2020.03.30 00:51:44 (1244396853212221440) from Daniel J. Bernstein, replying to "🔴@pdfkungfoo@meteo.social🐝🔋 #YesToNoCovid (@pdfkungfoo)" (1244392742752522240):
Small changes in R0 have an exponential effect, yes, but R0=2 doesn't mean 2x every day: it means you're transmitting to 2 people on average during your infectious period after your incubation period. Even in crowded city with higher R0, hopefully incubation takes multiple days.
2020.03.23 16:10:47 (1242106527189778437) from "Stephen Kissler @skissler@fosstodon.org (@StephenKissler)", replying to "Stephen Kissler @skissler@fosstodon.org (@StephenKissler)" (1242106525902090241):
Increased critical care capacity (doubled capacity shown here) is crucial to enable more patients to receive care they need while allowing population immunity to accumulate more rapidly and reducing the overall duration of the epidemic and the total length of social distancing.
2020.03.24 05:30:08 (1242307687653593088) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
Increased critical care capacity is of course good, but here @StephenKissler also makes the unjustified claim that it's good to take advantage of such capacity by infecting people sooner. Adding the possibility of widespread mid-2021 vaccination to the model would flip the claim. https://twitter.com/StephenKissler/status/1242106527189778437
2020.03.24 05:57:12 (1242314501854130177) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
Even within the paper's focus on distancing, the paper's quantitative conclusions start by assuming that distancing reduces R0 by _at most_ 60%. The paper claims, citing (3), that this is what China's distancing did. (3) does _not_ say this; it says that China did _at least_ 60%.
2020.03.30 00:35:24 (1244392742752522240) from "🔴@pdfkungfoo@meteo.social🐝🔋 #YesToNoCovid (@pdfkungfoo)":
Even if (assumed) R0=2 is reduced by only 30% and putting daily growth from (assumed) 100% down to 70% - that‘s a HUGE single contribution to #FlattenTheCurve! In 21 days you’d go from 1 infected person to 70.000 instead of going to 2,1 million.