ronk wrote:Ramping up testing is really hard. I have some sympathy for the government over that.
Other things are less forgivable. Cross transmission due to workers in vulnerable populations was neglected badly. Reorganising work schedules so workers were focusing on a single site would have made a huge difference and it should have started 2 weeks before they closed the schools. Instead it was happening well after they closed them.
Fair comment.
Applying hindsight to the exit strategy.
1. Isolate or keep isolating the at risk.
2. Identify the first wave of foot soldiers.
Criteria here should be based on age and any other known or suspected +ve attributes
3. Tools for the job.
What does that mean.
Obviously a return to normality is going to take time.
Consider the criteria for identifying the first wave.
A. Age group 18 to 40
B. Single
C. Blood type O
D. No underlying or history of health issues.
E.
F.
People falling into the above group could quite safety be allowed back into circulation.
All going well the second wave could start after a ten day waiting period.
In addition an antibody test may be imminent.
This would be a game changer. Comments below are exclusive of the obvious prioritising of front line medical staff or staff at high risk of exposure eg Nursing home staff.
People like RP or my brother should be prioritized for antibody testing. If they test positive they should be allowed to get on with life.
This of course raises the issue of licence, fake license and so on.
This is the foresight bit that we should be preparing systems for this NOW.
Enough for now.
Except of course - If we have an antibody test available then we can/need to do that random sample to get a handle on just what % of the population is infected.
It's a lot more than the 8k obviously but just how much more. All age categories should be included in the sampling.