4 ms·

I’m curious: Are these types of simulations (not these specifically, but those run by trained epidemiologists) used to inform decisions at all? Can the paramete

I’m curious: Are these types of simulations (not these specifically, but those run by trained epidemiologists) used to inform decisions at all? Can the parameters of more refined simulations be optimized to minimize cumulative fatalities, for example?

diroussel 7y ago
Yes they are. These types of models have been studied for decades. For instance the Foot and Mouth disease outbreak in the UK, models were used : https://www.ft.com/content/7e56cf84-6a9e-11ea-a3c9-1fe6fedcca75 https://www.ft.com/content/7e56cf84-6a9e-11ea-a3c9-1fe6fedcc... Or if that link doesn't work: https://www.google.com/?q=FT+Neil+Ferguson+a+virus+modeller+sounds+the+alarm https://www.google.com/?q=FT+Neil+Ferguson+a+virus+modeller+... The article talks about the modeller Neil Fergusson, and in my next link it talks about how he has advised the UK government: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/top-government-adviser-self-isolates-developing-coronavirus/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-diseas...
- acqq 7y ago
  The analysis that is claimed (1) to have affected the change in the Covid-19 policy of the British government: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s... is by Neil M Ferguson et al. 16 March 2020 Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team DOI: https://doi.org/10.25561/77482 https://doi.org/10.25561/77482 "Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand" In my opinion, the experts were aware of the problems in approach of many governments, but the governments managed to do what they wanted (pretend nothing is happening) for too long. Also in my opinion, the smaller players believed too much to the most influential one, which has a specific history of bluffing. That even works in social contexts, but, in the words of Richard Feynman eventually: "reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." 1) E.g. The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/new-data-new-policy-why-uks-coronavirus-strategy-has-changed https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/new-data-new-p...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
madhadron 7y ago
Yes. Basically everything you hear about like flattening the curve, social distancing, all of it is informed by variations on the classic SIR model of epidemic propagation. The modelling most often goes wrong either when people do something bizarrely stupid that the modellers didn't think of, like farmers in the UK foot and mouth disease epidemic moving animals at night to farms that had been declared clean in order to avoid having them destroyed, or lack of good numbers to go into the model in the absence of adequate testing.

diroussel 7y ago

Yes they are. These types of models have been studied for decades. For instance the Foot and Mouth disease outbreak in the UK, models were used : https://www.ft.com/content/7e56cf84-6a9e-11ea-a3c9-1fe6fedcca75 https://www.ft.com/content/7e56cf84-6a9e-11ea-a3c9-1fe6fedcc... Or if that link doesn't work: https://www.google.com/?q=FT+Neil+Ferguson+a+virus+modeller+sounds+the+alarm https://www.google.com/?q=FT+Neil+Ferguson+a+virus+modeller+... The article talks about the modeller Neil Fergusson, and in my next link it talks about how he has advised the UK government: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/top-government-adviser-self-isolates-developing-coronavirus/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-diseas...

acqq 7y ago
The analysis that is claimed (1) to have affected the change in the Covid-19 policy of the British government: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/sph/ide/gida-fellowships/Imperial-College-COVID19-NPI-modelling-16-03-2020.pdf https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s... is by Neil M Ferguson et al. 16 March 2020 Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team DOI: https://doi.org/10.25561/77482 https://doi.org/10.25561/77482 "Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand" In my opinion, the experts were aware of the problems in approach of many governments, but the governments managed to do what they wanted (pretend nothing is happening) for too long. Also in my opinion, the smaller players believed too much to the most influential one, which has a specific history of bluffing. That even works in social contexts, but, in the words of Richard Feynman eventually: "reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." 1) E.g. The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/new-data-new-policy-why-uks-coronavirus-strategy-has-changed https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/mar/16/new-data-new-p...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

madhadron 7y ago

Yes. Basically everything you hear about like flattening the curve, social distancing, all of it is informed by variations on the classic SIR model of epidemic propagation. The modelling most often goes wrong either when people do something bizarrely stupid that the modellers didn't think of, like farmers in the UK foot and mouth disease epidemic moving animals at night to farms that had been declared clean in order to avoid having them destroyed, or lack of good numbers to go into the model in the absence of adequate testing.