And What Can Countries like the US or Netherlands Learn from It?
Hammer and Dance with an initial aggressive lowdown seems to cause the least harm to the economy.
Sweden has famously followed a different coronavirus strategy than most of the rest of the Developed world: Let the virus run loose, curb it enough to make sure it doesn’t overwhelm the healthcare system like in Hubei, Italy or Spain, but don’t try to eliminate it. They think stopping it completely is impossible. The natural consequence is that most citizens get infected, and that eventually slows down the epidemic. That’s why, in short, people call that strategy “Herd Immunity”.
The other strategy is the Hammer and the Dance: Aggressively attack the coronavirus by locking down the economy. Once curbed, jump into the Dance by replacing the aggressive lockdown with cheap and intelligent measures to control the virus.
Some countries and states, such as the Netherlands and the UK, or US states like Texas and Georgia, have implemented measures in between the two strategies. So which strategy is best?
2 comments:
The strategy where 80 percent of deaths occur in nursing homes, among the demographic known to be susceptible to the virus.
That was the strategy pursued in Canada.
Doesn't matter if it's our strategy or not, but it is in fact what we're doing. The US is simply not a functioning enough society to eradicate it like some countries have done.
Post a Comment