12-23-2020, 12:38 PM
So, the shutdown is definitely not a lockdown, and leaves much to be desired.
However, it's possible that it's still enough. The new case rate have been pretty stable at around 12.1% of active cases since September (9.5% in August and 8.5% in July!). If the shutdown manages to reduce that by just 20%, to about 9.7%, it will reverse the growth in the new case numbers. My rough modeling (I do have a lot of data by now ...) says that we could get the new-case rate down to around 1,200 by the end of the four weeks, and the active cases down below 5,000.
If I continue with the optimistic assumptions and assume that the infection rate will only come back up to 11% after the shutdown finishes, we can still get below 1,000 -- and stay there -- in February. And keep the ICU population below 150.
But the key assumption here, as with everyone's models, is the infection rate, and whether we can really manage to infect 20% fewer people than we are doing today.
However, it's possible that it's still enough. The new case rate have been pretty stable at around 12.1% of active cases since September (9.5% in August and 8.5% in July!). If the shutdown manages to reduce that by just 20%, to about 9.7%, it will reverse the growth in the new case numbers. My rough modeling (I do have a lot of data by now ...) says that we could get the new-case rate down to around 1,200 by the end of the four weeks, and the active cases down below 5,000.
If I continue with the optimistic assumptions and assume that the infection rate will only come back up to 11% after the shutdown finishes, we can still get below 1,000 -- and stay there -- in February. And keep the ICU population below 150.
But the key assumption here, as with everyone's models, is the infection rate, and whether we can really manage to infect 20% fewer people than we are doing today.