Why don't old people just quarantine?
Why are you so certain of your viewpoint? Other people can't have different opinions to you?
Why are you so certain of your viewpoint? Other people can't have different opinions to you?
Could this be addressed? Sure. Should it in future? Probably. But we don't get a whole lot of tries when there's a pandemic going around. It didn't work at first, how many attempts do you have to give it before you say "we need to solve that next time, right now we need a different solution"?
And I'm not concerned with other people's opinions. I'm concerned with their actions. If somebody follows public health guidelines, they can have whatever opinion they want. If they're out helping transmit a disease killing millions and wrecking the economy, I still don't care what their opinions are.
But once the human tragedy became apparent, once the people in charge visited one or two hospitals, once it became clear that many people, while surviving, are left disabled - well - opinions changed.
You are free to have your opinion, of course.
Given that this is a highly infectious virus, a reasonable person will understand that aside from those in this at risk group, every external point of contact is an additional risk. Should they also do the same?
The point I try to make is that with how connected our societies are, the interconnected nature enables the spread to the point where a single group quarantining is ineffective.
Think of it in terms of a spreading fire. The more a fire burns nearby, the higher the chances it will spread even to an isolated area or overcome fire resistance measures.
because the lockdown in Victoria worked.
> Other people can't have different opinions to you?
Are those opinions shared by the scientific community?
Co-authored by Donald Henderson who was credited with ridding the world of smallpox talking about the effectiveness of lock downs -> http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.552...
It is immaterial that D. A. co-authored that back in 2006. It was a different time, and the measures that he is professing against have _demonstrably_ proven to be effective.
The paper gives suggestions based on many assumptions that don't hold considering the implemented rules. But they're just suggestions. Offering this paper in the face of demonstrable evidence that these measures do in fact work seems a little irrational in my perspective.
So his solution is to not screen people and let everyone in?
> Quarantine. As experience shows, there is no basis for recommending quarantine either of groups or individuals
So his recommendation is to let people with virus loose in the community. You really believe that?
Maybe you need to listen to people who have experience with the flu and other corona viruses instead someone with small pox experience.
Two days later, the city shut down most public gatherings and quarantined victims in their homes. The cases slowed.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/2020/03/how-citie...
Look at NSW for how its done. Reasonable sensible decisions taken over months with contact tracing that actually works.
yes and Victoria's contract tracing was not good at that time and the virus was spreading in the community so the right solution after that was to have a lockdown.