[deleted]
South Korea Preserved the Open Society and Now Infection Rates Are Falling
41–46 of 46 posts
Re: South Korea Preserved the Open Society and Now Infection Rates Are Falling
#42A very very bad idea written by an economist.
It does not take into account a lot of factors, the least is the number of death.
The age distribution would be an other.
Re: South Korea Preserved the Open Society and Now Infection Rates Are Falling
#43South Korea has got over the hump of death count growth NOT because they are preserving the open society, but because they act swiftly. In fact, they acted in late January. When did U.S. acted upon? U.S. squandered 2 months and wait till WHO declared this is a global pandemic. And they have tested 140k of the cases now and more, how many cases has U.S. tested so far? Not even close. What about contact tracing? Have y…
[deleted]
Re: South Korea Preserved the Open Society and Now Infection Rates Are Falling
#44The US can't follow the South Korean model because the US does not have the testing infrastructure for it: https://www.propublica.org/article/how-south-korea-scaled-co... This article presents it as dueling narratives: open versus authoritarian. This implies that, as of now, the US has some choice. But we don't. We screwed up testing when it was small and containable, and now it's not.
Things change, I get right now the US does not have the choice but this thing is not going away and choices have to be made as to how to deal with it. Raising awareness of other options that are successful is a good thing. Constructive criticism can help.
Re: South Korea Preserved the Open Society and Now Infection Rates Are Falling
#45Article is disingenuous as fuck. Glad to see so many good comments here.
Re: South Korea Preserved the Open Society and Now Infection Rates Are Falling
#46But didn't South Korea too have aggressive location tracking and even made those details public? Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00740-y So not exactly CCP style lockdown but not a 2019 style free society either. They did make the hard choices necessary to got it in control. But it wasn't as simple as more testing.
Preserving privacy may inherently contradict with public interest coming from aggressive contact tracing. This is really unfortunate, but the S.Korea case could be even worse if adequate CDC agents were not granted with the authority to aggregate/join arbitrary private data (very likely against the subject's will).
This was especially important for early actions taken by S.Korea's CDC since a single super-spreader (#31) had contacts with thousands(!) of people within just 2~3 days. I'm 99% sure that Europe and America also have similar cases, but just remains unveiled because they couldn't really do the same thing with the given authority. S.Korea was in a similar situation during the MERS outbreak but now they passed a law to allow such actions.
IMHO, this trade-off is no brainer. The cost is can be controlled/minimized while the economical/societal damages caused by full lockdown is not. And yes, this is also not 2019 style free society.