[M T]

A study (currently a not-yet-reviewed preprint) in Germany (described here) found that

• "The researchers found very high levels of virus emitted from the throat of patients from the earliest point in their illness —when people are generally still going about their daily routines.
  
• "Viral shedding dropped after day 5 [of symptoms] in all but two of the patients, who had more serious illness.
  
• "The scientists said at peak shedding, people with Covid-19 are emitting more than 1,000 times more virus than was emitted during peak shedding of SARS infection, a fact that likely explains the rapid spread of the virus.
  
• "The study suggests that while people with mild infections can still test positive by throat swabs for days and even weeks after their illness, those who are only mildly sick are likely not still infectious by about 10 days after they start to experience symptoms."
  

And from the study itself:

• "The present study shows that COVID-19 can often present as a common cold-like illness."
  

So, if people are spreading the illness before they know they are sick, then maybe a 1-week region-wide lock-down order would be appropriate. 
The idea is to stop the spread long enough for everyone who is infected & doesn't yet know it, to get symptoms.  (I've still seen little report of the ghost asymptomatic cases that some people believe in.)

Suppose there was a 2 week advance notice that  1 week (Saturday to Sunday) will be a Firebreak Stay Home period.  Except for emergencies, no activity outside your living space.  All grocery stores, etc. would be closed, so buy your food ahead of that firebreak.    That might give long enough for those that are infected to develop symptoms and know they are sick.    The only people they might have infected are in their household, which would then need to be quarantined.

This isn't a months-long lockdown like in China.  It is somewhat akin to the year-end closing of many regular businesses.  Having food for a week is not too undue a burden (yes, there will be people for which this is a problem).  (Actually, considering crowds just before & just after this, you probably need 2 weeks of food.)

Yes, it would be very difficult on some people.  What about kids that would go crazy locked in?   What about people that need exercise?  Etc.

But it would be better than overwhelming the health system, lots of deaths and more economic impact.

[M T]

A study (currently a not-yet-reviewed preprint) in Germany (described here) found that

• "The researchers found very high levels of virus emitted from the throat of patients from the earliest point in their illness —when people are generally still going about their daily routines.
  
• "Viral shedding dropped after day 5 [of symptoms] in all but two of the patients, who had more serious illness.
  
• "The scientists said at peak shedding, people with Covid-19 are emitting more than 1,000 times more virus than was emitted during peak shedding of SARS infection, a fact that likely explains the rapid spread of the virus.
  
• "The study suggests that while people with mild infections can still test positive by throat swabs for days and even weeks after their illness, those who are only mildly sick are likely not still infectious by about 10 days after they start to experience symptoms."
  

And from the study itself:

• "The present study shows that COVID-19 can often present as a common cold-like illness."
  

So, if people are spreading the illness before they know they are sick, then maybe a 1-week region-wide lock-down order would be appropriate. 
The idea is to stop the spread long enough for everyone who is infected & doesn't yet know it, to get symptoms.  (I've still seen little report of the ghost asymptomatic cases that some people believe in.)

Suppose there was a 2 week advance notice that  1 week (Saturday to Sunday) will be a Firebreak Stay Home period.  Except for emergencies, no activity outside your living space.  All grocery stores, etc. would be closed, so buy your food ahead of that firebreak.    That might give long enough for those that are infected to develop symptoms and know they are sick.    The only people they might have infected are in their household, which would then need to be quarantined.

This isn't a months-long lockdown like in China.  It is somewhat akin to the year-end closing of many regular businesses.  Having food for a week is not too undue a burden (yes, there will be people for which this is a problem).  (Actually, considering crowds just before & just after this, you probably need 2 weeks of food.)

Yes, it would be very difficult on some people.  What about kids that would go crazy locked in?   What about people that need exercise?  Etc.

But it would be better than overwhelming the health system, lots of deaths and more economic impact.