Danke, genau sowas ist mal interessant.
Ich bin mal gespannt ob der Artikel dann wirklich hergibt, was Bloomberg daraus macht (nach deinem Zitat).
Konkret steht im Abstract des Artikels:
Our model predicts that a small minority of “superspreader” POIs account for a large majority of infections and that restricting maximum occupancy at each POI is more effective than uniformly reducing mobility.
(POI=point of interest)
Es sollten also, nach diesem Abstract (Rest lese ich später), jegliche Menschenansammlungen vermieden werden. Restaurants und religiöse Einrichtungen werden im Abstract nur als Beispiel genannt: "to points of interest (POIs) such as restaurants and religious establishments,"
PS: ok, tut er:
Because we found that certain POI categories contributed far more
to predicted infections in March (ED Figure 2), we also expected that
reopening some POI categories would be riskier than reopening others.
To assess this, we simulated reopening each category in turn on May
1 (by returning its mobility patterns to early March levels, as before),
while keeping all other POIs at their reduced mobility levels from the
end of April. We found large variation in predicted reopening risks: on
average across metro areas, full-service restaurants, gyms, hotels, cafes,
religious organizations, and limited-service restaurants produced the
largest predicted increases in infections when reopened (ED Figure 5d).