platinumsage
HaveMyPassword123
At the time I fixated on Vallance saying the UK was 4 weeks behind Italy (when it was really 2). But he said something else at the same time, that may seem even more bizarre given the actual timing we are hoping our peak has now
Huffington Post have now picked this up:
"The miscalculation leading to the four-week claim can be laid squarely at the door of the mathematical modelling sub-group of Sage. So why weren’t SPI-M’s world-leading modellers better able to calibrate their models to the early UK data. It turns out that some of groups who contribute to SPI-M did calculate significantly shorter and more realistic doubling times at an earlier stage in the UK’s epidemic, but that their estimates never found consensus within the group. Members of SPI-M have communicated their concerns to me, that some modelling groups had more influence over the consensus than others.
On March 16, Neil Fergusson’s Imperial College Covid-19 Response Team published their infamous report, which used effective estimates of the doubling time of over five days – way, way too slow. This figure seems to have dominated proceedings in SPI-M. It was a long time before more accurate doubling time figures eventually made their way up through SAGE and on to policy-makers."
The UK Was Never Four Weeks Behind Italy. How Did 'Following The Science’ Go So Wrong?