that's a very optimistic theory - don't think its supported by science though. Couldn't there be other factors causing those graph shapes, like maybe the states and countries that were hit harder have more cautious populations as a result of their experience?
the curve is called a sigmoid -
think of the intensity of a fire, you kinda get is going, it smolders, catches, gets rocking, then exhausts its fuel -
the fuel being highly susceptible people who have symptoms.
i'm just a numbers guy, and the early assumptions were that everyone could get it, and everyone could spread it.
so there was plenty of fuel for the fire, and enough O2 to keep it burning until. I was full in on these assumptions,
and it translated to some rather dire outcomes.
This might not be the case -
if i'm understanding this in my non-virologist mind, T cell doesn't mean you can't catch it, just that it will be recognized earlier,
preventing full expression and a full on cytokine response (paging
@Captain Brainstorm - am i in the neighborhood)
It changes the math in that the fuel available is more quickly consumed - this does not mean the behavioral changes haven't made
the biggest difference.
to Steve's point, does this have to happen in each population center? just because that is where the fuel is?
And instead of it all happening in parallel, it is spread out until quarantine fatigue becomes too much, and boom.
Washington State does not support the theory, unless the population centers being hit are different.
(or the arizona people are home for the summer)
