Coronavirus (2022) thread

[Bluewonder]

You and everybody else didn’t know the most likely case for a very long time.

There were epidemiological modellers around the world who did a much better job than ours.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

There were epidemiological modellers around the world who did a much better job than ours.

Perhaps we should employ them, should they have enough immigration points to come.

 

[True_Blue69]

We don't predict that a parachute will fail to open every jump, yet we do use reserve 'chutes.

Very true, but we should at least predict that they will open once or twice. SAGE's models would have pretty much said that they never open they were that far out.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Very true, but we should at least predict that they will open once or twice. SAGE's models would have pretty much said that they never open they were that far out.

They also will have predicted that they always open.

 

[blueparrot]

There were epidemiological modellers around the world who did a much better job than ours.

Were there? And did these countries take a different view to the restrictions needed?
Because as far as I can see most countries took similar precautions to us, some stricter some less , but similar.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

The most likely case.

You can appeal to authority all you want but when scenarios that are described as plausible are out by magnitudes of 10, they deserve to be criticised.

I don't think you understand the messing of "uncertainty". Or "dynamic modelling".

A factor of ten was the difference in case rates within a week during omicron growth.

But, by all means, keep on shouting about how your understanding is better than that of experts, if it makes you feel good about yourself.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Very true, but we should at least predict that they will open once or twice. SAGE's models would have pretty much said that they never open they were that far out.

No, that's entirely untrue. Makes for a good slogan though.

 

[Bluewonder]

I don't think you understand the messing of "uncertainty". Or "dynamic modelling".

A factor of ten was the difference in case rates within a week during omicron growth.

But, by all means, keep on shouting about how your understanding is better than that of experts, if it makes you feel good about yourself.

You're attempting to hide failure behind meaningless phrases and appeals to authority; perhaps it would work with the less perceptible.

A better alternative would be acknowledging just how badly wrong they were, understanding why, and improving how they work so they can provide better advice/modelling the next time this happens.

If they're anywhere near as arrogant as you, that sadly won't happen.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

If they're anywhere near as arrogant as you

You believe you know better than world experts; I'm arrogant.

Got it.

 

[Bluewonder]

You believe you know better than world experts; I'm arrogant.

Got it.

I don't believe I know better, I'm criticising their performance.
Work on your comprehension skills.

 

[Healdplace]

UK Cases up a bit today on 54,218 - but down week to week from 68,214

Deaths down (they have been falling steadily for a week or two now) on 199 V 276 last week

HOWEVER

The best news is that England hospital patients fall into four figures for first time in 50 days on 9804 - down 215 on the day.

Every region falls.North West down 50 on 1437.


Further data on the other thread.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Which scenario do you think any government should work on?

Best case,
Worst case or
Average of the two case?

If the worst case scenario isn’t prepared for, then millions of people could have died.

Now the worst case scenario hasn‘t happened, we have lots of Dr Hindsights with degrees in epidemiology from Facebook university calling the modellers out.

Continually getting it wrong means they will be ignored next time.
Compare and contrast with the Danish model that for Omicron was pretty much spot on with the Median outcome pretty much matching the actual Omicron wave.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Continually getting it wrong means they will be ignored next time.
Compare and contrast with the Danish model that for Omicron was pretty much spot on with the Median outcome pretty much matching the actual Omicron wave.

But. They. Didn’t.

They modelled all scenarios.

Whoever made the decisions on their results are the ones whose houses you need to camp outside with pitchforks.

 

[meltonblue]

What the fuck were they then?
See Denmark equivalents for a reasonably accurate model.

Projections, as in if x and y happen and we do nothing then this is the potential outcome. Forecast vs scenario modelling basically, Denmark isn’t an equivalent.

It never is do nothing though as even the creation of the models makes people do something (look at all the Christmas parties cancelled as an example). We also didn’t do nothing as we massively increased the speed of the booster roll out - worth comparing the impact of that vs hospital admissions too as that does bring it in line with their predictions, so they did exactly what they’re there to do.

 

[meltonblue]

Continually getting it wrong means they will be ignored next time.
Compare and contrast with the Danish model that for Omicron was pretty much spot on with the Median outcome pretty much matching the actual Omicron wave.

The danish model was a prediction not a projection of scenarios. What a lot seem to be ignoring is that the danish prediction was also used both by Sage and the government. The head of danish modelling is a member of Sage too.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

guesses, really bad ones at that

They literally cannot guess when modelling. Modelling requires the exact opposite of guessing.

They can only use a data set, that data set can give a vary of answers if used together in different ways, but they cannot use any of their expertise or experience or even common sense to change the outcomes the data provides otherwise the model cannot be published because the outcomes have been “tampered with”.

They way people moaning about the modelling is bizarre. They might not even advise what the models suggest could be required.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

The head of danish modelling is a member of Sage too

Shhh. Too inconvenient.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

They way people moaning about the modelling is bizarre

I think it's that people want a target for their frustrations.

Covid is unpredictable and frustrating, and the uncertainty is hard to deal with. The consequences for many are very severe, financially and socially more than the direct disease for most. The huge uncertainty shown by these models is real. It's tough.

 

[meltonblue]

They literally cannot guess when modelling. Modelling requires the exact opposite of guessing.

They can only use a data set, that data set can give a vary of answers if used together in different ways, but they cannot use any of their expertise or experience or even common sense to change the outcomes the data provides otherwise the model cannot be published because the outcomes have been “tampered with”.

They way people moaning about the modelling is bizarre. They might not even advise what the models suggest could be required.

I don’t think the way some of the media have interpreted them has helped at all. It’s been great for some people with the amount of transparency they’ve provided with the data and modelling throughout, it has led to a deliberate misinterpretation by some too though (and some MPs too)

 

[hillcrest]

In general, I’m tired of getting upset about the coronavirus and therefore I rarely even read the news. Recently vaccinated and feel good.