1/ Things seem really bad at the moment. That's because things ARE really bad at the moment. But I wanted to share a perspective that might encourage you a little.
2/ Deaths have been so heavily concentrated among the elderly that even the current very limited vaccine rollout should have big benefits soon. Here's some back-of-the-envelope maths:
3/ As @ActuaryByDay told @BBCMoreOrLess a few weeks ago, more than a third of all Covid deaths in the first wave in the UK were among the few hundred thousand people who live in care homes residents. Another third were among people over the age of 80.
4/ There are fewer than 4 million people in those highly vulnerable groups. UK had administered nearly 3 million vaccine doses already, as of 11 Jan. ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinat…
5/ If vaccines were 100% effective (they aren't) and if only the over-80s had been vaccinated (not so: NHS and care home workers are also front of queue, for good reasons) we would already be close to protecting the majority of the over 80s.
6/ The reality is slower and messier, of course. But the big picture is that although we're just getting started, we're already vaccinating large numbers of the most vulnerable. What difference will this make?
7/ At first, no difference at all. It takes a few days to get any protection - perhaps two weeks to get significant protection. So, figure a two week delay before we see reduced infections among the elderly; add another 3-4 weeks before we see reduced deaths.
8/ But by the end of February I would expect to see a very noticeable difference to death rates. I'm no epidemiologist, just a nerd with a calculator. But my calculator is giving me some hope.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
World Statistics Day only comes every five years - like the Olympics - so it's time to express a little mindful gratitude for all the statisticians and other wonderful nerds out there helping us to understand the world.
Since I literally wrote the book on the topic, I’d like to mark the day by sharing my TEN RULES FOR THINKING DIFFERENTLY ABOUT NUMBERS. Each of us could be thinking more clearly about the world if we got ourselves right with the numbers. timharford.com/books/worldadd…
So, Rule One: SEARCH YOUR FEELINGS.
What we believe, or refuse to believe, is strongly influenced by our emotional reaction. A lot of the statistical claims we see aren’t just data: they are weapons in an argument. Social media thrives on emotion. So do media headlines.
THREAD 1/ "When the facts change, I change my opinions. What do you do? - Attributed (without evidence) to John Maynard Keynes, hero of "How To Make The World Add Up" ch 10
Why is it so hard for people to change their minds?
2/ Partly, we make public statements and then we get stuck. We feel don't want to admit making a mistake. Opponents call us out for our inconsistency. A shame.
3/ But it should be really easy to update beliefs based on new information. For example, I wrote in August that the chance of being infected was 44 in a million per person per day. I still believe that is true.... of August.
Source: ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulati…
My column this morning ventures into science fiction: what if everyone who was infectious glowed orange like the children in the Ready Brek ads?
The answer: the virus would be extinct in humans within a month.
This, basically, is the promise of super-fast, super-cheap testing: test everyone, all the time, and the problem goes away (as @paulmromer said many months ago).
A few problems, though:
a) We don't have billions of rapid tests, and as @deeksj reminds us the testing industry is long on promises and short on solid evidence.
b) Boris Johnson has said it will happen - so obviously it won't.
c) Cheap tests will be ropey and unreliable.
Statistics, lies, and the virus: five lessons the pandemic has taught us about data and how we use it.
My #LongRead for the @FTMagft.com/content/92f64e…
Lesson One: the numbers matter.
We've become used to numbers being spun, distorted, used for slippery targets, lied about - and we easily become cynical. But statistics aren't just a vector for bullshit: they're the only hope we have of understanding the pandemic.
Lesson Two: don't take the numbers for granted.
Even nerds like me can easily lapse into thinking that statistics just come from some big database somewhere. But first they have to be gathered, measured, collated etc. This 'statistical bedrock' is essential, and under-rated.
1/ Time for an apology and a correction. Seems that every newspaper in the UK is (correctly) reporting that I said the risk of catching a fatal case of Covid-19 is about the same as the risk of having a bath. I did say that, but I was wrong. Details below.
2/ What’s true is that for a typical 60 year old, running the sort of infection risks the current UK citizen is currently running, the chance of catching a fatal case of Covid-19 is currently about 1 in 2 million per day, perhaps a bit lower.
3/ Now according to this piece – the author of which should be held blameless – the risk of taking a bath is about 1 in 3 million (0.3 micromorts). But that can’t be right. theconversation.com/whats-most-lik…
1/ So, a few words about my friends at @MathsGear - the most wonderful online store for nerds everywhere.
MathsGear is the brainchild of brilliant maths & science performers @standupmaths@MouldS@jamesgrime@stecks - who have adapted brilliantly to evaporation of audiences...
2/ Where else but @MathsGear can one buy non-transitive dice? (Yellow beats red, red beats green, green beats blue, blue beats purple... purple beats yellow...) mathsgear.co.uk/collections/di…
3/ And where else but @MathsGear can one buy skew dice, which look weird but are actually perfectly fair? (Hurry: these sell out fast.) mathsgear.co.uk/collections/di…