COVID-19 Outbreak (Update: More than 2.9M cases and 132,313 deaths in US)

superchuck500 said
The phased approach using data trends is the method the White House has developed and is now encouraging - and I think many states, cities, and organizations using it to some degree.

I have needed to look at the White House plan to understand the re-opening plan for a large organization that I do legal work for . . . I have only been asked to spot (tort) liability concerns but I have reviewed the plans and they're based on (1) requiring case and test trends to hit certain metrics to get through the "gate" in to the next phase; (2) continued use of some mitigation measures - some in a sliding scale of impact - to protect the vulnerable groups that include the elderly and healthcare workers, and (3) monitoring the situation as a function of health-care capacity.

The New Orleans plan public website doesn't state the specific metrics (there probably is a more detailed plan that isn't on the site), but the White House plan includes, for example, that phase 1 cannot begin until there is a downward trajectory of documented cases within a 14-day period or a downward trajectory of positive tests as a percent of total tests within a 14-day period (flat or increasing volume of tests). And phase 1 is a limited opening, it's not a immediate return with a few casual measures still around.

I didn't watch her press conference but is that where you're getting the "zero new infections" baseline that you're claiming? How is the New Orleans plan different from the White House guidance?

https://ready.nola.gov/incident/coronavirus/mayor-cantrell-outlines-steps-toward-reopening-(1)
https://www.whitehouse.gov/openingamerica/#criteria

I read the article in which there is no language about medical capacity but there is certainly language about fearing that people or pockets of people will get sick. That will happen when we open things up and it simply has to happen. Waiting for no risk is not an option. The other concern I have is the talk of establishing a number. It's currently set at 10 for public gatherings, which effectively means churches are closed, nevermind the fact that liquor stores and rouses are packed. The quotes in the article talk about 10 and 20 person gatherings when the national guidelines being followed by the state suggest we ought to open to 25% or capacity for restaurants and churches, likely on the 15th. The language the city is using does not lead me to believe this will be allowed.

A vaccine is not necessarily likely. And if we get one it will likely be on a timetable of years. Herd immunity by definition only happens when people are allowed to be exposed. The city's current plan is no plan at all.