Mathematical model finds no evidence of reduction of Covid-19 deaths under stay-at-home rules.

[squavers]

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Stay-at-home policy is a case of exception fallacy: an internet-based ecological study - Scientific Reports

A recent mathematical model has suggested that staying at home did not play a dominant role in reducing COVID-19 transmission. The second wave of cases in Europe, in regions that were considered as COVID-19 controlled, may raise some concerns. Our objective was to assess the association between...

www.nature.com

A fairly lengthy but interesting read, obviously not a perfect study (nothing possibly can be) and it only focuses on deaths and not than cases and hospital admissions, but it does use a large sample size of similar countries and regions rather than the usual practice of cherry-picking certain countries to suit an agenda (comparing the UK to New Zealand for example lol).

In conclusion, using this methodology and current data, in ~ 98% of the comparisons using 87 different regions of the world we found no evidence that the number of deaths/million is reduced by staying at home.

 

[Billericay Dichio]

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Stay-at-home policy is a case of exception fallacy: an internet-based ecological study - Scientific Reports

A recent mathematical model has suggested that staying at home did not play a dominant role in reducing COVID-19 transmission. The second wave of cases in Europe, in regions that were considered as COVID-19 controlled, may raise some concerns. Our objective was to assess the association between...

www.nature.com

A fairly lengthy but interesting read, obviously not a perfect study (nothing possibly can be) and it only focuses on deaths and not than cases and hospital admissions, but it does use a large sample size of similar countries and regions rather than the usual practice of cherry-picking certain countries to suit an agenda (comparing the UK to New Zealand for example lol).

Interesting to see the specialities of the authors.

 

[Brian Griffin]

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Stay-at-home policy is a case of exception fallacy: an internet-based ecological study - Scientific Reports

A recent mathematical model has suggested that staying at home did not play a dominant role in reducing COVID-19 transmission. The second wave of cases in Europe, in regions that were considered as COVID-19 controlled, may raise some concerns. Our objective was to assess the association between...

www.nature.com

A fairly lengthy but interesting read, obviously not a perfect study (nothing possibly can be) and it only focuses on deaths and not than cases and hospital admissions, but it does use a large sample size of similar countries and regions rather than the usual practice of cherry-picking certain countries to suit an agenda (comparing the UK to New Zealand for example lol).

Aye, rightyho.

 

[bu-bu-buchanon]

I dont fully understand a lot of that, but it seems very flawed

 

[anth]

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Stay-at-home policy is a case of exception fallacy: an internet-based ecological study - Scientific Reports

A recent mathematical model has suggested that staying at home did not play a dominant role in reducing COVID-19 transmission. The second wave of cases in Europe, in regions that were considered as COVID-19 controlled, may raise some concerns. Our objective was to assess the association between...

www.nature.com

A fairly lengthy but interesting read, obviously not a perfect study (nothing possibly can be) and it only focuses on deaths and not than cases and hospital admissions, but it does use a large sample size of similar countries and regions rather than the usual practice of cherry-picking certain countries to suit an agenda (comparing the UK to New Zealand for example lol).

there is the big flaw, if you only focus on deaths in the current circumstances you can't compare that to deaths with a completely different dataset of cases and hospital admissions. The whole point of lock down is to keep cases as low as possible, doing that means there are beds for everyone, so all those who could recover do. If you open everything up, cases skyrocket, 2 weeks later hospitals are at capacity and doctors are forced to pick between who would be the most likely to live because they don't have enough beds. We never wanted to get to that point, we wanted beds for everyone.

 

[The Hesford Diet]

I'd hardly call Rachel Riley a model. Or Carol Vorderman.

 

[SurreyMackem]

The people most likely to die were told to isolate or were in care home where "stay at home " is clearly irrelevant so it is not surprising that the impact of telling the general population to stay at home on deaths was not significant. The conclusion is that transmission to those vulnerable was from essential contact coming into the home or care home not from general community transmission.

 

[Mantobar]

Reminds me of the day after brexit was voted for sitting Lanzarote restaurant and family next to us, grandma says ,see brexit happened it was close though 60% v 50% ...

 

[DoctorMick]

The people most likely to die were told to isolate or were in care home where "stay at home " is clearly irrelevant so it is not surprising that the impact of telling the general population to stay at home on deaths was not significant. The conclusion is that transmission to those vulnerable was from essential contact coming into the home or care home not from general community transmission.

Where did those going into the home or care home contract covid?

 

[Frijj]

I doubt most people will bother to read the whole article, including checking out the cited papers and assessing the maths involved.

However, this is a single paper in a sea of evidence that stay at home measures did prevent deaths, though sadly it will probably become the life jacket for the lockdown sceptics amongst us.

I look forward to hearing them give their assessment of this paper

 

[I'm Spartacus]

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Stay-at-home policy is a case of exception fallacy: an internet-based ecological study - Scientific Reports

A recent mathematical model has suggested that staying at home did not play a dominant role in reducing COVID-19 transmission. The second wave of cases in Europe, in regions that were considered as COVID-19 controlled, may raise some concerns. Our objective was to assess the association between...

www.nature.com

A fairly lengthy but interesting read, obviously not a perfect study (nothing possibly can be) and it only focuses on deaths and not than cases and hospital admissions, but it does use a large sample size of similar countries and regions rather than the usual practice of cherry-picking certain countries to suit an agenda (comparing the UK to New Zealand for example lol).

I know people that were furloughed and basically hid themselves away, followed every rule and still caught. As far as I’m aware I haven’t had it and I’ve been in the thick of it from the start. I don’t know what to believe about the bloody thing to be honest. It’s a loose cannon.

 

[Repswick]

I dont fully understand a lot of that, but it seems very flawed

 

[DaveH]

I've not got time to go through the article, but I find the conclusions surprising. It is published in a reputable place so it is not a conspiracy or parody site, so it has some credibility. But in this country we have had three drastic drops in the case and death rate. All three have coincided exactly with lockdowns. The November one was only half-arsed and didn't have the same reduction rate.

 

[herra soul mob]

so its just a coincidence when there's been lockdowns the death rate and case rate has dropped .

 

[Sir Lancelot]

I know people that were furloughed and basically hid themselves away, followed every rule and still caught. As far as I’m aware I haven’t had it and I’ve been in the thick of it from the start. I don’t know what to believe about the bloody thing to be honest. It’s a loose cannon.

They haven’t kept themselves sufficiently locked away. Something or someone has got through their defences and exposed them.

 

[rudd]

I've not got time to go through the article, but I find the conclusions surprising. It is published in a reputable place so it is not a conspiracy or parody site, so it has some credibility. But in this country we have had three drastic drops in the case and death rate. All three have coincided exactly with lockdowns. The November one was only half-arsed and didn't have the same reduction rate.

I'll haven't looked at it yet but it's published in Scientific Reports, not actually in Nature.
Scientific Reports are nowhere near as reliable as it's parent and there is a history of publishing for money.
Not saying it is the case here though.

 

[DaveH]

I'll haven't looked at it yet but it's published in Scientific Reports, not actually in Nature.
Scientific Reports are nowhere near as reliable as it's parent and there is a history of publishing for money.
Not saying it is the case here though.

Ah cheers. I'm in a meeting at work and taking a casual glance.

 

[bu-bu-buchanon]

I doubt most people will bother to read the whole article, including checking out the cited papers and assessing the maths involved.

However, this is a single paper in a sea of evidence that stay at home measures did prevent deaths, though sadly it will probably become the life jacket for the lockdown sceptics amongst us.

I look forward to hearing them give their assessment of this paper

This is the thing. i have tried to understand their maths but cant quite figure out exactly how they have done it, but they even reference themselves that "staying at home" (using a fairly dubious indicator for compliance with that as well) reduces transmission and cases. And we know reduction in cases = reduction in hospitalisation and deaths so i'm really not sure what they have proved, if anything, at all.

 

[I'm Spartacus]

They haven’t kept themselves sufficiently locked away. Something or someone has got through their defences and exposed them.

Postman or delivery driver possibly? They live in quite a rural area and only left the house to walk the dog. Got everything delivered. I mean they weren’t severely ill with it or owt, a bit poorly but if it’s getting through that way then it’s a bit grim. I have no doubt lockdown will have slowed it like which was the whole point of it.

 

[jonnie_makem]

This is the thing. i have tried to understand their maths but cant quite figure out exactly how they have done it, but they even reference themselves that "staying at home" (using a fairly dubious indicator for compliance with that as well) reduces transmission and cases. And we know reduction in cases = reduction in hospitalisation and deaths so i'm really not sure what they have proved, if anything, at all.

The method is nonsense. You can't run on a linear regression where there are so many complex variables and expect to get any results. The non-results only prove that they don't understand comparative methods.