California governor issues statewide 'stay at home' order

Re:California governor issues statewide 'stay at home' order by standardUser on Friday March 20, 2020 @02:41AM (#22635520)

I agree this is exactly the right approach. The goal is to flatten the curve, not try to obliterate it. We're not going to eradicate this virus without a vaccine, so we have to aim for transmission rates that don't overwhelm healthcare capacity. Keeping the virus away from vulnerable populations helps that significantly.

In the UK and Colombia (and maybe elsewhere) there are mandatory quarantines only for the elderly. I can see this being tried in other Western nations if blanket quarantines go on too long.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California governor issues statewide 'stay at home' order by twblalock on Friday March 20, 2020 @09:12AM (#22637247)

“Flatten the curve” is trendy but the graph everyone is sharing is just made up. It’s a nice visual aid but that’s all it is.

What if we all shelter in place but hospitals end up overwhelmed anyway? That seems like a real possibility and it kind of makes the argument irrelevant.

If we didn’t “flatten the curve” enough to get the imaginary hump below the imaginary dotted line, then the benefits of “shelter in place” are going to end up being a lot less valuable.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:California governor issues statewide 'stay at home' order by standardUser on Friday March 20, 2020 @12:52PM (#22639085)

"What if we all shelter in place but hospitals end up overwhelmed anyway? That seems like a real possibility and it kind of makes the argument irrelevant."

There aren't just two modes: Hospitals OK and Hospitals Overwhelmed. The idea behind flattening the curve is to reduce the burden on the hospitals to whatever degree is possible. How is it "irrelevant" if a hospital is 200% over capacity versus 500% over capacity? The people who would die in the worst-case scenario but not in the "flattened" scenario would probably think it is extremely relevant.

[ Parent | on HN ]