BerkshireBlue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 3,476
I think there is a misunderstanding of the job that modellers have, modellers aren't there to express models that make the media or us feel warm inside. If a variant is milder then as the guy has said there's nothing whatsoever to see here and nothing to do so what's the point in modelling it?
They will model worst case scenarios because that informs the government on what action is needed, they need to know this because how can you plan otherwise? If Omicron turns out to be the same as Delta then that shows that they need X doctors, X capacity or else we can't cope and so we need X restrictions to help it. They then model the impact of those restrictions which gives you something resembling a plan.
However, what is the action needed if Omicron turned out to not cause any problems at all, the answer is no actions at all so what's the point in modelling it? It isn't like we're arguing to shrink health capacity if the severity of Omicron turned out to be milder, if that was the case then optimistic models would be very useful.
It needs to be remembered that the government doesn't just take a model and use that to decide if we go into lockdown or not. If that was true then at 90,000 cases per day (the highest ever) we'd be in total lockdown right now but we aren't.
So wrong. The point of modelling is to predict the likely truth. Sure you can do worst case best stuff but it's the likely outcome is what you are interested in. The MPs want to know the likely scenario as they don't want to blow £30+ billion on a lockdown that isn't needed. It also makes a mockery of all the press the SAGE models get.