
Merkel bans meetings of more than two people to slow coronavirus - doener
https://www.politico.eu/article/merkel-bans-meetings-of-more-than-2-people-to-slow-coronavirus/
======
baxtr
Story from a very good friend of mine in Germany, we talk almost every day:
There was a suspected case in his kid’s school class, first grader. So they
closed the class and tested the other kid. That was 11 days ago. The result
came in today (I.e. the other parents were informed today): Positive. There is
no way you can stop this virus from spreading if you inform contacts almost 2
weeks later.

~~~
s9w
That seems strange. Most results are ready in 24h in Germany I think.

~~~
humaniania
That's why the best rule for ingesting news about current events is usually:
don't read the comments

~~~
FpUser
In theory you're right but I've often see reporting that is plain BS and
serving some underlying political agenda rather then cold facts and/or
reasonable analysis. So in those cases first hand info from the people who are
actually there could make more sense.

------
pachico
I read an interesting article describing how cultural factors are affecting
virus spreading. Among many things, the family configuration is radically
different in Germany than in Italy or Spain and this is one of the key factors
(besides Germany being able to buy and execute tests to confine who needed to
be confined in time). It looks like many Italians (also many Spaniards but not
so many) live with their parents even when they are 30-40 years old. In
addition, many grandparents take care of children in daily or regular basis.
This means that very socially active slices of society are in constant contact
with the the population which is most at risk.

~~~
nemo44x
So far the median age of German cases is 47. It is 63 for Italy. Also, Germany
isn’t doing postmortem testing on people that are dying from preexisting
conditions that could be suspicious. Italy has tested corpses that weren’t
initially tested.

Global numbers are so tough to compare with different countries testing
differently, reporting differently, and of course demographic differences.

~~~
ma2rten
Why do they test people who are dead already? Given the shortage of tests,
wouldn't it more sense to test people who are alive?

~~~
toyg
Dying patients are still in contact with tons of people: doctors, nurses,
relatives, etc; and these people go on infecting, unless they are traced and
isolated. One case in Southern Italy resulted in death, but the body was
incorrectly released for the funeral like a regular case. Result: dozens of
infections at the funeral.

------
RalfWausE
I think this is fair. The problem in most western democracies is, that it is
nearly impossible to enforce a law that is not accepted by the people, at
least not for a long time. A complete shutdown in Wuhan-style may be more
effective, but in any western country the people would, after two or three
weeks, start to find loopholes. So i think its better to make a law that is a
bit less effective but accepted by the people instead of a law that invites
people to get "creative"

~~~
hutzlibu
" The problem in most western democracies is, that it is nearly impossible to
enforce a law that is not accepted by the people"

It's not a bug, its a feature.

Seriously, the very idea of democracy is to only have laws accepted by the
people.

So if there is no acceptance, there should be no law. Unless it is accepted to
have emergency authorian rule, like in this case.

~~~
tpetry
Would be nice if democracy would really work like that. In reality the ruling
parties can make the laws how they like no matter if people will like it or
not. Think for example on the current plan in the US to break all end-to-end
encryption: people will not like it but it does not matter

~~~
hutzlibu
"people will not like it but it does not matter"

It does matter what the people like and not. The problem in this case is just,
that most people do not at all understand the implications of breaking
encryption. Actually most barley know what encryption is at all. Thats why
there is no outrage.

~~~
DangitBobby
There was this analysis of bills passed and who supported them a while back by
someone at Princeton. Turns out public opinion has a near negligible impact.
[https://act.represent.us/sign/the-
problem/](https://act.represent.us/sign/the-problem/)

------
hintymad
Interestingly, Merkel herself is in quarantine because her doctor is tested
positive. Why did German think that social distance was not okay, or even
harmful, when it was clear that covid-19 was highly contagious? And why are
people so resistant to wearing masks? How do I know for sure that people
around me are not contagious? How do I know for sure that myself is not
contagious, under the current pandemic situation? Yet people freak out when
they see a person wear a mask.

Just saw this paragraph in the article "The politics of pandemics" in The
Economist: "To see what is to come look to Lombardy, the affluent Italian
region at the heart of the covid-19 outbreak in Europe. Its hospitals provide
world-class health care. Until last week they thought they would cope with the
disease -- then waves of people began turning up with pneumonia. Having run
out of ventilators and oxygen, exhausted staff at some hospitals are being
forced to leave untreated patients to die". So, this article is telling people
that Italians thought that they were so good that exponential contagion was no
big deal?

An honest question: isn't what the Europeans have been doing a classical
example for the quote "Weakness and ignorance are not barriers to survival,
but arrogance is"?

~~~
nokcha
>And why are people so resistant to wearing masks?

In the US, there is a severe shortage of masks. Even hospitals are struggling
to get enough masks for health-care workers.

~~~
barry-cotter
The US Surgeon General told the public masks don’t work[1]. Doctors and nurses
are being told they’ll be disciplined for wearing masks because it would alarm
patients and visitors [2].

[1]
[https://mobile.twitter.com/surgeon_general/status/1233725785...](https://mobile.twitter.com/surgeon_general/status/1233725785283932160)

[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/29/health/coronavirus-n95-fa...](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/29/health/coronavirus-n95-face-
masks.html)

[2]
[https://twitter.com/wendellpotter/status/1241371042020392961...](https://twitter.com/wendellpotter/status/1241371042020392961?s=21)

[https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/03/i-have-never-been-
so-...](https://www.nj.com/coronavirus/2020/03/i-have-never-been-so-scared-of-
walking-into-work-nj-health-care-workers-demand-more-protection-amid-
coronavirus-outbreak.html?outputType=amp&__twitter_impression=true)

~~~
aggie
> Doctors and nurses are being told

The passive voice is doing a lot of work here with only one anecdote cited.

~~~
barry-cotter
> Health care workers on front lines of coronavirus battle discouraged from
> wearing masks

[https://eu.citizen-
times.com/story/news/local/2020/03/26/cor...](https://eu.citizen-
times.com/story/news/local/2020/03/26/coronavirus-north-carolina-masks-nurses-
mission-va-hospitals/2903556001/)

------
FlorianRappl
Germany is still missing out on some very basic things that have been done
right in countries like South Korea: Namely: constant cleanup, constant
testing, identification and information about potential hot spots. The
government reacted really slow (we had the first case ~mid of February and
nothing happened for another 3 weeks) it now does a lot of actions but mostly
destructive ones like shutting down the economy.

Yes, social distancing is good, and yes we need to flatten the curve, but
there are other possibilities, too? Protecting people above 65 (i.e., retired)
and with medical conditions would have been easier. Now there is fear
everywhere. Still, I hear from a lot of people that they indeed show (mild)
symptoms, but are not tested - even upon request. How can that work?

I was riding the subway here in Munich last Friday. Quite empty - still very
dirty. No where anyone with sanitizing spray or anything.

~~~
DangerousPie
Do you have any evidence that cleaning subways is an effective way of
preventing infection? From everything I have read the main vector of infection
is by direct droplet infection during personal contact with an infected
person. Sure, maybe if you disinfect surfaces everywhere you may decrease the
spread a tiny little bit, but everyone's resources are probably better spent
elsewhere right now.

You also can't just protect people above 65 and let the virus spread amongst
young people. Have a look at the Imperial College study published a few days
ago, where they modeled the effect of different interventions in the UK and
US. Even if you could perfectly isolate all old people (and ignoring the
mental health cost of that) the young people needing medical attention would
still vastly overwhelm the health system.

And I agree that widespread testing would be great, but there are simply only
so many tests you can do with the resources available. It's easy to say "you
should test everyone" but nobody ever has an answer for _how_.

~~~
rsync
"Even if you could perfectly isolate all old people (and ignoring the mental
health cost of that) the young people needing medical attention would still
vastly overwhelm the health system."

I am willing to stipulate that this is correct.

However, I feel that we've slowly developed (over the past few decades) an
underlying assumption that "flu-like symptoms" automatically warrant a trip to
the hospital.

During normal times, if you went to an emergency room in rich, well-educated
American cities, you would see many, many rich, well-educated people who had
taken their children to the ER (or urgent care center) for flu-like symptoms
and had asked for _and been given_ antibiotics, wastefully, for a condition
caused by a virus.

This was, of course, irksome and disappointing, but now it is a matter of
tremendous import for public health: what would our options look like if we
did not assume every person exhibiting flu-like symptoms needed medical
services ?

What would our options look like if people understood that there is _no such
thing_ as cold "medicine" or flu "medicine" and that the doctor can do nothing
for your not-critically-sick child other than prescribe rest and good
nutrition ?

Instead, _we desire to be consumers of health-care_ because it is a modern
imperative.

I believe these were wrong-headed attitudes and we are now paying the price
for them.

~~~
DangerousPie
Are you implying that the reason the hospitals are overwhelmed is that they
are admitting people that could just "ride it out at home"? Because that is
certainly not the problem. Many COVID patients need to be on 24/7 ventilation
in the ICU to stay alive, including young and healthy ones. Way more than the
hospitals can cope with.

This is not about people's attitudes towards healthcare, this is about
thousands and soon millions of people suddenly requiring emergency medical
treatment, way beyond what the health system can cope with.

~~~
rafiki6
I haven't seen any young and HEALTHY folks needing ICU care. Can you share any
cases? Or any stats indicating this is the case?

~~~
T-A
[https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/18/coronavirus-new-age-
anal...](https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/18/coronavirus-new-age-analysis-of-
risk-confirms-young-adults-not-invincible/)

And of course the case everybody should know about:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Wenliang](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Wenliang)

~~~
rafiki6
I read that statnews article. Nothing in there actually indicates that young
and HEALTHY people are at a high risk. What it does say is that 2-4% of the
20-44 age group needed ICU treatment. No indication is made to the risk
profile or previous issues that group has. That being said there is a 0.1-0.2%
risk for people within the age range of 20-44.

The example of the hero doctor frankly stands out as an outlier. We aren't
actually sure he was healthy, and even if we were, what we know is he was
exposed to a high viral load very rapidly. Beyond that he was under tremendous
stress from being a front line worker, meaning he might have been exposed to
multiple infections and under stress from an authoritarian government trying
to silence him with questionable means. Stress has a very real effect on our
immune systems that has been empirically shown to make it very challenging for
the body to recover from infections.

I want us to be incredibly careful about how we share information and our
interpretations of it. I have yet to see anything that clearly indicates that
young people age 20-44 are at a high risk if they are HEALTHY. Healthy here
means not currently battling any other severe infections, and in a general
state of good health. The percentage within this demographic is clearly stated
as 0.1-0.2% and this includes immunocomprised people.

Please help spread accurate information, as this panic is getting absurd. I
was at a grocery store today and people were fighting for supplies that there
is not actual shortage of, and being generally rude to each other.

People are losing their livelihoods and our economy is crashing. A recent
bloomberg article is stating that we should expect a 30% unemployment rate.
[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-22/fed-s-
bul...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-22/fed-s-bullard-says-
u-s-jobless-rate-may-soar-to-30-in-2q)

This would be a devastating outcome which will be substantially worse than
this virus has been, especially in a country like the USA with no universal
health care and no clear indication that will ever happen. Have you ever tried
being poor in the US? It's not fun or easy.

Unfortunately our leadership is not equipped to handle this correctly. Corrupt
congresspeople are profiting off of this. The sitting president is showing
signs of mental instability. The alternative probably isn't much better.
Beyond that, sentiment on social media now seems to have people favoring
authoritarian measures enacted to force people to stay home.

This virus is serious, but our reaction to it is much more serious. We cannot
sustain this type of quarantine for the long run. We may end up finding
ourselves under authoritarian rule that won't disappear anytime soon.

The only solutions we have are that we accept this virus as a real part of
life, we attempt herd immunity through a more targeted type of quarantine, or
we wait for the miracle of a vaccine to be developed. Referring back to the
statnews article, they come to a similar conclusion and say that the
demographics of a country should dictate the measures taken to prevent the
most at risk populations from contracting this virus.

~~~
T-A
> I read that statnews article. Nothing in there actually indicates that young
> and HEALTHY people are at a high risk.

That's not what I responded to. This is:

> I haven't seen any young and HEALTHY folks needing ICU care.

The linked articles says "up to one-fifth of infected people ages 20-44 have
been hospitalized, including 2%-4% who required treatment in an intensive care
unit."

Unless you wish to claim that 1/5 people ages 20-44 are not HEALTHY (your
capitalization, maybe there is some intended meaning I'm missing there), you
have now seen what you were asking for.

> That being said there is a 0.1-0.2% risk for people within the age range of
> 20-44.

Let's go with the lower number, 0.1%, and see what that implies. In 2018,
there were about 109 million people aged 20 to 44 in the US [1]; 0.1% of that
is 109000, more than all ICU beds in the US [2]. And that's just counting
those who would die _if given intensive care_. If we go with 2% of the same
age group needing ICU treatment (again, the lower end of the quoted range,
2-4%), that's 2.2 million people.

With only 100000 ICU beds available, that means 2.1 million people aged 20-44
die, even if we deny everybody else intensive care.

[1] [https://www.statista.com/statistics/241488/population-of-
the...](https://www.statista.com/statistics/241488/population-of-the-us-by-
sex-and-age/)

[2]
[https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/03/18/coronav...](https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/03/18/coronavirus-
ventilators-us-hospitals-johns-hopkins-mayo-clinic/5032523002/)

------
archi42
It's absolutley frustrating that this is even necessary - after all that's
happening worldwide, people should just stay at home and avoid meeting people.
A lot of us are not THAT relevant for society to not collapse at an instant,
and a lot of our pasttime are even less so.

Still, a few think that all this wouldn't apply to them. Or think this is the
problem of the risk groups, who should stay at home while all others act as if
nothing happened. Just had that discussion with a friend, who wanted to host a
game night and used that very "argument". Well, egoism rules supreme :(

Thanks to people like these, some of our basic rights now have to be
suspended.

~~~
knocte
I agree with what you're saying but then there's the other example of Asian
countries that are not China, who have flattened the exponential curve without
forced lockdowns. Governments in the west should just speedup mass production
of masks because this is IMO the key to this flattening (and even if they
still prefer forced lockdown, masks would be a good measure for when the
lockdown is lifted).

~~~
archi42
I agree with you: We could have impactful measures without a forced lockdown.
However, people in these other countries, did they act like usual or did they
practice a strict regime of (voluntary) social distancing? After all, as long
as the data is lacking, social distancing is one of the most simple, yet
impactful measures.

This makes a huge difference. Though I am seeing a non-negligible portion of
the population believing they could just act as if nothing happened. I know it
sucks, but not meeting people for a while isn't the end of the world. And it
would be easily possible without any laws, giving law- & policy-makers time to
gather data and make a better, well-informed decision. I see this (voluntary,
not-enforced-via-the-law-like-this-lockdown) as my democratic responsibility.

Edit: I see two interpretations for this lockdown: 1. "Shit, this is out of
control and oh god, plenty of our people will die". (as a side note, the
parties in power tend to be strong with the elderly; though I believe this
isn't a major factor for this decision) 2. "Oh, what a nice chance to fk
democracy and get more power". I'm tending to the 1., as long as the measures
are not enacted for too long. Problem is: Relaxing too early will be bad for
the people, relaxing to late will bad for getting re-elected. So I'm very
happy right now I didn't enter politics. (end edit)

Also, the government can't just ramp up mask production. You need raw
materials for that, factories, a supply chain. You need to make sure the masks
are safe to various standards, else - even if you're the government - you're
in a huge legal mess. Oh, and train people for all that. Germany isn't
strictly free market economy, but it's not too far away from that ("social
market economy"). And under that system, the state isn't meant to
spontaneously interfere massively with markets by becoming a producer. So if
they did, that would open just another pandoras box. Yes, we have food and
other critical supplies, but masks and other medical equipment is a wholly
different league.

The "ruleset" is too complex, there is no obviously best decision right now :(

------
p1mrx
It seems reasonable to allow meetings of 2, because orders like California's
amount to weeks/months of solitary confinement for people who live alone. We
may have to deal with a suicide epidemic alongside the regular one. (I'll be
fine, but there are probably a lot of people going through much worse.)

------
dijit
I just heard Boris Johnson on television urging people to take responsibility
and stay indoors, this is after the government had to force shut certain pubs.
(notably Tim Martins' Wetherspoons where Tim Martin himself said he would not
close[0])

In Sweden, I see more people on the street now than before the pandemic was
announced, although I definitely see a downtrend in Restaurants. People are
not staying inside, and I lament this. Failure to prevent the spread of this
virus will only lead to harsher regulations and a lengthening of the
quarantine period. But it seems like for a certain part of the population
legal force is actually necessary.

I can only assume that this is driven from "individualist" mentalities that
often come with delusions of being above rules or communal responsibility.

If that's the case then if Sweden can't follow such simple rules then I have
no hope for the UK and even less hope for the USA.

[0]: (Sorry about daily mail)
[https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8133303/Pubs-
packed...](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8133303/Pubs-packed-
revellers-despite-calls-social-distancing.html)

~~~
ohp2veeJ
Why don't you want to see people outside? Indoors is more crowded, and outside
sunlight makes short work of pathogens and otherwise the wind will disperse
them anyway. Of course, as long as the people don't flock together.

People need to take responsibility of course, but they also need to protect
their physical and mental well being, and being outside contributes to that.
Covid-19 isn't the only challenge people face. What I mean is, you can't just
let it become a Pyhrric victory.

~~~
beatgammit
Exactly. We should be encouraging responsible outdoor activities. If you can
maintain a safe distance from others, making sure to account for wind, your
added risk of going outside is pretty low and you get a ton of mental and
physical health benefits.

~~~
l_davis
WHO is, I believe, encouraging outdoor exercise as well, with appropriate
distancing.

Lots of discussion here on mask wearing, which I think is great and would help
slow spread of this (reusable ones for those who aren't health professionals).
Not a lot of discussion that I've seen on how to improve health and function
of the immune system, which might not stop spread but could certainly improve
the percentage of those who don't get critically ill. I'm talking mainstream
advice like getting rest, exercise, eating nutritious food, not smoking. I've
also seen a reputable study that states that vitamin d supplements can lower
odds of getting respiratory infections. So a low cost way of improving odds.
I'm glad I take vitamin d already.

------
chris_engel
I wonder how this should help while people still need to go to work in
factories or large space offices. A friend of mine posted a pic of a sign in
the lunchroom at Siemens that demands people to keep their distance to
eachother while eating. In the meantime two or more people work together at a
workbench, sharing tools, etc. But I guess every small bit helps somewhat.

I am glad that the client I currently work for closed all offices and sent all
people to ull remote work two weeks ago.

------
billfruit
I heard an exception is made if the meeting is 'work-related'.

------
idclip
Germany is treating this pretty badly. Many People here dont care. The FAZ
(popular conservative newspaper) is calling the german reaction “resembling
ancient roman decadence”

------
Simulacra
"two is a coincidence three is a conspiracy"

~~~
angel_j
Coronavirus is perfectly okay with co-incidence.

------
1123581321
The article said the government didn’t specify punishment for breaking this
rule, but what would the existing statutory consequences be for disobeying an
order like this?

~~~
stefan_
Presumably you'll be paid damages. The reason there is no mention of specific
enforcement is that there is very obviously no constitutional standing for
these kind of outlandishly dystopian rules. Their "enforcement" is an
emergency court petition away from being entirely invalidated.

~~~
hef19898
There are quite a few, the "Infektionsschutzgesetz", or whatever the official
name is, being one of them. There are also national emergency laws and such.
That's nothing new.

------
abnry
Can a government even function with meetings of 2 or fewer?

~~~
oaiey
Well, the government is a working place. This regulation is not addressing
working places but only the public places.

Aside, members of Parlament are similar protected like journalists.

~~~
pvorb
Protected from fines, but actually unprotected in this case.

------
elric
This has been the case in Belgium for over a week now. Along with the closure
of the obvious gathering spots, like pubs and restaurans and whatnot.

------
ericmcer
I am currently sitting in my room across the street from a church that is in
full swing, 100+ people singing together in a single room. I don’t live in the
middle of nowhere, I am in Oakland CA. We have many confirmed cases and have
been getting quarantine and stay in place messages for the last 9ish days?

It is totally baffling, do people really need military and police intervention
to force them to not get a deadly virus?

~~~
lisper
Some people genuinely believe that God will protect them.

I have no idea how to get through to such people, but if you happen to have an
opportunity to engage with someone like that here's an experiment that I would
love to see someone try: tell them to read Exodus 12:29 and suggest that maybe
this time we are Egypt.

~~~
Mountain_Skies
Churches have closed during other pandemics. Maybe use those incidents as
examples so they know it is ok to close down while also not feeling like
they're showing a lack of faith. When I checked the webpage of the Catholic
diocese I'm located it, it mentioned that Catholics have been released from
their obligation to attend mass and this has happened before. Hopefully other
churches will have the same attitude.

~~~
exegete
I think most have the right attitude. I’m in the NYC area and most had closed
even before any official request or order. Although there are always some
members who don’t get it. I was actually able to get our church to use Zoom
for the time being until we can meet in person again.

------
djdkrkfkgk
I'm very curious if all this social distancing, hand washing and mask wearing
on a global scale will have an effect on the next flu season. Could this be
the first year with very little flu going around?

~~~
__s
Wish it was acceptable for me stow away like this every flu season

~~~
masklinn
At least wearing masks over flu season might get normalised by this?

~~~
Hamuko
I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it does.

------
vanniv
Isn't it interesting how, in every country, the only methods being considered
or implemented to aid this "crisis" are the ones that are identical to the
behaviors of authoritarians?

~~~
lawlorino
What's your suggestion?

~~~
vanniv
Seeing as even locking everyone in their houses doesn't slow down the virus in
the slightest (see Italy, where the exponential growth is still full steam
ahead, and will clearly only slow at this point once the virus runs out of new
people to infect), honestly the UK's original plan is clearly the best one:
just let everyone be exposed, it'll be over the fastest and there will be herd
immunity to prevent new waves every few weeks for the rest of our lives.

Even if the worst-case estimates were true (which they basically can't be at
this point), you're looking at 0.25-0.5% of the population dying.

Compare that with the effect that the permanent collapse of our free and
prosperous societies, converting the world into Venezuela will have.

If we don't change course, the living will envy the dead

~~~
pvaldes
> honestly the UK's original plan is clearly the best one: just let everyone
> be exposed,

But then your father or your grandmother would die as probable outcome, and
this plan will not look so clever then.

> Converting the world into Venezuela

A beautiful country with astonishing nature?

------
ma2rten
I am not sure that European countries are acting strongly enough. California
and New York's shelter-in-place order includes not going to work for non-
essential workers. In Germany (and even in Italy until recently) people are
still going to work.

Also, German politicians don't want to use words like curfew
("Ausgangssperre") because of East Germany's history. There was a lot of talk
if a curfew is even constitutional.

EDIT: I really don't understand why this is getting downvoted. Maybe consider
commenting if you disagree?

~~~
m4rtink
In Czech Republic you can go outside only for work shopping or excecise on
condition you don'c come close to anyone else. Also masks (including self
made) are mandatory in public.

All non essential shops are closec, borders are closed.

All this is enforced and the few people who for some reason break these rules
have been fined pretty heavily.

Also if you are in quaratine as infected or potentially infected and go out,
you might get a multi year jail sentance.

~~~
jansan
In my region in Germany a stupid lady who was supposed to be under quarantine
caused a traffic accident. Dear god, how stupid can people be?

~~~
Tomte
She "caused" it by being there. The other driver was at fault, swerving onto
the opposite direction lane and hitting her.

She shouldn't have been outside, but your version of the story is
preposterously wrong.

~~~
jansan
You are right, I should have written that the stupid lady was involved in an
accident.

------
qzxan
Banning meetings for two weeks is fine.

But a total curfew that some politicians want to impose is counterproductive.

Most infections occur inside the home. Many German cities with high rents have
very high number of shared apartments.

I caught the worst flu of my life inside such a shared apartment. The
following years, whenever some flatmate had symptoms, I immeadiately escaped
to a hotel. Never had the flu again.

Also, people sitting at home affects their immune system.

Politicians with large houses stolen from the population are fine of course.

We see in Italy that a total lockdown does not work.

People absolutely need to go out for solitary activities.

~~~
onetimemanytime
>> _Most infections occur inside the home. Many German cities with high rents
have very high number of shared apartments._

If you don't have the virus you cannot infect wife. Now if you go out and come
back home you might pick up something from outside.

>> _We see in Italy that a total lockdown does not work._

Italy closed the barn door too late

~~~
vlogxx
The comment you reply to mentions shared apartments, like students use. In big
expensive cities many non-students are also in this situation.

So it is not about "you cannot infect wife [sic]".

It is about an escape hatch of being outside _alone_ so these shared
apartments don't turn into the Diamond Princess.

You cannot infect yourself outside if you keep a distance of 5m to everyone.
In Germany, the streets are empty enough to allow that without a curfew.

You also very unlikely to infect yourself if you go to a hotel without air
conditioning, clean the room yourself, don't go to breakfast and just use the
room as an isolated office and keep a frigging distance to everyone.

~~~
admax88q
> You cannot infect yourself outside if you keep a distance of 5m to everyone.

Depends what you touch while you're out.

> You also very unlikely to infect yourself if you go to a hotel without air
> conditioning, clean the room yourself, don't go to breakfast and just use
> the room as an isolated office and keep a frigging distance to everyone.

Sure but if everyone starts going to hotels, you're putting the staff there at
risk.

I don't think anybody disagrees that if you isolate yourself you won't get
sick.

But if a bunch of people from these shared apartments start fanning out to try
to get away from eachother, some of them will already be carriers and will
spread the disease further.

People have to stop moving around.

~~~
simion314
>Depends what you touch while you're out.

So try to not touch too many things and wash your hands as often as possible
and don't touch your face.

