7 Comments

It seems unlikely that they truly have stopped those people from ever getging infected. Look at the attempts to kill polio. Even with vaccines its super hard to contain so Im skeptical.

Another explanation is official manipulation of statistics or simply they maxed out their testing resources or more ppl are simply staying home when sick.

Expand full comment

Yes and there are simple changes in hospital assignments which could achieve this, eg, rotating all doctors through ward with patients on some kind of equal time fairness model.

Expand full comment

Yes, draconian measures were instrumental. Now China is starting to go back to work, and new cases have not re-accelerated. It seems whatever China did was preferable to intentionally infecting people.

Expand full comment

Forget about wealth redistribution, let's redistribute the coronavirus!

Expand full comment

Yes, the great value in infecting early is targeting health care workers, not this model.

Sure, the headline is true, but quarantining and everything that reduces R0 does increase infection date variance. What actions could you be criticizing? I guess delaying the patient zero just delays the epidemic. Are multiple initial patients better or worse?

Also, delaying infection date buys us time for innovation, like vaccines. Or just replacing broken kits.

Expand full comment

New cases in China have leveled off ...

.., but plausibly, that leveling-off is attributable to Draconian isolation measures, not to a dissipation of the threat.

Expand full comment

Are you assuming everyone eventually has to be infected? That's unlikely. New cases in China have leveled off, and 99.994% of their population has not yet caught the disease, if you believe the statistics. So if you pay someone to be infected, there must a high chance they would not have been infected otherwise.

Expand full comment