The K M Links Game - December 2024 Week...
Quizzes & Puzzles5 mins ago
Interesting...
The architect of Sweden's coronavirus strategy has claimed that the UK's lockdown has been largely "futile" in containing the virus:
https:/
You may not be able to read the full article because of the DT's paywall. Mr Jieseke claims that the lockdown strategy does not prevent severe cases but only pushes them further into the future. He suggested that once restrictions are eased, cases will reappear. In particular he has been critical of the modelling produced by the team led by Prof Ferguson. You remember him. He was the one who told the PM that without a lockdown the country could see half a million deaths. He then encouraged his married lover to visit him because "he thought he was immune." His team's research forecasted that Sweden's approach would take its R number above three and would lead to 40,000 deaths by May 1st. Yesterday (May 6th) that number stood at 2,941. To be fair, Prof. Ferguson did not say which May 1st he was referring to.
https:/
You may not be able to read the full article because of the DT's paywall. Mr Jieseke claims that the lockdown strategy does not prevent severe cases but only pushes them further into the future. He suggested that once restrictions are eased, cases will reappear. In particular he has been critical of the modelling produced by the team led by Prof Ferguson. You remember him. He was the one who told the PM that without a lockdown the country could see half a million deaths. He then encouraged his married lover to visit him because "he thought he was immune." His team's research forecasted that Sweden's approach would take its R number above three and would lead to 40,000 deaths by May 1st. Yesterday (May 6th) that number stood at 2,941. To be fair, Prof. Ferguson did not say which May 1st he was referring to.
Answers
New Judge, You may find this interesting.
12:19 Thu 07th May 2020
I agree that the idea of the lockdown was to "flatten the curve". It may have achieved that, who knows? But that isn't what I says on the tin. The mantra is "stay at home - save lives". I don't recall anywhere seeing "stay at home - flatten the curve". The government's propaganda machine has now led to a situation where many of the population are more nervous about lifting the lockdown than the government is.
But, back to Prof Ferguson: any views on his team's forecast of 40,000 deaths in Sweden by last Friday? And how does that stack up with the same teams forecast of 500,000 deaths in the UK without a lockdown.
I didn't mention that the learned professor's notion that because he thought he was immune (or even if he was sure that he was) he believed it was OK to encourage his lover to break the lockdown rules. He admits to "an error of judgement". It would be better if he had admitted to a "dose of hypocrisy."
But, back to Prof Ferguson: any views on his team's forecast of 40,000 deaths in Sweden by last Friday? And how does that stack up with the same teams forecast of 500,000 deaths in the UK without a lockdown.
I didn't mention that the learned professor's notion that because he thought he was immune (or even if he was sure that he was) he believed it was OK to encourage his lover to break the lockdown rules. He admits to "an error of judgement". It would be better if he had admitted to a "dose of hypocrisy."
// But I can't see why other people shouldn't be able to carry out a continuing assessment of how different approaches - Swedish, Australian, Taiwanese, US and British for example - are panning out. //
That's fine, but there's too much noise. The Govt should base it's actions on the scientific and medical advisors that they have, and the equivalent in other countries which are undoubtedly corresponding with each other.
Random people writing articles basically saying 'the government's approach is crap' doesn't help anything. Not that they're bothered of course, as the aim is not to help, it's simply to fire criticism at the govt for political reasons.
That's fine, but there's too much noise. The Govt should base it's actions on the scientific and medical advisors that they have, and the equivalent in other countries which are undoubtedly corresponding with each other.
Random people writing articles basically saying 'the government's approach is crap' doesn't help anything. Not that they're bothered of course, as the aim is not to help, it's simply to fire criticism at the govt for political reasons.
//I think death reporting would have to be hugely divergent to account entirely for Poland's low figure. Besides, it's not just Poland. There's a look at the low figures across all eastern Europe here - it suggests early lockdown may be the key factor//
Jno, I picked on Poland due to their large border with Germany. One would've thought that their figures would have been comparable with Germany's as a result.
Jno, I picked on Poland due to their large border with Germany. One would've thought that their figures would have been comparable with Germany's as a result.
New Judge,
You may find this interesting...
https:/
You may find this interesting...
https:/
As far as I'm aware, Ferguson's team itself has not released any forecast for Sweden. Other teams have taken their model and tried to apply it to Sweden, which is not necessarily the same thing, e.g. naively using a model that may have been designed with a specific country/demographic profile in mind can sometimes lead to bad results. Or the model itself may be broken, eg most likely here the fatality rate may be overestimated.
Jim360,
ICL have been very reluctant to release the source code for their predictions. When they finally release something, it had been modified so that the predictions could not be replicated. Most odd.
// Although the ICL model’s main paper has been out for over a month, an odd series of missteps continue to hamper external scrutiny of its predictive claims. In an unusual break from peer review conventions, the ICL team delayed releasing the source code for their model for over a month after their predictions. They finally released their code on April 27, 2020 through the popular code and data-sharing website GitHub, but with the unusual caveat that its “parameter files are provided as a sample only and do not necessarily reflect runs used in published papers.”
Although ICL only released scenarios and associated forecasts for the United Kingdom and United States, its model is theoretically adaptable to any country by changing the inputs to reflect its population, demographics, and the date its specific policies took effect. //
ICL have been very reluctant to release the source code for their predictions. When they finally release something, it had been modified so that the predictions could not be replicated. Most odd.
// Although the ICL model’s main paper has been out for over a month, an odd series of missteps continue to hamper external scrutiny of its predictive claims. In an unusual break from peer review conventions, the ICL team delayed releasing the source code for their model for over a month after their predictions. They finally released their code on April 27, 2020 through the popular code and data-sharing website GitHub, but with the unusual caveat that its “parameter files are provided as a sample only and do not necessarily reflect runs used in published papers.”
Although ICL only released scenarios and associated forecasts for the United Kingdom and United States, its model is theoretically adaptable to any country by changing the inputs to reflect its population, demographics, and the date its specific policies took effect. //
Chalk and cheese. For a start ...
* UK population density: 259 people per square kilometre (671 people per square mile), with England having a significantly higher population density than Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
* Sweden population density: 24 people per square kilometre (63 people square mile)
The closer people are packed, the more the virus will spread.
* UK population density: 259 people per square kilometre (671 people per square mile), with England having a significantly higher population density than Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.
* Sweden population density: 24 people per square kilometre (63 people square mile)
The closer people are packed, the more the virus will spread.
there has to be more to it than that, Ellipsis. Taiwan has more than twice the population density of the UK but a death rate per million of 0.3 (UK: 443). So that's one of the things that need to be looked at. What are they doing that Britain isn't, and is there a case that Britain should? (Not rhetorical questions, I don't know the answer.)
these apparently are NBER papers and have a pay wall.... but
https:/
Inequality of Fear and Self-Quarantine: Is There a Trade-off between GDP and Public Health?
which is FREE - yippee !
and has...
"Our paper belongs to the new strand of literature that incorporates the SIR epidemiology model by Kermack et al. (1927) or its variants into economic environments. Our innovation on the epidemiology side is to consider asymptotic carriers,.... blah blah blah"
oh my god thank god NJ doesnt believe in SIR models!
oh no - it agrees with him ( they say the UK has really screwed up) so perhaps after all he DOES believe in models - this time - if they say what he wants. The paper says if the UKhad adopted the South Korea model then NONE of this would have happened....
another one is
https:/
A MULTI-RISK SIR MODEL WITH OPTIMALLY TARGETED LOCKDOWN
o no - another SIR model that NJ refutes and ignores because it is crap. but wait! - is this the one that they have plugged in Swedens values into Neils model and gets complete billox ? well in that case, it is the most sensible modelling paper ever written !
https:/
is the one in America that rubhishes Neil F's model buy saying that the NBER papers rubbish Fergusons model of the swedish outbreak - and then doesnt give a reference.
anyway there is quite a lot to read here
which will keep me quiet for a day or two
unless you dont agree with modelling when you can skip it all while blaarting all the way loudly and often - "and the Ferge got sweden wrong - so wrong and it is somewhere but I havent read it of course"
https:/
Inequality of Fear and Self-Quarantine: Is There a Trade-off between GDP and Public Health?
which is FREE - yippee !
and has...
"Our paper belongs to the new strand of literature that incorporates the SIR epidemiology model by Kermack et al. (1927) or its variants into economic environments. Our innovation on the epidemiology side is to consider asymptotic carriers,.... blah blah blah"
oh my god thank god NJ doesnt believe in SIR models!
oh no - it agrees with him ( they say the UK has really screwed up) so perhaps after all he DOES believe in models - this time - if they say what he wants. The paper says if the UKhad adopted the South Korea model then NONE of this would have happened....
another one is
https:/
A MULTI-RISK SIR MODEL WITH OPTIMALLY TARGETED LOCKDOWN
o no - another SIR model that NJ refutes and ignores because it is crap. but wait! - is this the one that they have plugged in Swedens values into Neils model and gets complete billox ? well in that case, it is the most sensible modelling paper ever written !
https:/
is the one in America that rubhishes Neil F's model buy saying that the NBER papers rubbish Fergusons model of the swedish outbreak - and then doesnt give a reference.
anyway there is quite a lot to read here
which will keep me quiet for a day or two
unless you dont agree with modelling when you can skip it all while blaarting all the way loudly and often - "and the Ferge got sweden wrong - so wrong and it is somewhere but I havent read it of course"
// //"stay at home - save lives". I don't recall anywhere seeing "stay at home - flatten the curve".//
yes - no - Boris - stay at home and flatten the sombrero
and no I am not going over what Bareez said before hospital to find it
there was discussion on this very site about whether it was flattening ( no reduction in area under curve = same no of deaths ) or reducing ( smaller area under curve and therefore fewer deaths)
yes - no - Boris - stay at home and flatten the sombrero
and no I am not going over what Bareez said before hospital to find it
there was discussion on this very site about whether it was flattening ( no reduction in area under curve = same no of deaths ) or reducing ( smaller area under curve and therefore fewer deaths)
"there has to be more to it than that, Ellipsis". There is, which is why I wrote "for a start". The deaths per million will depend on the infections per million. If Taiwan's infections per million were well below the UK's (and who knows ours???) then of course they will have fewer deaths.
Another odd one is Singapore - https:/
Another odd one is Singapore - https:/
With Singapore I think the deaths figure will increase quite a bit as the spike in cases is pretty recent- second half of April. Of the 20939 cases 19285 are shown as Active. I'm sure most of those recent cases have not had time to reach the death stage yet. I also notice that males significantly outnumber females in the known gender cases and the average age is shown as 35
Whilst we are yet muddling through this crisis, the government need to take what it has learned and will learn, and begin making preparations for the next pandemic which will surely come.
Build and stock warehouses full of equipment, recruit and train more staff, prepare more wards ready to be converted into ICU units.
Its only a matter of time.
Build and stock warehouses full of equipment, recruit and train more staff, prepare more wards ready to be converted into ICU units.
Its only a matter of time.
Isn’t flattening the curve (wish I could do that with some of mine ......) all about pushing cases further forward to ensure beds and equipment were available for everyone over a period of time?
If that’s the case the virus will resume after lock down but one hopes (although I don’t hold out much hope) that enough people have had it for a bit of Hurd immunity to works.
I don’t think every country should be looking to another to see if their protocols worked better or worse because most countries have differing social constructs and attitudes etc.
Screaming that the UK has more deaths than any other is at best disingenuous and at worst scare mongering.
We are where we are and we should learn by what went wrong and what went right.
If that’s the case the virus will resume after lock down but one hopes (although I don’t hold out much hope) that enough people have had it for a bit of Hurd immunity to works.
I don’t think every country should be looking to another to see if their protocols worked better or worse because most countries have differing social constructs and attitudes etc.
Screaming that the UK has more deaths than any other is at best disingenuous and at worst scare mongering.
We are where we are and we should learn by what went wrong and what went right.
dont worry, theres enough "material" here to keep scientists, researchers etc analysing, formatting and producing data sets, graphs with lots of nice colours and research papers to suit all sorts of scenarios that their paymasters will be expecting to back up their arguments for years (decades even) to come.
And just about every report will be littered with coulds and shoulds and lashings of hindsight etc..you know how it goes.....
And just about every report will be littered with coulds and shoulds and lashings of hindsight etc..you know how it goes.....
Latest Posts
Crosswords7 mins ago
ChatterBank34 mins ago
ChatterBank41 mins ago
News54 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles57 mins ago
