Comments on Covid 19 update 4

[PetervGreen]

I have made detailed changes the first page and a half. I can't attach it as a Word doc, or as PDF!!! So you get the mess when its rendered in plain text (you won't see what I have ruled out, so I did another draft in which I replaced what I crossed out with an ellipsis. Let me know if you want me to continue fiddling with nearly every sentence.

Current figures [for Australia] indicate that the number of new cases [of Corona Virus infection] each day is stable or “flat” at around 100 per day from 5 to 10 April. This has resulted in talk of being on the “cusp” of success … [and] to start planning for [an] “exit” from restrictions, together with cautionary warnings from epidemiologists that we won’t actually know for a couple of weeks since data on “community transmission” is currently mixed together with data from overseas acquired cases[,] and the different effects of recent measures on those two categories will not become clear immediately. … But my view is that both sides are wrong. … [The] numbers look more or less flat at the moment … [and that] implies that we are currently at the bottom of a sharp decline in the transmission rate that will be followed by a rise. A flat period is what you get at the bottom of a trough (as you do at the top of a peak). Two measures … [recently have been ]taken almost simultaneously.

Incoming travellers [put in] enforced quarantine from midnite [midnight] Saturday 28 March.
… [A major] increase in the level of “social distancing” …[was set, with a two] person limit on social gatherings Sunday 29 March (enforced by States over … [the following] days).
… [On the thirtieth of March] … the … [Committee] of Chief Medical Officers in charge [asserted] that:
“…there is a lag time of at least 7-14 days before the real impact of additional measures will be seen on case incidence, and longer for critical care requirements and mortality”. [Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC) Advice to National Cabinet…]
But [Now,] less than two weeks later, many people [because the numbers look flat to them,] actually believe they can already see the real impact ….
… [The numbers looking flat] is actually a strong indication that the measures are not sufficient to prevent community transmission continuing to grow exponentially[,] rather than … [a flattening, or the beginning of an exponential decline].
… [With] the current levels of “social distancing”, the positive exponential growth rate will be much slower than the catastrophic doubling twice a week that … [had been occurring up till now]. That … [is] the same trajectory as the overwhelming of hospitals in Italy, Spain, UK and USA[,] which led to sudden imposition[s] of [measures that were] essentially … [the same as those imposed] here in Australia … [Even stronger] measures [were imposed] in New Zealand).
[It could be just a difference in style, but I am trying to make what I regard as lengthy and stilted sentences easier to read – trying to make them more clear, more conversational, and at the same time, more succinct and snappy.]
…[The exponential growth will slow] because … [, although there has been a] sharp rate of decline in transmission … [of] the large majority of new cases … [(because there are less people coming in] from overseas[)] … [there is, at the same time, a] positive rate of growth in the small proportion of “community transmission” (less than 10% of total cases).
There are certainly grounds for optimism that this rate will be slow enough for further measures to succeed in preventing the hospital system being overwhelmed [√]. But there is no basis for imagining that the figures do not ALREADY indicate that further measures are likely to be required, rather than providing grounds for speculating about “exit plans”. [If I read that sentence a third time, I might be able to work out what it means. But it should be clear on first reading].
… The decline in cases acquired from overseas will first be gradual and then sudden[,] until they are an insignificant minority of cases. Likewise the growth in “community transmission” will first be gradual and then be sudden[,] until what is now less than 10% of cases becomes the overwhelming majority. [I have no idea how the 10% can become 90%...]
… [There] will necessarily be subsequent waves after the first peak, since the large majority of people … [have] not … been infected and therefore will still have no immunity until a vaccine at least 12 to 18 months away.
It requires “Explorable Explanations” with widgets so that people can “feel” for themselves what happens as you vary different parameters. [Too dense – you are talking only to your immediate friends. My guess is: There are gadgets that let users know which actions they can take that will be beneficial. (A propos of what?)]
At present careful tracking of each case to determine [both] the date of infection and the individual contact that caused [the] infection is still feasible in Australia.

[PetervGreen]

arthur covid 19 second draft.docx

I'm curious to see if I could have dragged and dropped the Word file, in which case I could have sent a copy with the strikethroughs and highlighting I did originally. That Word file, this test, is the stripped down 'text' type version that I copied and pasted into the previous message.

[dentarthur]

Thanks!

Yes "drag and drop" does exactly what it says. Reading your attached file now. Then going out before calling.

Github is not obscure. Cutting and pasting from a Wordprocessor file into a markdown text box simply is not the way to do it.

It is the way you would have had to do it on a blog comment like 21stcenturyL.

[PetervGreen]

Arthur I have been reading The Next Phase of Modelling, ‘Nowcasting’ - from the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC) coronavirus (COVID-19) statement on 16 April 2020.

I listened part way through the April 7th video clip from the Sharon Lewin - Doherty Institute https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhNrhGMog38&feature=youtu.be

So that's a start! What else should I read?

Is there a more particular issue or focus that you want me to investigate?

Are we there yet?