he doesn't mention the first amendment - free speech is about more than american laws.
Saying that what twitter is doing is "stifling free speech" is a matter of opinion, and while you can certainly argue against the statement there's no need for the amendments to the us constitution to come into it.
Are infections spread out across a representative sample of the population?
Is the population of New York (in terms of genetic makeup, behavior, underlying conditions etc) match that of the rest of the world?
I realize that this site is filled with autists who believe they can solve everything with a clean, simple model (the less lines of code the better, right?), but reality is a fucking mess. All models are not even wrong.
"Test refusal" is a very bad metric. Almost no countries are testing anyone who suspects they might be infected. A lot of European countries actually have more restrictive guidelines than Japan - Norway won't even test people arriving from COVID-19 hotspots if they only exhibit minor symptoms.
In Japan 6-7% of the tests come back positive. This is not at all indicative of too little testing.
If it can be done cheaply and easily while preventing additional infections, no harm at all. In fact, testing as many people as possible to isolate carriers is, I believe, the single best way to handle this crisis. It's not doable at this point, although hopefully we'll get there.
> we don't know why the situation is so much worse in Italy than in Japan.
So... because we don't know why just Asian countries are better than Western in controlling the outbreak, the Western countries should just... do nothing to control the outbreak?
The testing rate is low almost everywhere. The mass testing done in the Italian town Vò suggests that 50-75% of infections are asymptomatic (but still contagious). This matches the findings from the cruise ship "Diamond Princess".
Also note that the populations of both the cruise ship and Vò skew quite a bit older than the world average, and younger people are more likely to be asymptomatic (AFAIK we still don't know how more likely)
Because shutting down the economy will kill people, too. It will also decrease quality of life for everyone, and disrupt families, communities, cities and countries.
I don't even know what the best course of action is, but there are trade-offs that a lot of people here seem to be ignoring.
Saying that what twitter is doing is "stifling free speech" is a matter of opinion, and while you can certainly argue against the statement there's no need for the amendments to the us constitution to come into it.