[conspire] [L]UGs & ...: Re: Cabal & Covid19

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Michael Paoli (Michael.Paoli at cal.berkeley.edu):

> As far as "end date(s)" of the orders and social distancing,
> at this point nobody knows exactly when.

Of course.  As a minor detail for those interested, the current
six-counties order has a stated expiration of April 7th, but that is
only a technicality, since the six county health officials can and will
either extend or terminate it as the science suggests is prudent.  Gov.
Newsom's recent (and roughly similar if far less detailed) order
covering all of California has no stated expiration date, applying until
further notice.

> And "going back", from where things are now, likely won't be a
> flip-the-switch off-->on, but more a transition over days to week(s)
> or month(s).

What I can envision happening is the six Bay Area counties reviewing the
data and deciding the shelter-in-place order has become unnecessary and
announce it immediately terminated and the immediately prior
social-distancing order put back into effect.  (Gov. Newsom would
presumably need to grant a carve-out for the six counties from his
statewide order.)


> So ... lazy/efficient? ;-) 

I not only have no problem with your stating on the Google Calendar that
lots more cancellations are likely, but I commend it.  All I'm saying
concerning CABAL is that I'm not pre-emptively cancelling.

> I'd likely guess somewhere between 3 weeks (including the time when
> this started for the (first) 6 San Francisco Bay Area counties, and
> ... 2 years(-ish).

Once again, please check the implications of the Imperial College London
report that I paraphrased at
http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/conspire/2020-March/010260.html .
(The post includes a direct link to the layman-friendly report text.)
The researchers used computer modeling using data from China and South
Korea, to determine trend lines under three scenarios, the third of
which they called 'suppression', and closely matches what the six Bay
Area counties are doing starting this past Monday.

The best overall outcome (until a game-changer such as vaccination
arrives) is an intermittent one where suppression gets re-implemented
when ICU cases fall below a certain number and is terminated when 
ICU cases fall below a different trigger number.  (This is mainly
covered in report pp. 11-13.)

The projected rhythm of an example strategy looks to be about two months
on, one month off -- suppression order covering 2/3 of the time, with a
1/3 respite.

But the whole rulebook may need to be changed because of other, newer
findings, since far too many unknowns plague (sorry!) this problem.