posted by QuakerOats
They indicated 2 million or more deaths; and maybe 1 million with mitigation. Then they said maybe 240,000 deaths; then 100,000 to 200,000. Now it may be 60,000. My point is their modeling is poor, piss poor, and it led to much more panic than necessary, not to mention much more spending than likely warranted, and much, much more economic destruction than necessary. We know who needs to be quarantined; they should handle it from there.
You've tracked it right, but they're just updated estimates based on the progress resulting from the measures. You can't fault someone for that. That's how estimates work. They base them on the current circumstances and update them as models dictate.
Now, as for the money spent, and MAYBE some of the economic measures, sure.
However, no. We don't "know who needs to be quarantined." It takes too long to even know who is infected. That's part of the problem.
posted by Automatik
Any expert on the subject hopes to be wrong on their projections.
Who exactly should be quarantined? Would you lump yourself into that group?
Everyone age X and older? All obsese people? Diabetics? Ashmatic? Who cares for these people? Gets them groceries and other supplies? Do you seal them off in their homes?
I'm sure he's healthy as a horse and not in his own determination of who needs to be quarantined. It's like where people draw the line on "bad" people. They'll always draw that line below themselves.
posted by kizer permanente
LOL Rep'd.