From all of the articles I am seeing, they have an extremely high number of deaths (higher rates than others) tied to their nursing homes. There seems to be different analysis regarding why -- is it because of their looser restrictions elsewhere in society, is it related somehow to late measures or lack of PPP in homes, or is it tied to how they chose to treat sickness when it started spreading in facilities (which by some accounts seems to be almost no attempt at treatment)?

I am not seeing much that speaks to getting underneath to those details. Part of their approach at least in theory was to focus much more on the high risk population, but if they really didn't do that or almost the opposite -- what will we have learned? This is the absolutely critical part of the entire analysis and there seems to be no good understanding of this aspect.

Sad because somewhat of an important but failed experiment if we don't really know some key parameters and what may really be driving some of the numbers. I'd also note that even this architect of the strategy states that what he thinks would have been better is something "in between" what they did and what others are doing. Those are pretty vague words -- it could mean taking much greater care than they did with the elderly at the care facilities with everything else being essentially the same.

[Post edited by fishhoo at 06/03/2020 11:08AM]