https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/rr/rr6601a1.htm

The paper is a list of recommendations from 2017 to deal with influenza type pandemics using NPIs (non-pharmaceutical interventions) such as hand hygiene, isolation, distancing, and respiratory etiquette. The paper was updated in response to the 2009 h1n1 swine flu infecting 43-89 million Americans and killing 12,000 over a one year period (April 2009-10).

There are some recommendations worth following in this paper and the response depends on the type of pandemic.

I've been researching why we are isolating / quarantining. We hear it's to flatten the curve of cases to prevent a surge but there isn't any scientific evidence in this paper it will flatten the curve. My question has been what happens after isolation? Won't a surge happen quickly?

In fact there isn't much evidence at all for justifying isolation in response to covid-19. Checkout appendix 5 of the paper: https://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/44314

One of the key conclusions from the evidence section:

"Mandatory quarantine delayed the peak of the pandemic, but when cost was taken into account, mandatory quarantine was not an economically effective intervention against the 2009 H1N1 pandemic"

Yikes! The evidence clearly states the economic hit we are taking does not justify the response.

Most of the evidence from the paper seems to push for giving employees more sick days (a good thing). One piece of valid evidence was from Japan where they saw a 20% lower risk of infection during isolation of one company compared to a non isolated company (however they didn't account for preexisting conditions and other factors in the 15,000 person study).

All the curve flattening talk is based on computer generated "what if" scenarios for previous pandemics. Not very scientific or reasonably actionable in my opinion as their models likely don't sufficiently represent our reality.

The paper also presents three primary objectives of isolation / quarantine. As you will see they don't apply to covid-19 in the USA. While you might think #2 applies I haven't heard of hospitals going on a spending spree for equipment or manpower to handle a surge.

"Objective 1: To gain time for an initial assessment of transmissibility and clinical severity of the pandemic virus in the very early stage of its circulation in humans (closures for up to 2 weeks)

Objective 2: To slow down the spread of the pandemic virus in areas that are beginning to experience local outbreaks and thereby allow time for the local health care system to prepare additional resources for responding to increased demand for health care services (closures up to 6 weeks)

Objective 3: To allow time for pandemic vaccine production and distribution (closures up to 6 months)"

Please provide any insights you've found after reading the paper and appendices. If you have better sources or research please post.