efcfanwirral
Player Valuation: £30m
I think there's a genuine question about whether MPs are being briefed with those models only, and not the potential ok ones. Probably not true, but it does raise the question
Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!
- Thread starter bullybeef
- Start date
- Status
It is very plausible that hospital numbers don't increase a lot, since this does seem to be mild. Of course there are possible scenarios which are much better than those in the models. Why have they not been modelled and why is this not done on a probability basis?
Kev The Rat
Player Valuation: £70m
attempting to question the severity of this or to suggest that hospitalizations will be much lower with omicron are irrelevant.
Nation after nation worldwide has decided they will not live with the virus - end of conversation.
Zero Covid is now a global objective like it or not.
Nation after nation worldwide has decided they will not live with the virus - end of conversation.
Zero Covid is now a global objective like it or not.
tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
Because it’s very difficult to predict “good” outcomes when there aren’t really any reasons for them to come about. SAGE are having to model worst case scenario’s because that’s what our government has left us with.
You could model less severe illnesses, but that is (at least at the start of a wave) going to be a matter of guesswork. It’s possible to model a COVID variant that doesn’t kill anyone, but I’m not sure what use it would be other than to provide people who’ve been consistently wrong with a comfort blanket.
Zero covid is impossible.
We should be modelling based on probability not the possibility of some pie in the sky worst case scenario. Sage do nothing other than encourage lockdowns.
If they aren't going to model the full range of possible outcomes and provide an analysis of the probability of each, then they really are pointless.
CharliePotato
Player Valuation: £10m
Sure there will be loads....
Kev The Rat
Player Valuation: £70m
They won’t stop their efforts though
As I said it’s the global objective - not saying it’s right or wrong
Personally I’m neutral on the subject - but you need to pick your fights and this one you ain’t winning
Diogenes the Cynic
Player Valuation: £40m
Everyone who has been vaccinated and been concordant with previous social distancing and mask guidelines have done their part, keep society open for them.
Those who have chosen not to get vaccinated and who willingly choose to risk the deaths of the vulnerable while bedblocking decent citizens should have none of the benefits of the society that they abuse.
Round them up and stick them in Covid Camps for all I care.
grandjoeblue
Player Valuation: £35m
Definitely. The model should be based on evidence already gathered by SA and Denmark.
The 5000 deaths a day suggestion really is a complete disgrace.
CharliePotato
Player Valuation: £10m
Brainwashed to the absolute hilt, sound eerily like a German fella with a tash.
tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
There isn’t any probability this country would stop a wave of infection though - we’ve seen that four times now. If you believe that this kills people, “just letting it spread“ will always produce bad outcomes if you model what happens when the spread is uninterrupted.
Of course if we did have effective track, trace, isolation and containment then you really could model what effect that would have. However for some unfathomable reason the opponents of lockdowns don’t want that and would rather have the alternative (lockdowns).
I can answer that question with certainty. They definitely get all scenarios of forecasting.
I’ve done work over the last year that gave me sight of Cabinet Office and SAGE scenario forecasting so have seen many first hand.
EDIT: would also add that in Summer 2020 I saw the modelling of forecasted infection and death rates for last winter, and the actual death toll exceeded the forecasted reasonable worst case scenario.
It’s already modelled using probability. The issue is that the confidence intervals are wide due to the number of variables that affect the various scenarios they are looking at. And, some of those variables are behaviours which in turn are influenced by communication (other behaviours). By simply presenting a given scenario/model, you are potentially changing a major input to that model (and frankly they will be aware of this and likely use this as one of their first tools).
It’s complex and almost impossible to model accurately. The models are there as a guide and nothing else. They will always err on the side of caution due to the uncertainty. They are a tool to use in conjunction with others.
Well, you know my opinion on the effectiveness of track and trace. No point going down that debate again.
We can't stop all death in this country unfortunately, but this is about hospital capacity. There is absolutely the possibility that this will not have the dramatic impact on hospitals that is being predicted, because the evidence from SA suggests it may not.
If a full range of outcomes is not modelled, then I don't see how that is much benefit to policy makers.
- Status