From Day 1 of this pandemic I’ve been blogging – as a tech innovation blogger AND PhD former pandemic modeller/planner – about what is conjecture and what is fact. And why some public decisions have been so stupid as to be better described as idiotic, delinquent or even criminal.

Well, it’s just all so ridiculous.

Here’s why.

We all know that Trump in the US response has been essentially criminal in his approach apart from the good decision to close borders early with China. I won’t rehash that because an elementary school student can see his lies and misdirections.

What I’m shocked about is how our other world leaders and pandemic experts have responded.

In particular I was shocked at two things.

Firstly the early bizarre notion that achieving herd immunity was somehow a good thing. I think we all know now that that was a childish and callous approach, yet it was briefly policy in the UK and Sweden. Sir Patrick Valance is a definite nutter I’m afraid. Arguing for herd immunity is like saying, don’t worry, after the aliens have wiped out most of us and moved on, the rest of us will be OK.

Secondly, and more subtle was the ridiculous misuse of the let’s ‘wait for the science to speak’ approach.

“Are you actually nuts?” is my response, I’m afraid.

There’s no time to wait.

“We’ll only respond to the best evidence”.

Why?

Whether the ‘evidence’ is modelling or biological experiments there’s one thing missing from that approach in how it was implemented that makes it ridiculous: the COMPLETE LACK of applying a correct understanding of accuracy vs precision vs timeliness and likelihood of accuracy of such evidence or modeling.

The classic example was again in the UK.

Instead of trusting the simple math that estimates herd immunity and therefore 600,000 likely UK deaths, the delinquent pandemic modellers with Boris Johnston in tow waited ANOTHER week before announcing social distancing and even longer for masks. That was in the context of thousands of cases per day.

This showed a misunderstanding of use of modelling in playing off accuracy with precision. The simple calc they already had the result of was 100% accurate meaning it’s approximate result was not in doubt. The need for a more precise result (the exact value) was . . irrelevant.

But they waited a week for that pointless more precise result! That made it take another MONTH or 2 to get under control!

That’s what happens with exponential growth.

It is so simple but many pandemic experts even do not seem to understand this. Or if they do then they are heartless. One or the other. You can’t have it both ways.

A third frustration was the lack of understanding about local quasi-eradication. But I’ll keep that for another day.