>> and, if so, “At what level of social distancing do we have to >> maintain in order to make sure that a program of testing, vigorous >> contact tracing and isolation is assured?” >> > I would claim that the *quality* of social distancing is very > important... but those "qualities" haven't been determined yet. In > principle, keeping
... <sorry> ... keeping strong "cells" or "cliques" or "islands" with very limited out-group contact is more important than *everyone* keeping 6' distance, washing their hands, covering their face, etc. I have several "cliques" in my social circle which I have very limited in-person contact, and each one has a very different level of in-group-hygiene. At least one is a very "leaky" cell... with one member who simply doesn't take the whole thing seriously. I avoid direct contact with her and her space, but I do have very infrequent (once a week or less) contact (with 6' distance for short periods without much exchange of objects) with her 80+ year old husband who I know to be *much* more careful and perhaps much more likely to become symptomatic more quickly if *she* does bring him some Corona?
..-. . . -.. / - .... . / -- --- .-. .-.. --- -.-. -.- ... / . .-.. --- .. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
