Re: [Phys-L] Ex: Re: It's this simple ... isn't it?

[John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>]

On 4/7/20 8:52 AM, Albert J. Mallinckrodt wrote:

> Building on and refining the "hammer and dance” scenario

That's the important thing, and we agree on that.

===============================

At the next level of detail:  4/7/20 6:59 AM, Albert J. Mallinckrodt
wrote:

> Nobody has ever accused me of being an optimist.

I'm an optimist, and I'm terrified.

> Tomorrow marks 20 days since Newsom’s statewide stay-at-home order
> and the day after that will be the first day that it’s effects begin
> to show up.  My model predicts a peak at 54 deaths on April 10.  As
> of right now the data is tracking below my predictions, but there is
> an VERY stringent test on my model coming over the next week.
>
> Check it out here:
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/cjzrr9ncpbpb2ut/California_COVID-19_Model_ver2.xlsx

I have no objections to that model as far as it goes.  WHAT HAPPENS
AFTER THAT?

Contrast the other spreadsheet (mentioned last week) that extends
out 300 days:
   https://www.dropbox.com/s/mwbraqx3nlbjhxf/COVID-19_sim_ver4.xlsx

We really need to consider what happens after mid-May.  There are
policy decisions that need to be made IMMEDIATELY.  After California
backs off from the current lockdown, further suppression efforts
absolutely will be needed.  WHAT WILL THAT LOOK LIKE?

 *) It could be a short wait followed by another lockdown.  However,
  wow, that's a terrible prediction.  Lockdowns are crude, clumsy,
  and costly.  I don't think extended or repeated lockdowns are
  possible, for practical, economic, political, and other reasons.

 *) There are less-crude ways of suppressing the disease.  However,
  this requires an elaborate multi-step process, and *none* of the
  required mechanisms are currently in place.  There are a ton of
  sub-issues and sub-questions under this heading, but I will leave
  those for later.

Bottom line:  As for projecting out to early or mid May, yes, "it's
just that simple".  However, there is a desperate need for models --
and sound policies -- that extend out farther than that.  Work needs
to be done IMMEDIATELY to deal with the post-lockdown situation.

===

One more thing:  Projecting for California is not the same as projecting
for other states, or nationwide.  Neither California nor New York will
ever be models for nationwide policy under this administration.  If the
disease killed every last person in Pelosi's, Schiff's, and Nadler's
districts, the toadstool-in-chief would be perfectly happy with that.
Alabama governor Kay Ivey explicitly said "We're not California".   As of
this morning there were seven states that had no statewide stay-at-home
orders, and seven more with exceptions and exemptions that greatly reduce
the effectiveness.