Jump to content
IGNORED

Modelovanje epidemije i dugoročne procene njenog kretanja


vememah

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 104
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • vememah

    27

  • iDemo

    10

  • Lord Protector

    10

  • omiljeni

    6

Ukratko, bupnuli su iz vedra neba pretpostavku da samo 0,1% ili 1% zaraženih završi u bolnici i na osnovu toga došli do zaključka da je većina ili skoro većina populacije već preležala virus.

 

Quote

The study posits a scenario in which only 1 percent or even 0.1 percent of people are susceptible to falling severely ill from the virus. If there are 99 or 999 mild cases for every serious one, of course, a bigger share of the population has already had the virus than we previously thought. In the U.K., 40 or even 68 percent of the population might already be immune, per the study’s modeling.

 


But crucially, this is a possibility the paper sketches out, not an actual finding inferred from the data. As the study itself puts it, “Our overall approach rests on the assumption that only a very small proportion of the population is at risk of hospitalisable illness.”.

 


https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/coronavirus-pandemic-does-everyone-have-covid-19-already/

 

Bilo bi odlično kad bi model bio tačan, ali s obzirom da ova tvrdnja nema drugih značajnih zagovornika u naučnom svetu, pre će biti da ova Gupta samo obavlja prljave poslove za elitu koja smatra da će joj se isplatiti masovni pomor penzionera i bolesnih.

 

I pride, gle čuda, FT prvi objavio priču.

 

No dobro, nek se naprave serološki testovi pa ćemo videti.

Edited by vememah
Link to comment

I još nešto, ako je u Britaniji koronavirus već preležala polovina populacije, koliko je preležalo u Lombardiji? 150%? Kako se onda virus i dalje širi tamo?

Edited by vememah
Link to comment

Bilo bi lepo da su u pravu.

Ja sam oko 20. februara bio skenjan 5-6 dana baš (temp 38+, nos ne curi, suv kašalj takvog intenziteta da su me svi *mišići grudnog koša boleli danima*) a još 3-4 potom sam se oporavljao (vrlo blaga uzbrdica me ostavi bez daha, ako se nešto žustrije raspričam - isto).

Pokupio najverovatnije od ćerke, koja je sve isto imala nedelju dana ranije, ali je trajalo kraće i lakše je podnela sve.

 

* I @Lancia je beše prijavljivala ovo isto?

 

Kol'ko je komplikovana serologija, ne bi smelo da je nešto strašno, ili tripujem? Ono, ima neki beo/heksa/deksa lab na svakom ćošku, to bi moglo brzo da se radi?

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Skyhighatrist said:

Bilo bi lepo da su u pravu.

Ja sam oko 20. februara bio skenjan 5-6 dana baš (temp 38+, nos ne curi, suv kašalj takvog intenziteta da su me svi *mišići grudnog koša boleli danima*) a još 3-4 potom sam se oporavljao (vrlo blaga uzbrdica me ostavi bez daha, ako se nešto žustrije raspričam - isto).

Pokupio najverovatnije od ćerke, koja je sve isto imala nedelju dana ranije, ali je trajalo kraće i lakše je podnela sve.

 

* I @Lancia je beše prijavljivala ovo isto?

 

Kol'ko je komplikovana serologija, ne bi smelo da je nešto strašno, ili tripujem? Ono, ima neki beo/heksa/deksa lab na svakom ćošku, to bi moglo brzo da se radi?

Ja sam imao zagnojeno grlo, roknuli mi injekciju, dobio antibiotike i bilo mi OK, al' mi ostao kasalj, sad opet idem na kontrolu.

Link to comment
5 minutes ago, vememah said:

I još nešto, ako je u Britaniji koronavirus već preležala polovina populacije, koliko je preležalo u Lombardiji? 150%? Kako se onda virus i dalje širi tamo?

 

Odlicno zapazanje.Moze ladno da bude argument protiv naucnika.

 

Link to comment
Quote

 

Coronavirus exposes the problems and pitfalls of modelling

Models based on assumptions in the absence of data can be over-speculative and ‘open to gross over-interpretation’

 

The lessons to be learned from the coronavirus pandemic will keep scholars and university lecturers busy for decades to come. Chief among them is the value of modelling, and the fact that an uncritical reliance on their findings can lead you badly astray.

Take a recent model from Oxford University. It assessed how well different outbreak scenarios fitted the rise in coronavirus deaths in the UK and Italy. The most extreme UK scenario assumed that only a tiny fraction of people were at risk of serious illness. It also estimated that, as of last week, 68% of the population had been exposed to the virus. The study, which has not been published or peer-reviewed, unleashed a flurry of headlines declaring that coronavirus may have infected half of the people in Britain. That is 34 million people.

But as infectious disease modellers and public health experts, including the Oxford team themselves, have pointed out, the model used assumptions because there was no hard data.

No one knows what fraction of the public is at risk of serious illness. The study merely demonstrates how wildly different scenarios can produce the same tragic pattern of deaths, and emphasises that we urgently need serological testing for antibodies against the virus, to discover which world we are in.

Paul Klenerman, one of the Oxford researchers, called the 68% figure the most extreme result and explained that “there is another extreme which is that only a tiny proportion have been exposed”. The true figure, which is unknown, was likely somewhere in between, he said.

In other words, the number of people infected in Britain is either very large, very small, or middling. This may sound unhelpful, but that is precisely the point. “We need much more data about who has been exposed to inform policy,” Klenerman said.

The Oxford model was useful in emphasising the need for serological testing, but not for grasping the scale of the pandemic in the UK. As Prof James Wood, a researcher in infection dynamics at Cambridge University, put it: “The paper does substantially over-speculate and is open to gross over-interpretation by others.”

Devi Sridhar, a professor of global public health at Edinburgh University, said the Oxford study set out a hypothesis and nothing more. “It’s like me sitting here and putting into very fancy equations what would change if we had a vaccine tomorrow. I could model how a vaccine would save lives and you would see headlines reading ‘New vaccine is going to save lives.’ But we don’t have a vaccine.”

The modelling from Imperial College that underpinned the government’s belief that the nation could ride out the epidemic by letting the infection sweep through, creating “herd immunity” on the way, was more troubling.

The model, based on 13-year-old code for a long-feared influenza pandemic, assumed that the demand for intensive care units would be the same for both infections. Data from China soon showed this to be dangerously wrong, but the model was only updated when more data poured out of Italy, where intensive care was swiftly overwhelmed and deaths shot up.

Nor was that the only shortcoming of the Imperial model. It did not consider the impact of widespread rapid testing, contact tracing and isolation, which can be used in the early stages of an epidemic or in lockdown conditions to keep infections down to such an extent that when restrictions are lifted the virus should not rebound.

It is not a question of whether models are flawed but in which ways are they flawed, and models can still be enormously valuable if their shortcomings are appreciated. As with other sources of information, however, they should never be used alone.

“Models are a useful input among many when you are doing public policy, but you have to use triangulation. You have to look across different sources of information and not just rely on one. It’s more messy and complex than just saying ‘OK here’s a number’, but you get to a more accurate answer for our world,” Sridhar said.

Never have the words of the British statistician George Box rung truer than in this pandemic: “All models are wrong, but some are useful.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/mar/25/coronavirus-exposes-the-problems-and-pitfalls-of-modelling?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Skyhighatrist said:

Bilo bi lepo da su u pravu.

Ja sam oko 20. februara bio skenjan 5-6 dana baš (temp 38+, nos ne curi, suv kašalj takvog intenziteta da su me svi *mišići grudnog koša boleli danima*) a još 3-4 potom sam se oporavljao (vrlo blaga uzbrdica me ostavi bez daha, ako se nešto žustrije raspričam - isto).

Pokupio najverovatnije od ćerke, koja je sve isto imala nedelju dana ranije, ali je trajalo kraće i lakše je podnela sve.

 

* I @Lancia je beše prijavljivala ovo isto?

 

Kol'ko je komplikovana serologija, ne bi smelo da je nešto strašno, ili tripujem? Ono, ima neki beo/heksa/deksa lab na svakom ćošku, to bi moglo brzo da se radi?

 

nema teoretske sanse da su u pravu, u pitanju je misaoni eksperiment, ali sa nagadjanjima suprotnim medicini. njihova pretpostavka je takva da su i stari ljudi i oni koji pripadaju kriticnoj kategoriji (astma itd.) imali asimptomatsku infekciju ili blagu prehladu. to je sumanuto. 

Link to comment

Šta piše u radu - polazimo od pretpostavke da vrlo mali procenat populacije dospeva u bolnice:

Quote

Our overall approach rests on the assumption that only a very small proportion of the population is at risk of hospitalisable illness

 

Šta piše u članku FT-a - rezultati modela kažu da vrlo mali procenat populacije dospeva u bolnice:

Quote

New epidemiological model suggests the vast majority of people suffer little or no illness

:puke:

Edited by vememah
Link to comment
4 hours ago, Krošek said:

nema teoretske sanse da su u pravu, u pitanju je misaoni eksperiment, ali sa nagadjanjima suprotnim medicini.

 

To je dosta korektno objashnjeno™ u ovoj tabeli - tipa - sta je neko pametan ranije (s)mislio a sta smo mi danas istolkovali ( markirano sa " - " u Tabeli 1):

spacer.png

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...