Cable Forum - View Single Post

**Hugh** · 06-05-2020, 14:34

From another thread (where the topic was drifting) - the conversation belongs in this thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfman View Post
Less than the 250,000 deaths you'd cause by lifting lockdown prematurely.

How many times....?

The government's policy is to slow the deaths down so the NHS will not be overwhelmed. The only way to deal with this is to let the vaccine travel its course more slowly or lockdown until a vaccine is mass produced, distributed and applied.

Clearly, it cannot be the latter or we will no longer have an economy.

---------- Post added at 20:19 ---------- Previous post was at 20:17 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by richard s View Post
Now the Chancellor may reduce the furlough to 60%.

Well, that will discourage too much talk about extending the lockdown!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

You keep posting that, but never provide evidence to back up your assertion.

You also just posted in another thread

Quote:

The number of deaths overall, however, will probably be about the same

I provided the previous Imperial Colleage paper which showed the numbers of deaths could be reduced by tens of thousands (not delayed, reduced), but you have not shown any scientific evidence to uphold your claim. Here is a later IC paper (30th March)

Quote:

Table 2 shows total forecasted deaths since the beginning of the epidemic up to and including 31
March under our fitted model and under the counterfactual model, which predicts what would have happened if no interventions were implemented (and Rt = R0 i.e. the initial reproduction number estimated before interventions). Again, the assumption in these predictions is that intervention impact is the same across countries and time. The model without interventions was unable to capture recent trends in deaths in several countries, where the rate of increase had clearly slowed (Figure 3).
Trends were confirmed statistically by Bayesian leave-one-out cross-validation and the widely applicable information criterion assessments – WAIC).

By comparing the deaths predicted under the model with no interventions to the deaths predicted in our intervention model, we calculated the total deaths averted up to the end of March. We find that, across 11 countries, since the beginning of the epidemic, 59,000 [21,000-120,000] deaths have been averted due to interventions. In Italy and Spain, where the epidemic is advanced, 38,000 [13,000-84,000] and 16,000 [5,400-35,000] deaths have been averted, respectively. Even in the UK, which is much earlier in its epidemic, we predict 370 [73-1,000] deaths have been averted.

These numbers give only the deaths averted that would have occurred up to 31 March. If we were to include the deaths of currently infected individuals in both models, which might happen after 31 March, then the deaths averted would be substantially higher

Averted, not delayed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Just watch what happens when restrictions are lifted.

So, you don't have any scientific evidence/forecasts to back your assertion - thanks for confirming that.