4 ms·

We really have trouble learning lessons as a species. 1919 is calling.

by hatenberg 6y ago

jakeogh 6y ago
We achieved better results than _every_ pre-peak prediction. What do you measure?
- Retric 6y ago
  I saw plenty of predictions this was just another flu and thus no big deal. Wuhan contained it early so total infections would be kept low etc. If anything I am shocked how accurate many epidemiology predictions where.
  - jakeogh 6y ago
    Obviously, I'm talking about professional predictions. If for some reason you care about armchair predictions, it's going to be 10 to 1 in the "way worse" range for a random sample here. Which accurate pre-peak predictions are you referring to?
    - Retric 6y ago
      I am talking about predictions from politicians not random people online. Professional predictions had huge error bars around various levels of response and tended to be surprisingly accurate IMO. Hell the stock market still seems to think it’s no big deal.
      - jakeogh 6y ago
        Which professional pre-peak predictions were surprisingly accurate?
        Retric 6y ago
        Those underpinning the ‘flatten the curve’ projections and causing everything to shutdown for one. With exponential growth before a shutdown and flat growth during it. There where plenty of different models based on different government responses, and they generally hold up well.
        jakeogh 6y ago
        Like this one? 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... https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1239975682643357696.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1239975682643357696.html Is 1.1M is "holding up well"?
        Retric 6y ago
        Yep, I suggest you read it. Suppression. Here the aim is to reduce the reproduction number (the average number of secondary cases each case generates), R, to below 1 and hence to reduce case numbers to low levels or (as for SARS or Ebola) eliminate human-to-human transmission. The main challenge of this approach is that NPIs (and drugs, if available) need to be maintained – at least intermittently - for as long as the virus is circulating in the human population, or until a vaccine becomes available. In the 3 case of COVID-19, it will be at least a 12-18 months before a vaccine is available . Furthermore, there is no guarantee that initial vaccines will have high efficacy. That’s the current UK strategy and they don’t have exponential growth.
        jakeogh 6y ago
        Why wont you talk about the predicted numbers? It would be more useful than cheap shots. The paragraph you quoted is unrelated to the prediction. p16: "In the most effective mitigation strategy examined, which leads to a single, relatively short epidemic (case isolation, household quarantine and social distancing of the elderly), the surge limits for both general ward and ICU beds would be exceeded by at least 8-fold under the more optimistic scenario for critical care requirements that we examined. In addition, even if all patients were able to be treated, we predict there would still be in the order of 250,000 deaths in GB, and 1.1-1.2 million in the US." We achieved better results than the best case estimate for the US in that paper, and not by a little.

We really have trouble learning lessons as a species. 1919 is calling.

jakeogh 6y ago

We achieved better results than _every_ pre-peak prediction. What do you measure?

Retric 6y ago
I saw plenty of predictions this was just another flu and thus no big deal. Wuhan contained it early so total infections would be kept low etc. If anything I am shocked how accurate many epidemiology predictions where.
- jakeogh 6y ago
  Obviously, I'm talking about professional predictions. If for some reason you care about armchair predictions, it's going to be 10 to 1 in the "way worse" range for a random sample here. Which accurate pre-peak predictions are you referring to?
  - Retric 6y ago
    I am talking about predictions from politicians not random people online. Professional predictions had huge error bars around various levels of response and tended to be surprisingly accurate IMO. Hell the stock market still seems to think it’s no big deal.
    - jakeogh 6y ago
      Which professional pre-peak predictions were surprisingly accurate?
      - Retric 6y ago
        Those underpinning the ‘flatten the curve’ projections and causing everything to shutdown for one. With exponential growth before a shutdown and flat growth during it. There where plenty of different models based on different government responses, and they generally hold up well.
        jakeogh 6y ago
        Like this one? 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... https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1239975682643357696.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1239975682643357696.html Is 1.1M is "holding up well"?
        Retric 6y ago
        Yep, I suggest you read it. Suppression. Here the aim is to reduce the reproduction number (the average number of secondary cases each case generates), R, to below 1 and hence to reduce case numbers to low levels or (as for SARS or Ebola) eliminate human-to-human transmission. The main challenge of this approach is that NPIs (and drugs, if available) need to be maintained – at least intermittently - for as long as the virus is circulating in the human population, or until a vaccine becomes available. In the 3 case of COVID-19, it will be at least a 12-18 months before a vaccine is available . Furthermore, there is no guarantee that initial vaccines will have high efficacy. That’s the current UK strategy and they don’t have exponential growth.
        jakeogh 6y ago
        Why wont you talk about the predicted numbers? It would be more useful than cheap shots. The paragraph you quoted is unrelated to the prediction. p16: "In the most effective mitigation strategy examined, which leads to a single, relatively short epidemic (case isolation, household quarantine and social distancing of the elderly), the surge limits for both general ward and ICU beds would be exceeded by at least 8-fold under the more optimistic scenario for critical care requirements that we examined. In addition, even if all patients were able to be treated, we predict there would still be in the order of 250,000 deaths in GB, and 1.1-1.2 million in the US." We achieved better results than the best case estimate for the US in that paper, and not by a little.