[alancalverd]

Degenerate is the wrong word. It turns up correctly in examples like the relativistic factor √(1 - v²/c²) which is close to  1 if  you are travelling a speed v much less than the speed of light c , so the physics "degenerates" to the classical newtonian equations. That's not what this is about.

Exponential functions, which model growth rates of infection, are very sensitive to the behavior of the vector which, being human, is unpredictable and not very controllable.

[L_D_G (OP)]

Exponential functions, which model growth rates of infection, are very sensitive to the behavior of the vector which, being human, is unpredictable and not very controllable.

This makes sense!  So the decision was made to implement restrictions, but you can only do so much. 

Either at the time or now, was there a feasible alternative to the restrictions (which were a way to attempt to control the unpredictability of humans) at least in terms of being social and wearing masks?

[alancalverd]

You might provide everyone with a personal respirator and thus take all the glamor out of hard-hat diving, lunar exploration and nuclear war, but strict quarantine applied early by a competent and trustworthy administration has done the trick in Australia and New Zealand. There never was an alternative until vaccines became available. Masks and social distancing are attempts to compromise with a threat that doesn't understand the concept of negotiation.

[L_D_G (OP)]

Masks and social distancing are attempts to compromise with a threat that doesn't understand the concept of negotiation.

More an attempt to compromise with constituents and an economy.

When the US attempted a serious lockdown closer to Spring...all of this "doing our part to flatten the curve"...what went wrong?  To clarify: asking a lot of these to get science minded answers.  Waters get murky when politics get involved.  My guess for this is that when people heard things were getting better, they decided quarantine was over.

[evan_au]

but then (epidemiologists) get criticism for being wrong

Epidemiologists will quote a range of possible outcomes, given the uncertainty of the inputs.
- Typically this takes the form of a "95% confidence interval", ie we can be 95% sure that, if nothing is done, it will be worse than X, and 95% sure it won't be worse than Y.
- That's a bit hard for the news to present to the public, so they often just present the "most likely" result.
- However, I have seen it done successfully - a line graph shown on TV was overlaid on a much wider band which represented the range of uncertainty. The news just talked about the central line, but you could see that the results were a bit uncertain.

Imperial College Neil Ferguson Covid model

I heard a critique of the UK modeling, on the basis that it focused on detection of cases through hospital admissions.
- The person making these comments had worked on containing Ebola in rural Africa (where the hospital system is pretty much non-existent).
- Her comment was that the most effective way to contain an outbreak is to get out in the community, and have community members help identify cases and identify contacts both forward in time (who did this patient give it to?), and backward in time (who did this patient catch it from?).
- This is especially important for COVID, where a large number of infections do not require hospitalization (and may be asymptomatic).

Apparently, modeling played a large part in the Australian response, with the Australian government being presented with computer models as early as February 2020.
- Shutting down international travel was shown to be a major factor in Australia getting it under control.
- This is easier done for islands like Australia, New Zealand (and potentially, the UK)

When there is no cure for a new disease, the only way to get it under control is public health measures, which requires support from politicians and the community.
- The technology/pharmaceutical solutions may come later, but you can't wait that long

Anyway, an interesting panel of experts with experience in different countries, including USA (38 minutes):
https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/healthreport/coronavirus-our-pandemic-year-in-review/12998796

[alancalverd]

- This is easier done for islands like Australia, New Zealand (and potentially, the UK)

"Potentially" AFAIK the British Isles have been surrounded by water since the Ice Age! The big bit where most of us live has been successfully defended against the Armada, Napoleon, the Kaiser and the Luftwaffe, by swift and decisive action.

Seriously, one of our Dishonorable Members rubbished the projections by waving the whole graph around in Parliament and claiming that the worst case curve was a communist/Guardian/BBC/academic conspiracy to undermine public confidence in the Prime Idiot. So  the PI "Saved Christmas", probably made a killing on  the Stock Exchange, and certainly killed another 20,000 people (to date). A general would be courtmartialled for wanton endangerment of a hundred, but politicians get away with mass murder every day to line their pockets.

Pay peanuts, get monkeys. Elect monkeys, get shat on.