THE TYRANNY OF "KEEPING R BELOW 1"
UK Health secretary comments that the goal is to bring R below 1 & keep it there until a vaccine.
A Sisyphean task.
Impossible.
Not due to the virus, but due to a misunderstanding of logic, science & maths.
UK Health secretary comments that the goal is to bring R below 1 & keep it there until a vaccine.
A Sisyphean task.
Impossible.
Not due to the virus, but due to a misunderstanding of logic, science & maths.
Infections rising: R > 1
Infections falling: R < 1
This would seem simple. As the epidemic grows R is above 1. As it wanes, R is below 1.
But infections cannot fall forever.
Infections falling: R < 1
This would seem simple. As the epidemic grows R is above 1. As it wanes, R is below 1.
But infections cannot fall forever.
When the level of infections has fallen to very low levels (or even zero) & a large proportion of the infections detected are false positives, then the infection figures will appear fairly stable; albeit with some noise, which is a problem at lower numbers.
Since infections are stable, even if this is because they are mostly gone, R cannot remain below 1.
R will therefore rise from below 1 to 1.
& there it will remain, with some movement due to noise.
Indefinitely.
To demand that R remains below 1 is to make success impossible.
R will therefore rise from below 1 to 1.
& there it will remain, with some movement due to noise.
Indefinitely.
To demand that R remains below 1 is to make success impossible.
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
