The U.K. Health Security Agency stopped publishing Covid modelling data this January. However, finding alternative labour for the out-of-work modellers only took a month.
The UKHSA’s Chief data scientist Dr. Nick Watkins said the country is living with Covid thanks to vaccines and therapeutics, and the data is “no longer necessary.”
The agency is now turning to models to understand the impact of Influenza H5N1 – Bird Flu – if mammalian transmission is established. Models will estimate the prevalence of the outbreak using different surveillance approaches, reasonable worst-case scenarios and the impact of public health measures, including border measures, on containing an outbreak. Hmmm, sounds familiar.
Information from the Government’s Independent Technical report – we wrote about this in December – stresses the importance of modelling.
Epidemiological modelling has been an important tool throughout the pandemic to interpret data to support understanding the situation, and to provide scenarios to develop awareness of the potential impacts of different options for policy choices.
But hold on – it’s not just one model; you need multiple models to generate the truth!
Modelling is considerably more robust when more than one model (ideally a minimum of three) is considered and a consensus is built and agreed across a broad community.
There you have it: consensus is all you need. Evidently, it introduces quality assurance and seemingly lowers the risk of “spurious results”.
Ah, but there are some limitations, as the Technical report informs us:
As the Omicron variant emerged in South Africa in November 2021, it was impossible to tell whether its early apparent decreased severity would be replicated in the U.K.
However, by December 2021, the models were overly pessimistic and far from reality. So on December 15th, we wrote ‘We’re almost certainly overreacting’ in the Telegraph.
The South African data reported fewer patients in intensive care, less-severe diseases and shorter hospital stays. With some medical knowledge, it wasn’t difficult to determine whether the South African data would be applicable elsewhere. Seemingly, the U.K. modellers were the only people who couldn’t understand the generalisability of the data.
The technical report also says that “data will always be lacking in the early phases of an epidemic or wave with a new variant, and this, in particular, was a significant limitation for epidemiological modelling early in the pandemic”.
Despite these limitations, Government machinery relies on models and is fixated on their use – the glean of prophetic insight afforded by fortune-telling is too irresistible for those in power.
But those in the know will recall the track record of modellers’ mistakes and their erroneous predictions: BSE in 2000 and a worst-case scenario of 136,000 vCJD deaths; foot-and-mouth disease in 2002, which saw millions of animals slaughtered based on modelling; 2005 bird flu models that led to the stockpiling of antivirals and then in 2009, swine flu models that predicted the worst case scenario of 65,000 deaths – the actual death toll was less than 500 in the U.K. with an infection fatality ratio one-tenth of that forecast.
However, if the Health Security Agency is modelling bird flu, perhaps it should start by revisiting the 2005 models. In 2005 Neil Ferguson told the Guardian “that up to 200 million people could be killed”. The Department of Health considered anywhere up to 700,000 deaths could occur in the U.K.
As science is cumulative, scientists should accumulate the science and keep non-science out. Therefore, in our next post, we’ll turn to those 2005 bird flu predictions to analyse what they foretold.
Dr. Carl Heneghan is the Oxford Professor of Evidence Based Medicine and Dr. Tom Jefferson is an epidemiologist based in Rome who works with Professor Heneghan on the Cochrane Collaboration. This article was first published on their Substack blog, Trust The Evidence, which you can subscribe to here.
Stop Press: Britain should be stockpiling more antivirals and PPE for bird flu as it is “essential” to start preparing for the worst-case scenario, according to Professor Peter Openshaw, who sat on two SAGE committees during the pandemic.
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.
They’re not skiving! They’re just staying at home to protect granny! We should be grateful!
I wonder how many of these glaikit nutters that glue themselves to roads, destroy public property or deface Starbucks/KFC/McDonald’s ( because that’ll ”free Palestine” ), and disrupt society generally with their antisocial behaviour, have jobs. Because I think not only do they have zero respect for others but they’re completely devoid of any self-respect also. Seriously, what right-minded person goes on like this? Pure vandalism. I’m sure her parents are proud!;
https://twitter.com/ScooterCasterNY/status/1766113531433230615
As German, I have much more reason to be pissed of by English politics of that time than these nutjobs. Yet, I’d never destroy a painting of Llyod George or Winston Churchill (or even Arthur Harris, for that matter). I guess this must be because we’re all completely barbarian quasi-animals who only derive pleasure from destroying irreplacable works of art and culture and hacking of the feet and hands of children (all of these being actual tropes of British WWI wartime propaganda) …
Yes but do you know what Mogwai means by “glaikit” ?
Is this a question? Not until I looked it up but it’s not really necessary for the meaning of the sentence as it just adds emphasis to object of it. Glaikit nutter could also be rendered as nutty nutter.
Yes it is a question. —-It is not confrontational though. I am only asking if you have heard of this since you are German and that is an old Scottish word that most English people will not be that familiar with.
Only one solution for that oxygen thieving halfwit …
Short Drop.
Mogwai
If this was at Cambridge university, then perhaps she’s a student. Very worrying indeed, that supposedly the brightest young minds in the country can behave like this: spoilt little brats, who are desecrating priceless British artefacts. I mean, does she really have any idea who Balfour is? Clearly many British professors are under pressure to fall in line with the latest leftist mind fart; under pressure from the students, in fact. In the past, this little girl would have been expelled, fined, possibly even arrested. Now the professors sit back and nod their heads “yes Balfour was a racist misogynistic islamophobe Covid-denying far right extremist, and he should be erased”
Interestingly, it was at Beijing University (the Cambridge of China) where Mao’s ‘thought’ was followed most feverishly by the students, who then turned against their professors for ‘old ideas, old habits, old customs, old culture’, vandalising artefacts, burning books and trashing people’s homes. Sound familiar?
That is what also happened at Evergreen State College in Washington.
Too much employment legislation:
‘“It is a common misconception that more laws mean greater protection. Legislation has become increasingly complicated and ambiguous for employers. There comes a point when the added benefit is questionable and must be outweighed by the burden which it places on business. This is especially the case for small and medium sized employers who may not have a specialist, in-house HR function.”
“In the past five years (2005-10) there has been a continuous flow of new employment laws passed ranging from the new Agency Workers Regulations, the Age Discrimination Regulations to European case law on rights to accrue holidays even while on long term sick leave. New employment legislation is estimated to have added £70 billion to costs for businesses over the last decade.’
So, Blair’s Britain. A massive public sector: ‘At its most recent high-point in 2010, the public sector employed about 6.1 million workers, or 21% of all UK workers. This followed an increase of about 700,000 in the absolute size of the public workforce since 1998–99.’
But:
‘The government has confirmed at least 10 new (HR) laws for 2024’
So Cameron, May, Bunter, Sunak’s Britain as well; still a massive public sector after fourteen entirely pointless and incompetent years:
‘There were an estimated 5.90 million employees in the public sector in September 2023, which is 35,000 (0.6%) more than in June 2023 and 135,000 (2.3%) more than in September 2022.’
We know what to do:
‘It will be necessary to curtail the major areas of government spending: welfare, health and education. Indeed, emergency cuts, or at least freezes, in welfare benefits and public sector pay may be in order – the kind of measures seen recently in struggling central European countries. Indeed, we should start this year – welfare benefits, pensions and public sector pay should not rise by more than private sector pay rises. If public sector pay cannot be reined in this year it will never be reined in. If welfare benefits are not pegged to wage increases then employment incentives will be diminished.
However, the crisis also presents opportunities for Cameron to launch positive longer-term reforms that reduce the scope of government. He could start by tackling public sector pensions (a liability of over £1 trillion), move on to welfare reform and then health and education, promoting competition and efficiency through individual savings accounts and voucher-type schemes while getting rid of the costly bureaucrats.
How could this be done in practice? A voucher scheme could involve a voucher of a fixed money value being given for the first five years of the scheme. Its value in real terms – and certainly relative to national income – would then fall. This could be politically acceptable as it would happen at the same time as huge efficiency savings were achieved.
And let’s not forget regulation. Removing red tape – for example, the new gender pay audits – would reduce the government payroll while lowering costs for businesses.’
IEA 2010
But no-one has the backbone to do it…..so they will be removed…..and so will the next ones and so on until someone gets the message…….
‘
All Bureaucracies are the same. They expand out of control and grab more and more power and control. The virus of Politically Correct, wokery and human rights nonsense has spread all across the western world faster than a speeding bullet.
I worked as a senior exec at a ftse 100 company, the ceo appointed a new female HR Director. who still works at a senior level in Industry, she never remained in any post for more than 2 years. On arrival what was a small efficient department bloated to a large over reaching one, a more manipulative and machiavellian individual I have never before or since come across. She caused division between the execs through a whisper campaign, she would monitor and spy on staff members through their social media accounts. she introduced the concept of pay increases linked to ” the correct behaviors and values”, she denied job opportunities to be offered to non university educated staff.
She was a true horror of a woke virtue signaller, who justified her spying and displacement of members of the workforce for the good of the company.
The ceo was weak, she used knowledge of his extra marital affairs to keep her position. True to form when a new ceo joined she left. I regularly see her writing s in HR journals on the importance of equity and kindness. A more unkind person I have yet to meet, she is also a mentor for her discipline which helps explain the malignant growth and influence of a role that actually is of no financial or creative value to a business.
I know this isn’t necessarily gender-specific, although I’ve always got on better with male colleagues than female ( probably because they, like me, weren’t bitchy and didn’t flirt with the male consultants on ward rounds ), but your post reminded me for some reason of this. So in the spirit of ‘International Womens’ Day’ I must share this skit that’s floating around, plus I always was a Harry Enfield fan back in the day, so any excuse;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS37SNYjg8w&ab_channel=BBCStudios
Thankfully, this has meanwhile been fixed: I know a fair lot of men who are extremely fond of kittens and entirely unaware of what gold standard means.
genius. Thanks for posting
Why do you think your CEO chose her?
Christ only knows
I mean do you think the CEO just wandered into it without really paying attention to the possible consequences, or was he on board with her agenda, largely? I work in a small firm which doesn’t really do box ticking crap, but a lot of our clients, especially the US-based ones, seem to really push it and they are in the B2B space so no need to appeal to the general public.
Rights come from our humanity. Not from governments. Because if you get your rights from bureaucrats, politicians and governments then those same people can take those rights away again.
Indeed- Clarence Thomas said something similar in his gay marriage dissent.
Speaking of International Women’s Day, I had an e-mail from my old school today (an all boy’s grammar school since the sixteenth century) inviting me to help them celebrate International Women’s Day and champion the importance of gender equality.
It’s good to know the lads are being fired up to begin the much needed fight for equal rights and equal pay for women.Who knows, today’s might even win women the vote one day.
Evil globalists are destroying western civilisation. HR are just useful idiots.
There is arather angry and curt tone to this writing. Of course there is plenty to be said about these miserable tendencies but this seems to be a list of bitter complaints masquerading as a cogent proposition. Stoicism is an interesting philosophy to reflect upon. In Greece it was one of the three responses to the decline of empire, along with Epicureanism and Pyrrhonic sceptism. There were schools devoted to the science of the will in the early twentieth century but they were killed of by the world wars. Christian teaching provided a profound exposition of how stoicism and tenderness represent the fullness of being. Surely an attempt to understand such tendencies begins with an attempt to unravel their antecedents first. For some people it takes a lot for them to keep their physical and mental health in good condition in the times that we are living in.
Nuanced erudition, how passe
The author does have a point, but is also clearly conflating matters to attract traffic.
Now now, what could have caused that ca. 40% uptick starting in 2020 in the trend of the (sadly) long-term sick?