Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

SAGE only gives govt the bad scenarios…..

173 replies

CamQ · 19/12/2021 06:30

It turns out that the Government uses the pessimistic SAGE models to make decisions without evaluating their probability or context.
The chair of the SAGE modelling committee explained to Fraser Nelson that they have only given the government models of the worst scenarios, not what happens if omicron is a mild disease - and so the government seems only to make decisions based on the worst models, without looking at their probability. This is also on Fraser Nelson’s Twitter.

www.spectator.co.uk/article/my-twitter-conversation-with-the-chairman-of-the-sage-covid-modelling-committee

If this approach continues for every variant we really won’t ever be out of this nightmare.

The government must widen their advice and look at the bigger long term picture.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
milly74 · 19/12/2021 08:32

Yes of course they do. SAGE are dangerous.

Bovrilly · 19/12/2021 08:33

@milly74

Yes of course they do. SAGE are dangerous.
I rest my case
Bovrilly · 19/12/2021 08:35

OP what are you suggesting - that the govt are deliberately only using worst case modelling because they like lockdowns and want to justify unnecessary restrictions?

LemonViolet · 19/12/2021 08:36

What’s your personal expertise in epidemiological modelling and policy decision making, Keating, if you think there’s a better approach? Personally I don’t have any, just a decent level of understanding thanks to a medical science background to postgraduate level including some epidemiology and public health aspects, but, I’m inclined to agree that it is not SAGEs fault, nor, indeed, the governments fault, if people don’t understand the difference between worst case scenario modelling and most likely prediction forecasts. In some areas you really do have to plan for the worst and hope for the best. Not plan for the average and waste resources modelling scenarios that would require no action just as to not worry people.

I’m no fan of this government by the way, but I think your issue is with the media and public understanding on this one.

AlecTrevelyan006 · 19/12/2021 08:37

@TheKeatingFive

Isn’t it obvious why is the government don’t need SAGE to model best case scenarios?

Well not really, making good decisions is about modelling all possible / plausible scenarios.

However, the specific issue here is that it wasn't presented publicly as worst case scenarios only.

Exactly - and the media coverage of the modelling reinforces the narrative that ‘we’re all doomed unless something is done’
twosticksandanapple · 19/12/2021 08:37

SAGE have considered a model here which assumes omicron is 10%-30% as severe as Delta. In this case there would still be unsustainable pressure on health and care settings.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1041902/SAGE99_SPI-M-O_Consensus_Statement.pdf

SAGE only gives govt the bad scenarios…..
Worldgonecrazy · 19/12/2021 08:38

@Daisydoor12

Personally, I think the press and media just pick up on the negative/worst case scenarios aspects of the reports and cause people a lot of stress and anxiety.
I think two things are happening:
  1. As discussed at SAGE on Feb/March 2019 there has been a focus on how to keep people as scared as possible.
  1. A large section of the population is getting some sort of weird kick out of being scared. Maybe it’s an adrenaline thing, or maybe their lives were so boring before this has made them feel less boring?
TheKeatingFive · 19/12/2021 08:38

What’s your personal expertise in epidemiological modelling and policy decision making, Keating

I'm simply saying if only worst case scenarios are being modelled then be upfront about that when presenting that data.

I wouldn't have thought that was controversial as a point, but there you have it.

GrandmasCat · 19/12/2021 08:39

I would say the government gets best and worst case scenarios from SAGE but sits on the information doing nothing until we are hitting the worst case scenario.

TheKeatingFive · 19/12/2021 08:42

I would say the government gets best and worst case scenarios from SAGE

This isn't what happened here according to Medley.

They were only asked to model the more pessimistic scenarios.

Mickarooni · 19/12/2021 08:43

@TheKeatingFive

I would say the government gets best and worst case scenarios from SAGE

This isn't what happened here according to Medley.

They were only asked to model the more pessimistic scenarios.

Perhaps it’s so the government can prepare for the worst? Not necessarily that they think the worst will happen.
TheKeatingFive · 19/12/2021 08:45

Perhaps it’s so the government can prepare for the worst? Not necessarily that they think the worst will happen.

Gosh I'm like a broken record now. Fine, but that's not how it was presented publicly.

Mickarooni · 19/12/2021 08:46

@TheKeatingFive

Perhaps it’s so the government can prepare for the worst? Not necessarily that they think the worst will happen.

Gosh I'm like a broken record now. Fine, but that's not how it was presented publicly.

Sorry, I genuinely wasn’t trying to be annoying. I guess we all see things differently.
TheKeatingFive · 19/12/2021 08:48

Apologies Mickarooni

succession · 19/12/2021 08:48

It's been 22 months and this has never been attempted

How do you know?

LemonViolet · 19/12/2021 08:49

If it’s not how it was presented publicly, then how is it that, it seems, to most other posters on this thread this isn’t news? This is just how it all works.

You’re trying to pretend like this is new hidden information that had been leaked. I really don’t think it is. If Fraser Nelson has only just understood how this all works, then perhaps that is our problem summarised right there.

TheKeatingFive · 19/12/2021 08:50

How do you know?

Where is it?

Why isn't it being referenced at every point when new restrictions are being mooted?

Why has it never been so much as mentioned?

succession · 19/12/2021 08:51

@TheKeatingFive

how would you deal with a pandemic?

Because the issue is fundamentally healthcare resource, I would have prioritised this.

Yes that takes time, but 22 months would have achieved significant amounts.

70 billion has been spent on shutting viable businesses down and keeping the healthy locked down and isolated. A much bigger proportion of that should have been ploughed into healthcare resource.

There's also the issue of decades of underfunding of the nhs.

What specifically would you do? You can't train Drs and nurses in 22 months.

We've put money into anti-virals and vaccines, surely that's good in your opinion?

kistanbul · 19/12/2021 08:51

I’m genuinely confused as to why people want to spend taxpayers’ money on models that don’t require the government to plan anything.

If I’m saving for the future, I might think about how much a new boiler would cost, unexpected trip to see suck parent, potential mortgage interest rate rises etc. and work out how much I need to have to feel secure - basically modelling based on what would cost me money. At no point would I include how much money I would need if the government introduced a scheme to replace everyone’s boilers for free, if there was no need for unexpected travel or if mortgage rates stayed the same, but because those things are more of less likely, but because that’s not going to help me work out how much to save for a rainy day.

They’re looking at all the different rainy days from drizzle to downpours and Fraser Nelson is screaming because sometimes the sun shines. We know that Fraser, but that’s not relevant to the exercise.

TheKeatingFive · 19/12/2021 08:53

*You’re trying to pretend like this is new hidden information that had been leaked. I really don’t think it is.

I'm not sure how to make this any clearer, but what was revealed was a discrepancy in how the government presented the data, versus what was actually modelled in the data.

If you don't care that you've been misled because it suits your purpose, knock yourself out. It doesn't mean others are alright with this.

succession · 19/12/2021 08:54

@Bovrilly

OP what are you suggesting - that the govt are deliberately only using worst case modelling because they like lockdowns and want to justify unnecessary restrictions?
Indeed. What's the end game?
TheKeatingFive · 19/12/2021 08:54

I’m genuinely confused as to why people want to spend taxpayers’ money on models that don’t require the government to plan anything.

Who said they do? They don't want to be misled about what the models cover. Again, I am struggling to understand why this is a controversial point.

Notonthestairs · 19/12/2021 08:57

Why would the government like lockdowns?

notimagain · 19/12/2021 08:59

@kistanbul

As I understand it, they’re not worst case scenarios, but scenarios that require government action. If you want to make a road safer, you might model what would happen if there were road closures increasing traffic volume, a big event, a local school doing a big walk to school promotion. It would be irresponsible to use resource to model what would happen if everyone used the roads very safely, because there would be no mitigation required.
^ This and other posts saying similar.

If the Government only have a limited amount of resources, including time, there is no point dicking around looking at best cases.

You plan for the (feasible) worse case but hope for the best.

FiveGensOfLove · 19/12/2021 09:02

When H1N1 was a threat, in 2009, the modellers made worst-case scenario predictions. I remember headlines about bodies piling up in makeshift mortuaries and what might happen in hospitals.
It informs government planning so they’re not completely caught out.
This isn’t some kind of ‘gotcha’ - Medley hasn’t messed up by admitting some dark secret - it’s what is always done.
And I also don’t think the govt has presented this data as anything other than the worst case scenarios that they’re trying to avoid.
It’s a non-story to me.

Swipe left for the next trending thread