My suggestion wasn't to slow it. Given the math it cannot be stopped. The suggestion was the opposite, let it spread in the young and strong to achieve herd immunity as soon as possible and only then would the virus transmission die out.
Yes, there are no good choices. In my mind musings, I just thought isolation of those under 50 would be easier, given many in their 40s have children in school and transmission more efficient. But say the cutoff was 40, and you achieved herd immunity while isolating the older group, then you would avert 93.8% of the projected deaths (or 150MM), and the number of critical cases hitting medical facilities may be reduced 20X or more.
I had read that just before they issued the lock down that it was made public that the lock down was coming. That allowed some 10,000 people to leave the area. If even just a small percentage of them were shedding virus, the lock down was doomed to fail.
Both some kind of lockdown / social isolation *and* massive testing is needed. The lockdown is the blunt, widespread, immediately available and immediately effective (*) instrument. But a perfect lockdown is not possible, unless everybody is fully compliant, everybody has enough groceries at home for 3 weeks and basically every business gets shut down. Testing fills the holes by providing the basis for more thorough isolation of identified cases. It will make the difference between, "not getting out unless there is a good reason" and "not getting out at all". Too many people in a free society will not comply with the necessary measures, unless they know they are affected.
That's exactly what the Israelis are doing with the additional measure of protecting as much as possible those most vulnerable to bad outcomes.
For flattening hospital demand from an initial condition of a likely huge number of infections due to lack of testing it's OK, but it can't be done over and over again without absolutely destroying the economy. Isolate - end isolation - virus returns - isolate - end isolation - virus returns, etc. After initial curve flattening via lockdown followed by widespread TESTING, the only thing to do is to do what the Israelis are doing.
Wish it was by order. Still not enough social distancing.
Getting this virus does not give immunity to re-infection.
The only reputable information available indicates that it likely does.
Can only speak for my locale, but grocery stores are considered essential businesses and are open. There was a plea by the governor to not overbuy and that normal supply channels should keep the stores stocked if people are reasonable in their buying. There are also options for home delivery, as there was before the shelter-in-place order, and those can be used if preferred.
But that's not a situation of a lock-down as I understand it. It sounds like you're in an area where people are highly encouraged to stay home unless they absolutely need to, which is like most places anymore, but not one where you're told by the government that you HAVE to stay home or else. That's the situation I'm unclear about.
I'm actually not sure what you are describing then as a lock down. I would guess that is basically marshall law(?). I posted a New Yorker article yesterday on an account of a person on "lockdown" in China. They still had freedom of movement, they were just being watched/policed more than we are (at least as of now).
Yes, I agree. Indiana does have its orders.
