On one hands tons of countries locked down after China (relative to the number of serious cases or deaths - I understand there is a debate about Chinese numbers, but I don't find it relevant here, because Italy or France also did not test a lot and also under-reported deaths -- basically counting only cases that were tested and died in an hospital -- in the end given the dynamic of the epidemics and other uncertainties it does not change a lot rough date predictions even if there would be 3 times more deaths)
So it even could take a few more weeks to get to the same low point again. Plus China had an extremely aggressive strategy, accumulating the measures, and even Italy did not use all of them. And France does less than Italy (non essential production has not been stopped by the government in France).
On the other hand I doubt we are going to eradicate the disease (at least not in the immediate future and not only with worldwide lockdowns), so we might want to use another lifting strategy than what they did in China (if we manage to develop means to control the spread at a very low rate)
2 months is still a reasonable approximation, given all the unknowns. But I will not even be surprised if it ends up being 3, and 4 is not out of the question.
So it even could take a few more weeks to get to the same low point again. Plus China had an extremely aggressive strategy, accumulating the measures, and even Italy did not use all of them. And France does less than Italy (non essential production has not been stopped by the government in France).
On the other hand I doubt we are going to eradicate the disease (at least not in the immediate future and not only with worldwide lockdowns), so we might want to use another lifting strategy than what they did in China (if we manage to develop means to control the spread at a very low rate)
2 months is still a reasonable approximation, given all the unknowns. But I will not even be surprised if it ends up being 3, and 4 is not out of the question.