There follows a guest post by Daily Sceptic reader Graham Williams (a pseudonym), a maths graduate and by profession an analyser of business plans, models, forecasts and funding requests. He is not impressed with the latest Government pandemic modelling.
I have just read the SPI-M consensus statement paper of September 8th, which appears to be at the heart of the recent stories about possible future lockdowns etc. This paper seems to be as big a load of negative, hyperbolic scaremongering as all the ones they have issued so far this year (February at the start of the roadmap, March, April, June and July).
In paragraph two they state: “SPI-M-O groups have reflected on their modelling of Step 4 of the Roadmap, and despite unexpected falls in cases in mid-July 2021, these scenarios can still be used to consider the future autumn and winter trajectory.”
They appear however not to have reflected that were it not for the unforecast Delta variant their modelling since February would have overstated the position of deaths, cases, and hospitalisations by June 21st by around 1,000%. Even with the rise caused by the variant, their forecasts remained hugely overblown, but they still continue to model with the same flawed methodology.
After paragraph two there follow about 18 paragraphs of largely unsubstantiated waffle with a few facts thrown in.
One of the facts is that R is currently (i.e., at the date of the paper) between 0.9 and 1.1, so broadly flat. The covering page to the report says: “These are not forecasts or predictions… They are based only on the observable trends and data available at the time the projections were produced.”
Had the modelling actually done what it said on the tin, project observable trends, then it would have been in line with their own medium-term projection of September 8th, which shows a fairly flat trend for September, even if arguably the base they have used is a bit low.
Instead of doing this, SPI-M’s modellers produced three scenarios based on different R numbers. Of course, it appears to be hardwired into their models that R can never be less than or equal to one, so despite suggesting the modelling follows the recent trajectory of 0.9 to 1.1, the numbers they use are 1.1, 1.5 and 2.0.
Lo and behold, when you run those through the models you get a rapid increase in numbers, leading to the 7,000 hospital admissions a day clickbait headline numbers on the 2.0 scenario.
Even discounting that clickbait modelling, SPI-M’s refusal to countenance an R of less than one and only consider a range of 1.1 to 1.5 means that in only a week since they prepared the paper the numbers are already significantly adrift (forecast hospital admissions 850-950, compared to an actual seven day rolling average of 724) and the discrepancy will likely widen as the recent drop in case numbers feeds through.
It may be that some of their predictions come true, but the document reads as an attempt to scare the largely innumerate members of the Cabinet into imposing further restrictions rather than a balanced piece of advice.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I still look at that chart of ‘cases’ and wonder.
Is there a chart which factors in excess mortality in some way? We know that during the first wave there was a noticeable increase in excess mortality. Cases were low because there wasnt a test. You only became a case if you were ill, and pretty ill at that because you needed to seek out medical attention. I was ill during that time with covid like symptoms, though not so ill that I would have taken a day off work for it. But I wasnt a case despite symptoms, whereas since last summer there have been huge numbers of cases without anyone even having any symptoms thanks to our great testing.
I don’t believe that the Great British public has an automatic right to two weeks holiday abroad no matter what.
I am reminded of a young tradesman at the beginning of ‘austerity’ complaining that his bank had refused to furnish him with yet another loan for his annual break in Ibeza and how this was against his ‘rights’.
About 15 years ago I bit the bullet (soz irony) and commissioned a private dentist to do a large amount of expensive work on my teeth. This meant I could not afford to go abroad that year but the relief from pain was well worth it (and still is).
Further I do not see how a dearth of cases/deaths in much of the UK should impact upon where and when we can go abroad.
I realise that this view will not be popular but I am beyond caring though I am prepared to look on as people vent their spleen against our vindictive and spiteful government.
It’s not a two weeks holiday for those of us who have not seen our children and grandchildren and wider family who live overseas. You stay at home if you wish, I really want to see my family and friends. My husband is 77 and wants to kiss his daughter before he dies.
The issue is about freedom to choose – dental treatment, holiday abroad, new car….etc. etc. That’s what been taken away from us, based on a pack of lies from ministers (incompetent buffoons) who cannot admit their original panicked reaction was wrong
Indeed there is no such thing as an ‘automatic right to a holiday’ – all kinds of things might stop you going on holiday. However, the government should not be one of those things. If countries want to close their borders to visitors, that is their prerogative. Making it illegal for their own citizens to leave – unacceptable in any circumstances.
That appears based on whether you believe the human has a set of inalienable rights given by God upon his birth – birth rights as it were.
Or that your rights only exist as those that are provided to you by your govt or institution. Institutions exist and formed and defined by people other humans. So you are accepting that another person has the right to decide where and what you can do and go. Where do you draw that line?
The first idea is solidified in the US constitution enshrined in the idea of man being born free. The second exists as an idea that is a form of slavery.
All these regulations are part of the blameworthy and deflection culture in this country. Politicians using successfully when the main culprits for this disaster are themselves and the NHS.