So then, if you’re stuck in shades of gray, you have to weigh the antiviral benefits of the lockdown with just keeping the lights out. That’s a tough one to balance.
Kudos to New Zealand, I’m just not sure it’s a blueprint others can replicate.
So then, if you’re stuck in shades of gray, you have to weigh the antiviral benefits of the lockdown with just keeping the lights out. That’s a tough one to balance.
Kudos to New Zealand, I’m just not sure it’s a blueprint others can replicate.
Of course this is not working under the current way of how EU works, but I think this is the only pragmatic solution as response to such crisis.
Massive centralized control never ends well.
You’re close to the insight here though: there is a pragmatic solution, and it’s to stop waging war against an endemic respiratory virus of zoonotic origin. It’s like struggling in quicksand; trying to escape just makes it worse. That’s real pragmatism.
On return home, they need to assume they became infected en-route and use PPE suitable for that reality.
Medical staff already know how to avoid taking disease home. They just need the funding and support to access the right PPE, facilites and reasonable hours. If they are in transit, the need a good reason and well thought out measures.
Quarantines don't need to stop all people, just those who are likely to spread the disease.
More generally, these rules are all nice and well, but unless you are you going to give every person his or her own policeman to make sure that they follow them, people will keep stretching, bending and breaking the rules - of course, some (maybe even most?) behave responsibly, but the virus only needs a few who don't...