The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Life Sciences
  3. Physiology & Medicine
  4. COVID-19
  5. Is "Reproduction Number" a useful COVID-19 metric for politicians and public?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Is "Reproduction Number" a useful COVID-19 metric for politicians and public?

  • 1 Replies
  • 4974 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline evan_au (OP)

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • ********
  • 11032
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 1486 times
Is "Reproduction Number" a useful COVID-19 metric for politicians and public?
« on: 16/04/2020 22:24:38 »
Day after day the news repeats the mantra "Highest-ever number of new cases/deaths...".
- It is a characteristic of exponential growth that the number of cases accelerates at an accelerating rate.

We have heard the slogan "flatten the curve", and I think the public & politicians understand the concept, but not how their actions affect the outcome.
- Especially when "the curve" is sometimes displayed with a logarithmic vertical scale: any growth is still exponential growth!

I saw the graph below which focuses on the Effective Reproduction Number (Reff).
- With no special precautions, each COVID-19 patient will infect 2-3 others (R0)
- If we can keep Reff down below 1, then fewer and fewer people will catch the disease over time, and we can get it under control
- If there is a new outbreak, Reff quickly rises above 1, and disease will rapidly grow in the population.

* Reproduction_Number_TAS.png (41.46 kB . 321x276 - viewed 2779 times)

Is this a metric that is understandable by politicians and the public?
- Does it convey the idea that we as individuals need to take action to contain spread of the virus?
- Does it offer hints about when it is safe to relax restrictions?
- And when to impose tighter restrictions?

See: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/16/coronavirus-the-graphs-that-show-how-australia-is-containing-the-pandemic
https://www.doherty.edu.au/uploads/content_doc/Estimating_changes_in_the_transmission_of_COVID-19_April14-public-release.pdf
Logged
 



Offline chris

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 8061
  • Activity:
    1.5%
  • Thanked: 305 times
  • The Naked Scientist
    • The Naked Scientists
Re: Is "Reproduction Number" a useful COVID-19 metric for politicians and public?
« Reply #1 on: 17/04/2020 14:01:54 »
UK politicians and journalists are tending to talking about "R nought"; I think I helped a bit with this because I began talking about it early on in the outbreak in simple terms on prominent national networks; I anticipated, correctly as it turned out, that there would be a lot of emphasis on reporting in the coming weeks on maths, stats and modelling. I think people here get the concept.
Logged
I never forget a face, but in your case I'll make an exception - Groucho Marx - https://www.thenakedscientists.com/
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.666 seconds with 29 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.