went 100x since the lockdown.
6/N
6/N
Now, I'm not advocating for such draconian measures. A Korean-style tracing & self-imposed lockdown seems more ideal.
What I'm saying is: the worse implemented social isolation and contact tracing will be, the more cases we will have from the day of its implementation.
7/N
What I'm saying is: the worse implemented social isolation and contact tracing will be, the more cases we will have from the day of its implementation.
7/N
We cannot illude ourselves that from the day we implement social distancing it will be all downhill.
There will still be a lot of uphill. How much, depends on how late social distancing is implemented and how porous it is.
Can we beat China & Korea's benchmark?
8/N
There will still be a lot of uphill. How much, depends on how late social distancing is implemented and how porous it is.
Can we beat China & Korea's benchmark?
8/N
9/ A consequence of the 100x rule would be that each new infection while no lockdown would correspond to at least 80-100 cases down the road. With a 2% mortality, say, it would mean 2 deaths
Eg: Belgium had 197 cases last night; that could marginally translate to ~300-400 deaths
Eg: Belgium had 197 cases last night; that could marginally translate to ~300-400 deaths
