covid-19 spread is limited by two things: herd immunity and social isolation measures
at the moment, in america, there have been roughly 3.7 million tests in a population of over 328 million.
that some people are given the test multiple times, so let's assume just 1% of all americans have been tested.
that really means we're shooting in the dark in terms of knowing where we're at in terms of herd immunity.
if we assume everyone tested has immunity (not the case, because obviously, some never tested positive, but let's go with this), and we assume everyone not tested doesn't have immunity (also not the case, because not everyone who gets covid-19 gets tested), and let's further assume that everyone who got it now has immunity (not clear, as some people appear to get re-infected).
obviously, many simplifying assumptions, but what can you do without adequate testing?
in any event, this means that whatever the r0 infection rate was when no one was infected, without social isolation, it's going to be virtually the same if we were to lift all social isolation measures because 99% of the potentially infected people are still potentially infected. that 1% reduction in the susceptible population isn't going to put a very big dent in the r0 rate.
the best that we can do is massive testing, with relaxation of social distancing measures *only* in specific areas that local herd immunity permits.
that requires massive and repeated testing and responsible behavior by government, businesses and individuals.
nothing like anything donnie is stamping his feet for.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Since this thread could use another post! 
Knowing our boundaries overall is life saving....we are in this for the long haul. 
