This Page shows how according to this model the UK story would be described.
It is only an attempt to describe subject to corrections, improvements, suggestions.
Many models may provide different conclusions, this one shows some consistency and is the reason why we are sharing for better research for all.
You can see our analysis on the data and cross check to see how accurate the analysis is. You can see the dates, as per our analysis, at which the curve changes and things start becoming better by clicking here.
This country has a population of 67 Millions | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This model describes best if situation started January 21st 2020 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Each individual was infecting at a rate of 0.3 per day during 9 to 10 days | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Government proceeded to progressive lockdowns March 16th | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/28/coronavirus-may-have-been-in-italy-for-weeks-before-it-was-detected |
(2,7 to 3,0) Fits best ran models – except for South Korea that seems to capture clusters regulary |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(2,7 to 3,0) Fits best ran models – except for South Korea that seems to capture clusters regulary | Model may work if its started a few days later but entered 2 infected people navigating in different spheres or a superspreader appeared early on | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
On March 17th 2%(Infected people) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
With Confinment Factor
Assuming Confinment stops April 12th
If this model is correct a very large portion of Wuhan has been infected and recovered
It would mean Wuhan, is largely protected for as long as full or partial immunity lasts
Projected daily loss in blue natural spread in red with confinment
Lockdown slowed slightly the spread but had a limited effect
If the model is correct, the epidemic in Wuhan was well advanced and closer to the end
The model seems to reflect a higher number of loss than that identified
The model seems to reflect a correct window of loss with Corona for other countries so far
Possible causes
1) Adjustments to the model
2) At the beggining maybe losses may have been orverlooked before tests were available
3) When system was overloaded maybe some loss and tests were overlooked
4) China has a traditional medicine based on herbs and accupuncture, maybe it helped
5) Something else
In all cases remember these numbers are loss with Corona and not Over Mortality caused by Corona in a valid statiscal model
Such model would require
1) Available reliable data
2) Having details of mortality by category and after the fact calculating statistically what is the real over-mortality (this is how it is done with influenza in many countries)
Such statistic would result in a lower number as unfortunately some people die with or without Corona
An interesting figure would be changes in loss rate in Wuhan in January, February, March, April as they become available
They would reflect impact of Corona situation, the disease itself, anxiety, lockdown, trafic reduction...
Most should recover in all cases and may develop some form of immunity
Life finds a way and most will recover and let’s remember all those who may have left us
Unfortunately sometimes life ends, we all try our best to have long nice best moments.
Some go with Corona (Maybe it shortenned their life, maybe not)
Some just go every day Let’s honor them all Let’s take care of a larger picture (obsessions restrict our thoughts)
A thought for healthcared professionals who have left because they were overworked
A thought for the elder who have left us with or without Corona without being able to say goodbye because of confinement
Infected in blue recovered in red
Infections and recoveries
All are stronger and a little more adapted
Much of the Population has immunity
Time to reconstruct
How does the model test against reality
Hypothesis confinement peak minimized if until April 12th. At this stage 2/3 of population would have been infected
Our analysis and its corelation to real available data is underneath:
Date | Real Losses | Modeled Losses |
---|---|---|
16/03/20 | 55 | 67 |
17/03/20 | 71 | 86 |
18/03/20 | 104 | 109 |
19/03/20 | 144 | 139 |
20/03/20 | 177 | 176 |
21/03/20 | 233 | 224 |
22/03/20 | 281 | 285 |
23/03/20 | 335 | 362 |
24/03/20 | 422 | 460 |
25/03/20 | 463 | 584 |
26/03/20 | 578 | 741 |
27/03/20 | 759 | 939 |
28/03/20 | 1019 | 1188 |
UK started measures later to favor a quicker end and benefit from herd immunity
They need that herd immunity and a quick end as they may not get weather’s help
We may expect (hope) numbers of lossed to slow as weather becomes milder, people deal better with it, maybe the weaker are more subject to first ingection exposure, maybe people strengthen their immunity, maybe the healthcare system deals better with it, maybe the system starts to try to count only over mortality