反向隔离可能是对付新冠病毒一个有效的选择

s
solo1
楼主 (文学城)

在新冠病毒初始,隔离是最有效的方法。

在新冠病毒已经扩散的情况下,反向隔离可能就是一个有效的选择。反向隔离的意思与正常隔离相反,并不是隔离病毒感染者,而是有意让他们在人群中扩散病毒,从而在两个月内形成群体免疫。其间隔离老年人和其他易受新冠病毒危害的人,减少对医院的负担和死亡率。

这个方法比目前的压扁曲线法死人要少,更是减少经济损失达万亿美元规模。平摊下来每家损损失一万美元。

这个就是我以前说的搞活是一个意思。

这是一个方向性的问题,是个道的问题。很多人在纠结口罩等术的问题,那是枝节问题。

我写了个英文版如下,希望更多人想一想,能够帮助决策者。

Reverse quarantine may be a better option to fight the coronavirus

 

Quarantine is the traditional method to fight the coronavirus, and it can be cost effective at the initial stage. However, for an already spread coronavirus, a reverse quarantine may be a better option, and it can save the world trillions of dollars.

 

A normal quarantine is to put the infected in isolation. A reverse quarantine is the opposite. A reserve quarantine lets the infected to stay with the population to infect more people until herd immunity  is achieved. A reverse quarantine puts the elderly and a small number of people with preexisting conditions in voluntary isolation to protect them from infection.

 

From an antibody test in an Italian community, herd immunity is achieved with 70% of the population infected in two months, at a cost of 1.73% death rate for the whole population. We know that most of the deaths are for the elderly and patients with preexisting conditions. A German study shows 99.9% of the deaths have preexisting conditions. The majority of people infected only have mild symptoms, especially for people younger than 20 years. A reverse quarantine puts the elderly and people with preexisting conditions in voluntary isolation to protect them. As a result, the general population can achieve herd immunity with a much lower death rate and a much lower burden on hospitals. The death rate can be as low as 0.017%, the same order of magnitude as flu and traffic deaths. There will be deaths, but no more than the number from the current flatten-the-curve strategy. The reverse quarantine has minimal adverse impacts on businesses, in contrast with the potential loss of trillions of dollars in wages and business revenues for a normal quarantine.

 

During the reverse quarantine, people are encouraged to have healthy meals,moderate exercises,warm clothing,and good sleep. The air conditioning temperature is recommended to set at 78 degrees Fahrenheit. A warmer environmental temperature will help milden the symptoms of an infection. Grocery stores can set the first hour of business for the elderly and vulnerable people, and everyone is required to wear face mask during this protection period in the store.

 

At this stage of the coronavirus, the reverse quarantine is a viable option for the government to consider. It can save lives and save trillions of dollars to workers and businesses.

 

t
tryyyyyy
你带头试一试,如果有效可能有人跟上。
f
fuz
天下人都是傻子
外乡人
本来就是啊,君不见老人院谁都不让进?

多少人隔着窗户打电话,祝生日。

s
solo1
新冠病毒提供了一个观察人类从错误走向错误的机会。
i
indexguy
美国FBI已经抓了几个宣扬传播病毒的人。
s
solo1
每一步都是万亿美元的损失。第一步,从武汉问题变成中国问题,第二步,从中国问题变成世界问题。第三步,从病毒问题变成经济问题。第四步
s
solo1
第三步,从病毒问题变成经济问题,现在正在发生。
s
solo1
第四步,从经济问题变成社会问题。
米兰之夜
下一个就是sinology
d
dudaan
我的计划和你的不一样,但现在已经不可能实行了

我的建议是在疫情非常轻的地方实行严格的隔离,把为数不多的病人和直接接触者彻底隔离,并且实行反向的封城,不让疫情地区的人员和交通工具进入,在这些“净土”加倍生产。

而疫情已经蔓延的那些地方就放任了,愿意戴口罩就戴。

我提出建议的时候还可能,现在已经找不到净土了。

b
bigcatf4
没看懂,现在每天新感染数都是近万,你是觉得这个感染数还不够大吗?那赶紧动员你的家庭亲戚朋友去加入。
s
solo1
你的这个想法是正常隔离,就是断绝与疫区人员交流和疫区来的人隔离。初期很有效。
s
solo1
这个方法与福奇的方法(也是美国政府的方法)最终都要达到70%的感染率。差别在于这个方法时间短,死亡少,经济损失少。
纤风
怎样界定不易受新冠病毒危害的人?
d
dudaan
不一样,我的意思是越是感染少的地方越要严格隔离
d
dudaan
现在做法是相反的
k
kai2002
时间不会短,死亡更多,经济损失更大。
爱吃肉的胖子
没错! 地广人稀的大农村, 本来感染者很少/可控, 如果把他们严格隔离起来, 估计能控制住。。。。。但是,

放任(+)居家自行隔离, 他们又不自觉, 该吃吃该喝喝满地乱跑,传染家人传染社区, 一下子就传开了, 现在每天感染数字蹭蹭往上涨,让人心惊肉跳。。。。

 

爱吃肉的胖子
现在就等着大爆发, 病人往医院挤,早晚医院变毒邮轮,白忙活一场空。。。
爱吃肉的胖子
医护大范围感染。。。。。
d
dudaan
你的担心有道理,但现在看来无解。没有领导人敢公开这样做。

有报道意大利和西班牙要有所动作了。

U
Ucan111
最简单粗暴的就是年龄加基础病
三丝
fast track herd immunity. Very very very dangerous, in my opinio
p
phobos
“有意让他们在人群中扩散病毒,从而在两个月内形成群体免疫。”这句话政治极度不正确,后面的好意全部白费