You can set the duration of the simulation in a calendar control: [image: image.png] and adjust the transmission rate to reflect improvements in counter measures: [image: image.png]
It's very hard to set parameters that will not include the US running out of ICU beds and the attendant catastrophic death rate. On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 4:41 PM Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Charles <fran...@datacomm.ch> wrote: > >> 'We are a research group at the Biozentrum, University of Basel, >> Switzerland <https://www.biozentrum.unibas.ch/>. We are broadly >> interested in evolution, ecology, and population genetics with a focus on >> rapidly evolving pathogens such as HIV, influenza virus, or pathogenic >> bacteria.' >> >> https://neherlab.org/covid19/ >> > This is a excellent modeling program. It takes into account many different > parameters. I poked around with it for a while. I don't yet understand how > to use it properly, but let me make a few basic observations: > > Set this for "United States." On the top left, set the "epidemiology" > parameter to "Slow/North" and the projection for March 21 (yesterday) comes > out 19,624 cases, 260 deaths. The actual total for yesterday was 24,207, > 302 deaths. So, the model is remarkably close to yesterday with that > setting. > > > This model assumes the control parameters will not change. That's > unrealistic! We are not a flock of birds with no control over the epidemic. > Of course the parameters will change as people are frightened and they > begin to follow orders and stay in their houses. How much they will change > I myself cannot predict. I hope epidemiologists can predict this, and > advise government officials. > > > Obviously, the parameters could have changed completely, enough to > extinguish the epidemic weeks ago in the U.S., if only our political > leaders had learned from S. Korea and Japan. And learned what not to do > from Italy. Alas, they did not, and now whatever happens, we will surely > pay a high price. How high? This model predicts 223,000 deaths by Sept. 1. > The epidemic continues after that, but . . . um . . . I cannot figure out > how to extend this graph. > > >
